The language we use.

December 12, 2018

An Oldie but goodie

For Publication, 3,449 Words, 2/29/00
One-time North American Serial Rights
Copyright 2000 Alan Korwin
Not-for-profit circulation is approved.

by Alan Korwin, Author
Gun Laws of America

Part One — The Concept

Certain words hurt you when you’re talking about your rights.  People who would deny your rights have done a good job of manipulating the language so far. Without even realizing it, you’re probably using terms that actually help the people who want to disarm you.

To preserve, protect and defend your rights in this critical debate, you need effective word choices.

They want you to say (and you lose if you say):
It’s better to say (and they lose if you say):

They want you to say (and you lose if you say):

It’s better to say (and they lose if you say):

They want you to say (and you lose if you say):

It’s better to say (and they lose if you say):

They want you to say (and you lose if you say):

It’s better to say (and they lose if you say):

They want you to say (and you lose if you say):

It’s better to say (and they lose if you say):

They want you to say (and you lose if you say):

It’s better to say (and they lose if you say):

They want you to say (and you lose if you say):

It’s better to say (and they lose if you say):

They want you to say (and you lose if you say):

It’s better to say (and they lose if you say):

They want you to say (and you lose if you say):

It’s better to say (and they lose if you say):

They want you to say (and you lose if you say):

It’s better to say (and they lose if you say):

They want you to say (and you lose if you say):

It’s better to say (and they lose if you say):

They want you to say (and you lose if you say):

It’s better to say (and they lose if you say):

Guns kill

Guns save lives

Guns cause crime

Guns stop crime

Guns are too dangerous to own

Then you should take a safety class

Guns are too dangerous to own

Then don’t trust the boys and girls in the military and police with them

People shouldn’t have guns

You shouldn’t be required to have one

The only purpose of a gun is to kill

The main purpose of a gun is to protect

People shouldn’t have guns.

Only the good people should have the guns.

Guns should go away.

Then you should personally sign up to never have a gun in your life, under penalty of felony arrest, as you would ask of me.

They should take all the guns away.

Bad guys first.

We need more gun laws

Everything criminal about guns is already illegal

Why would anyone want to own a gun?

You’re kidding, right?

You mean you really don’t know?

Well, why do you think the police have guns?

We’re not really against people having guns.

What sort of guns do you think people should have, and why.

Do you really have a gun?

Of course, don’t you?

Then just give it a rest and watch where it goes. You’ll hear their litany, replete with flaws. Don’t rebut, seize the moment, listen hard and learn — then just raise an eyebrow and think, “How ’bout that. Feller doesn’t even own a gun. It takes all kinds.” Then talk about something else. And boy, does the disjoint hang in their craw.




A more accurate, and far more compelling term than the common “pro gun.” The reverse term, which describes them, is “anti rights.” Misguided utopian disarmament advocates love the phrases “pro gun” and “anti gun”, because they automatically win when they’re used. They believe the righteous path is to be anti gun, because only devils would be pro gun. You flat lose if you allow a debate to be framed that way.

The debate is really between people who are “pro rights” and “anti rights” (and then you automatically win), because the righteous choice between pro rights and anti rights is obvious. You’re pro safety; pro self defense; pro freedom; pro liberty; pro Bill of Rights (correctly casting them as anti safety; anti self defense; anti freedom; anti liberty; anti Bill of Rights). This is an accurate depiction of people who would restrict, repress and flat-out deny civil rights you and your ancestors have always had in America.


A more accurate, and far more compelling term than the common “anti gun.” The reverse term, which describes you, is “pro rights.” Fight the desire to cast repressionists as “anti gun,” (and by so doing casting yourself narrowly as “pro gun”). Instead, always refer more broadly to the “anti-rights” posture they take. Make them argue rights, not guns. 


