Great Vocal Majority Podcast

The last several years has seen a rise in politically motivated violence.  Who is stoking it?

National Review Editor, Charles C. W. Cooke wrote a blistering opinion piece taking down the news media.

Yonni Applebaum of the Atlantic vainly tries to make the case for the impeachment of President Donald Trump

PRESIDENTS OBAMA AND TRUMP: SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES Let's start with Barack Obama. To begin with, he's not really an American. I don't mean to say he was born in Kenya. I don't believe that. I am referring to his life experiences. They are uniquely NON AMERICAN. He's got almost nothing in common with Americans of any stripe. He's biracial, identifies as black, but his life growing up has almost nothing in common with blacks Americans outside of his skin tone. Obama grew up as a "red diaper baby." That is, his parents were either communists or radical socialists. He lived in Hawaii and Indonesia for much of his formative years and when he lived in the continental United States, from age 11 to 18, he was mentored by Frank Marshall Davis. Davis was a man so dangerous, the FBI had him on a roundup list of Soviet sympathizing communist subversives. By contrast, Donald Trump grew up in an upper middle class Queens home of a New York real estate developer. From all accounts, Trump had a more or less typical chi

"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."  Napoleon, the Pig, Animal Farm, by George Orwell Freedom of the press is precious.  It is axiomatic.  It's platitudinous.  We all say we want a free press.  But we must first define what that means. Does a reporter have a 1st Amendment right to ask a politician a question?  If the 1st Amendment carries any meaning at all, it means ANY American may ask questions and demand answers from government officials.  The public has every right to know the answers to questions asked and it is only under very special circumstances that answers to questions may be withheld.  Whether or not a government official provides a satisfactory answer to the question is another matter entirely. The duty of a free and independent press is to ask those questions and report on the answers.  Editors, commentators, and pundits can ruminate the adequacy or inadequacy of the answers, perhaps leading to more probing questions. Are there any obligations requires in order

PELOSI AND THE CBC   Different polls have shown an unmistakable trend.  Black voters are beginning to show signs of leaving the Democrat Party. During the 2016 campaign, the Quinnipiac Poll showed Trump with just 1% of black voters supporting him.  It was well within the margin of error, so according to Quinnipiac, Trump's support could actually have been zero. Since becoming President, however, Trump's approval among blacks has steadily increased across several different polling organizations.  Recently, the NAACP funded a poll and found 29% of blacks approving of Trump's job performance.  Other polls since then have shown Trump's approval among blacks at 36-38%.  It's been a very long time since a Republican had approval numbers like that among blacks. What could account for this turnaround?  Especially since the media and Democrats have spared Trump little and have accused him of being a racist over and over.  These are tangible reasons why Trump's approval is going up among black voters. THE DECLINE OF BL

THE RUSSIAN COLLUSION MYTHOLOGY Believe it or not, there are still people who believe Donald Trump colluded with the Russian government to steal the election away from Hillary Clinton. It's astonishing given the growing list of experts and commentators all in agreement that Special Counsel Robert Mueller has both failed to make public any evidence pointing to it, but more importantly, does not seem to be closing in on any kind of a Trump-Russia connection the Democrats and the Left are hoping for. Still, it's not all that surprising when one considers how people get their news and information today. More often than not, people gravitate toward the news outlet that reflects their political sentiments. Conservatives prefer Fox News. Liberals prefer CNN and MSNBC. The programs on these networks is a mix of commentary and straight news, where the line is often blurred between the two. Social media and regular real life day-to-day interactions with people regarding political topics often reveals where they are get

MEDIA MANIPULATION If you only watched MSNBC or CNN, you would come away believing the worst human being on the planet is Donald J Trump and anyone who voted for him is every bit as bad or worse. Keeping in mind, we are talking about half of the country, you'd have to think are racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, bigots. Half of all Americans. In other words, when Hillary Clinton referred to "half of all Trump supporters in a basket of deplorables", if that resonated with you, you're not tethered to reality and here's why. The same country just elected and re-elected America's first non-white President. Millions of people who voted for Obama, also voted for Trump. When did they become racists? Were they racist when they voted for Obama twice? Did they become racist by voting for Trump? How does that math work? Is the country only post-racial only when it elects a non-white Democrat? Is America doomed to never be post-racial? When non-white Democrats lose elections, is the reason always racism by default?

Progressives have played the race card so often, it's become a crutch. Today, it holds almost no influence at all. But the left continues to use it more than ever.

When Laura Ingraham voiced her commentary on her Fox News broadcast regarding America's lack of a rational policy on immigration and especially illegal immigration, the Left attacked her for being indistinguishable in her rhetoric from a Nazi. When the race card stops working, maybe the left thinks it's time to use the Nazi card?