What “gun control” used to mean, and a generally good idea (the phrase “gun control” has morphed to mean “disarm the public” and thus should be avoided, more on this later). Everyone basically agrees there should be crime control, so it is good grounds for détente. A common sense and reasonable proposal. Includes forcibly disarming criminals. Emphasizes the differences between criminals and an armed public.


A person who hates guns. Typically has little or no personal knowledge of guns, may never have even fired one, certainly doesn’t have any. Would subject innocent people to defenselessness without compunction. An elitist. One with an irrational and morbid fear of guns that is ignorant and immoral. Spews bile and venom at guns, gun owners, gun-rights advocates, gun-rights associations, pro-Bill of Rights legislators. Striking similarity and direct parallels with racial bigotry before (and even after) the civil rights efforts of the 1960s.


The notion that you can only own a gun if it is expensive, or passes a drop test, a melting point test, a consumer products test, a government design test, a caliber size, an ammunition capacity, a lock test, etc. The notion that only idiots, miscreants, red necks, dim bulbs and other nasty-named people would own guns. The notion that you can only vote, oops, I mean have a firearm, if you pass a test run by your government, and pay the tax, often called a “fee.” The notion that anyone who fails the tests — or any other qualifications — automatically forfeits their rights “for the common good.” An inability to distinguish honest people from criminals.


Discrimination against honest people merely for their legal ownership or possession of firearms. A common occurrence in society today. A violation of your constitutional and natural rights. Gun prejudice appears to be a federal civil-rights offense, punishable by prison and fine. Now there’s a thought. Repressionists have attempted some very novel court challenges to laws that protect our liberties. Turnabout’s fair play. If there were, say, a city bank somewhere that refused customers simply because they legally handled firearms…


Anti-rights bigots curse these as “junk guns” and “Saturday night specials,” racial epithets you should never use. The racist goal of outlawing guns unless they’re expensive is self evident and reprehensible. A woman who eats inexpensive food and drives an inexpensive car doesn’t lose her right to protect her family because she can only afford an inexpensive gun.


Or would you rather use the complex and dangerous sounding (though accurate perhaps) “semiautomatic handgun,” a term which many people think means machine gun, according to Handgun Control (who recommends use of the term “semiautomatic handgun”). Unfortunately, “handgun” has been vilified beyond usability, and needs to be retired or at least back-burnered for now. Remember, it was the so-called Brady “handgun” law that federalized all retail sales of rifles and shotguns.


Or would you rather use the complex and dangerous sounding (though accurate perhaps) “semiautomatic handgun.” A basic, reliable, standard type of pistol, a regular pistol, an ordinary pistol, the same kind of pistol anyone would normally own. A basic, reliable, standard type of sidearm, a regular sidearm, an ordinary sidearm, the same kind of sidearm anyone would normally own.


The type any household is likely to have. All the firearms you own, despite constant name-calling from the media, are just household firearms.


The only kind you can now buy in America at retail.


Any type of firearm that could save your life in an emergency.


Expunge the word “concealed” because so many people hear it and believe only a criminal would conceal something. It implies you have something to hide. Because being discreet is a common sense, reasonable measure, there’s no need to demean it with an ugly adjective (in this use anyway) like “concealed.” “Carry license,” not “concealed-carry license.”


The quality of a gun that makes it useful as a crime-stopping, life-saving, defensive tool. A point that is attacked subtly in most anti-rights arguments. When met head on, the issue works against the anti-rights position. Caliber and capacity restrictions reduce lethality and your ability to save yourself or the state. Reducing lethality costs lives. Why should police need more capacity than you, when you both face the same criminals. How few bullets may a person use against an attacker, and how small should they be.

Guns are dangerous. They’re supposed to be dangerous. They wouldn’t be any good if they weren’t dangerous. Anything that makes them less dangerous by reducing lethality puts you (or police officers) at unacceptable risk.


People who believe you have little or no right to defend yourself if attacked, because social order may only be imposed by an authority, and that such authority is superior to your right to exist (if push comes to shove). Also sometimes referred to as socialists. Sometimes expressed as your right to keep a cell phone handy to dial 911. The anti-self-defense movement is often deceptively portrayed as the “anti-gun movement.” Never let them hide behind their comfortable disguise as anti gun.


Language that does not automatically bias a debate about the Bill of Rights against individual liberty and freedom. Opposite of “politically correct” language, which is basically socialist in nature. We all recognize that “political correctness” is “incorrect,” and then we sneer and dismiss it. We do this at great peril, however, for PC statements treated that way don’t just go away, they fester and insidiously modify the paradigm, and bend our thinking into acceptance of that which we have verbalized as “correct.”

You want a good example of neurolinguistic programming and transformational grammar on a national scale, there it is to a tee.  It’s how we get to the Orwellian point where war is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength.


More broadly appealing and less polarizing than “Second Amendment.”  Sure, I like the Second Amendment, and talk about it all the time. But saying “Bill of Rights” protects you from malicious stigma and stereotyping as a gun nut. Much more difficult to oppose, slows the bigots down. All the rights count, don’t they, and they’re all under attack. Bill of Rights Day. Pro Bill of Rights. I support the Bill of Rights, don’t you? Actually, even virulent gun haters and gun bigots champion the First Amendment and other parts of the BOR, which, if you’ll recall, was a single amendment (with separate articles) to the Constitution.


Laws that encourage gun safety training and responsible firearms ownership, as opposed to repressive laws that criminalize honest gun ownership and infringe civil rights. Civil rights.


Stop saying Second Amendment so much, since the other side tunes this out immediately, and marginalizes you as a gun nut. Say “First Amendment” instead, and make your comparisons there — does the government jeopardize your First Amendment rights? You betcha! Should you be concerned? Of course! What would you think of Internet censorship, government approved religion, font size limits, restricted word choices, acceptable word counts, licensed writers, training and testing before publishing controversial editorials, and tests for accuracy — now there’s a nice parallel.

People on all sides recognize there are threats to free speech, religion, privacy and more from our friends, the government. The same root problems affect the whole Bill of Rights, gun rights are no different than other rights under attack.


Something that, with all the accidents reported in America, all Americans should be taking — from the tens of thousands of trainers out there. Always encourage people on both sides of a debate to take a real class. Why wouldn’t an honest person take a gun-safety class? Going out for some wholesome and relaxing target practice, with friends. Getting good at marksmanship. Target practice. Marksmanship. These words have not been defiled and cast a good light, use them. Privately promoted gun-safety training days. Talk up the goal of “National Accident Reduction” through education and training. Private enterprise should vigorously swell to fill the gaping theater called, “We need more safety.”


Anti-rights bigots who secretly own guns themselves, rely upon armed guards for security, or live inside communities with private security forces, but decry your right to arms. Closet gun owners. Named in honor of Carl Rowan, a vicious anti-gun bigot whose syndicated newspaper column vilified guns and gun owners for years, to a vast audience, until he one day fired at a trespasser near his home.



Gun buy back programs are misnamed. You cannot buy back something you didn’t own in the first place. Since the Brady law prohibits dumping such guns into criminal lairs (gun buyers must be certified by the FBI these days), there is no longer justification for destroying firearms collected in buyups. That’s right, there is no longer any justification at all for destroying firearms collected in buyups. When buyups are government funded, meltdowns are therefore wanton destruction of a public asset, and someone deserves to be held liable. Tax dollars are buying legal property simply to destroy it, when the only way to sell it is to certifiably law abiding individuals. What an outrage. Where I live, savvy collectors have set up shop at widely publicized gun buyups to make competitive bids and cherry pick the merchandise, pre-smelter.


Murder committed by government. The most prevalent form of murder, responsible this century alone for 170 million deaths. Regime-ocide.