DEMOCRATS AND RUSSIANS It's July 2018 and the mainstream media has been on fire for over 18 months with allegations that President Trump "colluded" with the Russians to win the 2016 Presidential election. So far, we have seen very little in the way of evidence that Trump or any member of his campaign had anything more than a conversation with the occaisional Russian. Still, whatever "new information" the media learns, they feverishly connect dots which have no business being connected. As a student of politics and history, I have found the behavior of the media as well as Democrats to be appalling. What I hope to do for you in this podcast is to give you some idea of the history that exists between Democrats and Russians. At the end of this podcast, my hope is you will understand why I am appalled at the current behavior of the Mainstream Media and the Democrat Party. The Russian Hoax by Gregg Jarrett This story begins in Russia, with the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917. The Bolshevik takeover of Russia was the

OBAMA'S GAMBIT IN KENYA During a speech made in Kenya, Barack Obama referred to himself as "the first sitting American President to come from Kenya." This has reignited social media into a storm of controversy about Obama's actual place of birth. The whole thing is ridiculous because the question has been settled: Obama was born in Hawaii. But why would Obama say something like this if it were not true? There are some very clever political reasons why Obama would like to renew the controversy. Let's examine some of them. To do so, it would be best to examine an often overlooked aspect of the controversy. When Obama graduated from Harvard, he planned to write a book. The book itself was never written, but Obama employed a publicist that also worked for other prominent people, like Tip O'Neill, who at the time was Speaker of the House. A pamphlet containing bio sketches of each of her clients was printed and distributed in 1991. Obama's entry noted that he was born in Kenya. It was believed that the pretense of

TRANSFORMATION: TODAY'S LEFTISTS AND YESTERDAY'S LIBERALS Back in 2007, when I first got wind of Barack Obama, an exciting newcomer to the national political scene, it was immediately recognizable to me, through his rhetoric, that he was NOT a Liberal in the sense of what that term had come to mean from the FDR era forward. Obama used much of the traditional rhetoric of Liberals, but he also expressed a good deal of leftist rhetoric. What's the difference? Liberal rhetoric advocates for a more activist federal government as a COMPLEMENT to certain limitations the private economy (ie., individuals and businesses) has in addressing societal inequities. The role of government for a liberal, is to do what nobody else can to address those problems. Conservatives disagree with this, of course. They place more faith in the free market and insist inequities can be alleviated more efficiently and effectively if government's role was limited to keeping the markets open, free and fair. Leftists have a compeletely differ

An analysis of the most recent Presidencies and any possible cult like qualities in both.

WHERE WE'VE BEEN, ARE AND GOING In every election since Barack Obama won the Presidency in 2008, the Democrat Party has lost ground. By 2010, the Democrats lost a total of 70 seats in the House and Senate, along with control of a majority of state legislative chambers and governorships. Even at the local level, Democrats saw their hold on elected offices slip to a low not seen in nearly a century. What was the cause of this? Democrats believed it was personal animus against America's first Halfrican American President. In other words, racism. But was it? Liberal pundits and politicians pointed to the overwhelmingly white opposition to Obama. But did that necessarily mean the opposition was based on race? Among blacks, Obama enjoyed almost unanimous support. It stood to reason that any opposition to Obama would lack much, if any, black support. Rather than Obama's opposition being based in race, it appeared that his support, at least among blacks was certainly based in it. The Democrats made an almost unpreced

I woke up this morning and came across an article by Mike Allen and Jim Vandehei on the Axios website called, "The Public Case against Trump." I figured I had better read it because if there is a public case against this President, I'd like to know what it is. I was immediately disappointed. The very first sentence in the article makes a false claim. It says, "One thing is true of all major political scandals: What we know in the moment is but a tiny, obscured, partial view of the full story later revealed by investigators." I thought to myself, "is there even one case where that was true?" The authors claim it has been true "of all major political scandals." Yet, when I think back to the mother of all political scandals, Watergate, the American public knew pretty early on that President Nixon was involved. And unlike Watergate, where an office was burglarized and people were arrested, the investigators of Trump and Russia aren't even investigating a crime. They are investigating hoping to find one. There is

SOURCES THE UK DAILY MAIL Crash that killed lesbian couple and their six adopted children appears INTENTIONAL   CBS NEWS Youth from famed photo believed among dead as SUV flies off cliff   THE OREGONIAN Hart children immediately pulled from public schools after mother's abuse conviction Former Hart family friend: "Current system failed to protect these children from their abusers."   NEWS ONE Devonte Hart and his siblings removed from public school the day after mother's child abuse conviction Troubling questions surround the Texas adoption of Devonte Hart and his five siblings