Now generally synonymous with “disarming the public.” Using the phrase “gun control” in its currently twisted form distorts the debate and should be avoided; it is the other side’s rallying flag, bolstered every time the words leave your lips; argue about gun control and you’ve already lost. Use “crime control,” “accident reduction” and “disarming the public” to distinguish issues and preserve accuracy.

Listen hard when you hear the term “gun control” in the news. You’ll notice they’re basically not talking about controlling crime. They’re talking about controlling you.

Always start by asking what a person means when they say this phrase, then shut up and see. Often, people who think of themselves as being anti gun, unwittingly adopt the position that only the rulers should be armed (cop and army guns OK, but not you; such a person isn’t anti gun at all, they’re simply anti rights — your rights).

When a “gun-control law” regulates or demeans honest people in the false name of controlling crime, that’s actually tyranny. When “gun control” controls your right to have a gun, that is people control. The phrase “gun control” is a dangerous misnomer (some would say euphemism) for an agenda now actively pursued by a segment of society — that would consolidate power solely in “official” hands.

Help seize the metaphor back:

1. Drop into conversation how your gun control at target practice recently was better than usual, or how you have pretty good gun control but you still need some lessons. Invite someone to your gun-control class at the range next Tuesday — free style target practice. A well advertised gun-control class might attract some pretty interesting neighbors. Jokes about gun control (“a steady hand”) are neurolinguistically challenged and don’t help. Say something else funny if you must be funny.

2. When reporters and others inevitably ask, “Are you in favor of gun control?” they often don’t realize their question is as biased as, “Are you still beating your wife?” So it’s up to you to show them. They’re looking for a pro or con answer, and then a question of how much. Don’t play into it. Instead, try responding, “Well me, I’m in favor of crime control. How about you?”

3. When you write about so-called “gun control” or so-called “gun-control laws” always put it in quotes, to disparage it.


Named by Dave Kopel in honor of its two leading proponents (Dennis Henigan and Carl Bogus). This is the notion, first arising a few decades ago, that the Second Amendment does not protect an individual right. It stands in opposition to the fact that “the people” means all of us, and is responsible for the widely armed population we observe today. Covered more thoroughly in an earlier article of mine, The Big Lie (posted under Position Papers at Kopel’s recent paper on this, for the St. Louis University Public Law Review, is nothing short of brilliant. David can be reached at


A tool for reaching closed minds. The use of questions to point out fundamental illogic, which can then topple the notions a person builds on that flawed base. An application of the Socratic method. The mental awareness that forms when a simple question challenges fundamentally held beliefs. Here are many. One at a time is usually enough for most minds.

If a registration list makes sense for the Second Amendment, would it make sense for the First Amendment?

Are criminals and an armed citizenry the same thing?

So why do people these days carry guns anyway, and does it ever work?

Should it be against the law to defend yourself?

If a person can’t have a gun, why should the police have them?

So if you are allowed to defend yourself, how many bullets can you use?

Shouldn’t we disarm the criminals first?

Why haven’t we disarmed the criminals?

Why don’t they arrest all the Brady criminals they find?

Are you against an armed citizenry?

Do you believe that only the rulers should have guns?

Now let me see if I understand this; when you say “gun control,” do you mean “stop crime” or “disarm the public”?

Now let me see if I understand this; when you say you’re anti gun, do you mean you want to disarm the police and the armed forces?

If you don’t want to disarm the police and military, you’re not really anti gun at all. You’re anti private gun. Why is that?

You know, after listening to you for a while, you’ve convinced me that you should never own a gun.

I’m against the idea that you should be forced to own a gun, and I would stand up for your right to not be armed.

Maybe you could sign up to be permanently disbarred from ever owning a gun. Would you do that (as you would ask me to do)?

Closing Note:

This article doesn’t end here. In attempting a document like this, I know I can never reach its ending. It defines a path which simply stretches forward.

If I wait until I have this evolved to my satisfaction it will never wrap. These ideas are too important to let wait that long. Consider it an early peek at a work in progress.



“Social balance has evolved into a war of the metaphor — neurolinguistic programming meets George Orwell.”

— Alan Korwin


Interesting times. Maybe sinister times..?

December 8, 2018

White Hats Take Out Obama Spy Chief

December 8, 2018


In an astounding update to my last post, after an FBI informant and his family were massacred, Trumpassassins have now taken outPresident Obama’stop spy chiefMichael Hayden.

Michael Hayden’s government service was described by the Columbia Journalism Review:

Hayden has a long history of making misleading and outright false statements, and by the estimation of many lawyers, likely committed countless felonies during the Bush administration.

It is something of a wonder that someone responsible for so many reprehensible acts is now considered a totally above-the-fray, honest commentator on all issues intelligence.

When you hear Michael Hayden spin his garbage, remember,Michael Hayden is a war criminal and a liar.

After Donald Trump defeated HRC in the 2016 election, Hayden claimed he had “wasted 40 years” of his life. Meaning, he witnessed President Trump unravel the coup plot thatHaydenhad…

View original post 306 more words

A Family Pays the Price for a Clinton Connection

December 8, 2018


President Donald Trumphas just taken over personal command of allUnited States intelligence agenciesfollowing the brutal massacre of an allegedFBI informant namedKeith Caneiro, his wife and two children—who, with his brotherPaul Caneiro, hadbegun penetrating the computer networks ofCitibank—theAmericanbanking giantbeing targeted byTrump, and who hadorderedPresident Obamato makeHillary ClintonhisSecretary of State.

Following theassassination a fortnight ago of topTrumpadvisorDaniel Best, coupled with this week’s massacre ofFBI informantKeith Caneiroand his family,President Trumph hand picked the rest of the members of hisPIABand put them in charge of the entireUSintelligence community:

Experts say Trump could roil the intelligence community by asking his hand-picked panel to draft reports, for example, on alleged surveillance abuses against his 2016 campaign associates…

View original post 202 more words

On Not so civil wars…

November 6, 2018

This is

Dr. Jack Minzey on Civil War in U.S. Today ….
Jack passed away Sunday, 8 April 2018.
Professionally, Jack was head of the Department of Education at Eastern Michigan University as well as a prolific author of numerous books, most of which were on the topic of Education and the Government role therein.
This is from the last of his works: Civil War
How do civil wars happen?
Two or more sides disagree on who runs the country. And they can’t settle the question through elections because they don’t even agree that elections are how you decide who’s in charge. That’s the basic issue here. Who decides who runs the country? When you hate each other but accept the election results, you have a country.
When you stop accepting election results, you have a countdown to a civil war.
The Mueller investigation is about removing President Trump from office and overturning the results of an election. We all know that. But it’s not the first time they’ve done this. The first time a Republican president was elected this century, they said he didn’t really win. The Supreme Court gave him the election. There’s a pattern here.

What do sure odds of the Democrats rejecting the next Republican president really mean? It means they don’t accept the results of any election that they don’t win. It means they don’t believe that transfers of power in this country are determined by elections. That’s a civil war.
There’s no shooting. At least not unless you count the attempt to kill a bunch of Republicans at a charity baseball game practice. But the Democrats have rejected our system of government.

This isn’t dissent. It’s not disagreement. You can hate the other party. You can think they’re the worst thing that ever happened to the country. But then you work harder to win the next election
When you consistently reject the results of elections that you don’t win, what you want is a dictatorship. Your very own dictatorship .

The only legitimate exercise of power in this country, according to Democrats, is its own. Whenever Republicans exercise power, it’s inherently illegitimate. The Democrats lost Congress. They lost the White House. So what did they do? They began trying to run the country through Federal judges and bureaucrats. Every time that a Federal judge issues an order saying that the President of the United States can’t scratch his own back without his say so, that’s the civil war.

Our system of government is based on the constitution, but that’s not the system that runs this country. The Democrat’s system is that any part of government that it runs gets total and unlimited power over the country.

If the Democrats are in the White House, then the president can do anything. And I mean anything. He can have his own amnesty for illegal aliens. He can fine you for not having health insurance. His power is unlimited. He’s a dictator.

But when Republicans get into the White House, suddenly the President can’t do anything. He isn’t even allowed to undo the illegal alien amnesty that his predecessor illegally invented. A Democrat in the White House has ‘discretion’ to completely decide every aspect of immigration policy. A Republican doesn’t even have the ‘discretion’ to reverse him. That’s how the game is played That’s how our country is run. Sad but true, although the left hasn’t yet won that particular fight.

When a Democrat is in the White House, states aren’t even allowed to enforce immigration law. But when a Republican is in the White House, states can create their own immigration laws. Under Obama, a state wasn’t allowed to go to the bathroom without asking permission But under Trump, Jerry Brown can go around saying that California is an independent republic and sign treaties with other countries.

The Constitution has something to say about that.

Whether it’s Federal or State, Executive, Legislative or Judiciary, the left moves power around to run the country. If it controls an institution, then that institution is suddenly the supreme power in the land. This is what I call a moving dictatorship.

Donald Trump has caused the Shadow Government to come out of hiding: Professional government is a guild. Like medieval guilds. You can’t serve in if you’re not a member. If you haven’t been indoctrinated into its arcane rituals. If you aren’t in the club. And Trump isn’t in the club. He brought in a bunch of people who aren’t in the club with him.

Now we’re seeing what the pros do when amateurs try to walk in on them. They spy on them, they investigate them and they send them to jail. They use the tools of power to bring them down. That’s not a free country.

It’s not a free country when FBI agents who support Hillary take out an ‘insurance policy’ against Trump winning the election. It’s not a free country when Obama officials engage in massive unmasking of the opposition. It’s not a free country when the media responds to the other guy winning by trying to ban the conservative media that supported him from social media. It’s not a free country when all of the above collude together to overturn an election because the guy who wasn’t supposed to win did.

Have no doubt, we’re in a civil war between conservative volunteer government and a leftist Democrat professional government.

Direct Democracy, Mob Rule, The Political Correctness of the day

October 24, 2018
Those are all pretty much the same thing, and here is commentary on that subject from a Facebook friend.

When you remove the mask, political correctness is simply fascism disguised as manners.

I want to start this article off by saying that I am NOT a Republican or a Democrat. I am independent in every way possible. I usually don’t talk write about politics, but the election in the U.S. is two weeks from today and this year, there is a clear choice presented to the American people. And it is too important for me to sit quietly by and simply watch what happens.

We have domestic terrorists running around claiming to be anti-fascist, who are actually THE fascists. They call themselves ANTIFA. They are nothing more than domestic terrorists and they have been accepted and promoted by the Democrat Party. These people are becoming the equivalent of Hitler’s Brown Shirts, who attacked those who they did not agree with, shouted down anyone from the other party who was trying to speak, and terrorized people in an attempt to get them to vote for the Nazi Party.

In fact, I see many semblances between today’s Democrat Party and the Nazi Party of the 1930’s. The Democrat politicians are encouraging their followers to harass Republicans in restaurants, in stores, in elevators, anywhere they find them. They refuse to denounce the domestic terrorists called ANTIFA and Black Lives Matter. They are perfectly fine with a mass invasion of illegal immigrants into our country. They actively make racist comments about white people and especially white men. They want to raise your taxes and have more control over your life, what you say, what you can’t say, and what you can or can’t own.

Is THIS really the kind of people you want running our country? Do you really want racist, anti-American politicians who will lie, cheat or steal, to regain power for their party? Do you really want politicians running our country who refuse to admit that MS-13 are bad people or who think it is okay to terrorize people who disagree with them?

Hillary Clinton just stated that, “You cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for…when we win back the House and or the Senate, that’s when civility can start again.”

That moronic politician from CA, Maxine Waters, stated, “Let’s make sure we show up wherever we have to show up…and if you see anybody from that Cabinet (Republicans) in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd. And you push back on them. And you tell them they’re not welcome anymore, anywhere.”

Ralm Emanuel told Democrats that, “When they go low, we kick ’em,” Holder told his audience to applaud. “That’s what this new Democratic Party is about.”

The new Democrat Party believes in guilty until PROVEN INNOCENT, not innocent until proven guilty. They do not believe in free speech, unless it is speech that THEY agree with. They apparently have a deep-seated hatred of white men, and white people in general, but don’t think they are racist. They denounce capitalism, but their politicians are multi-millions. THESE PEOPLE ARE LIARS AND HYPOCRITES!

They are actively encouraging hatred and division in our country, while denouncing it. They say they want to get rid of firearms because of violence, but encourage their supporters to harass, kick, and get into the face of those who disagree with them. Then they refuse to denounce violent groups like ANTIFA who go out and assault those who see the world differently than they do.

I can give you example after example of Democrat politicians who are encouraging harassment, hatred, and violence. I gave you just a few above, but they are MANY, MANY MORE. These people hate our president. They hate Middle America and talk about those of us who live outside of the major cities as if we are all uneducated buffoons. They have no respect for you or your beliefs.

I had one idiotic so-called “martial arts Grandmaster” call and leave a nasty message on my phone, calling me a racist, and more, because I support the President of the United States. I had no problem with his political beliefs, but his praise for me turned to hatred when he found out I had a different beliefs than he did. THAT is the new Democrat Party in America today!

These people are nothing more than propagandists, something else that they have in common with the Nazi’s. They want to impeach a president that has done more for our country, in a shorter period of time, than any president since the Founding Fathers. Yes, I can prove that statement. Here is a list of President Donald Trump’s accomplishments in less than two years:

Jobs and the economy

• Passage of the tax reform bill providing $5.5 billion in cuts and repealing the Obamacare mandate.

• Increase of the GDP above 3 percent.

• Creation of 1.7 million new jobs, cutting unemployment to 4.1 percent.

• Saw the Dow Jones reach record highs.

• A rebound in economic confidence to a 17-year high.

• A new executive order to boost apprenticeships.

• A move to boost computer sciences in Education Department programs.

• Prioritizing women-owned businesses for some $500 million in SBA loans.

Killing job-stifling regulations

• Signed an Executive Order demanding that two regulations be killed for every new one creates. He beat that big and cut 16 rules and regulations for every one created, saving $8.1 billion.

• Signed 15 congressional regulatory cuts.

• Signed an Executive Order cutting the time for infrastructure permit approvals.

Fair trade

• Made good on his campaign promise to withdraw from the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

• Opened up the North American Free Trade Agreement for talks to better the deal for the U.S.

• Worked to bring companies back to the U.S., and companies like Toyota, Mazda, Broadcom Limited, and Foxconn announced plans to open U.S. plants.

• Worked to promote the sale of U.S products abroad.

• Made enforcement of U.S. trade laws, especially those that involve national security, a priority.

• Ended Obama’s deal with Cuba.

Boosting U.S. energy dominance

• The Department of Interior, which has led the way in cutting regulations, opened plans to lease 77 million acres in the Gulf of Mexico for oil and gas drilling.

• Trump traveled the world to promote the sale and use of U.S. energy.

• Expanded energy infrastructure projects like the Keystone XL Pipeline snubbed by Obama.

• Ordered the Environmental Protection Agency to kill Obama’s Clean Power Plan.

• EPA is reconsidering Obama rules on methane emissions.
Protecting the U.S. homeland

• Laid out new principles for reforming immigration and announced plan to end “chain migration,” which lets one legal immigrant to bring in dozens of family members.

• Made progress to build the border wall with Mexico.

• Ended the Obama-era “catch and release” of illegal immigrants.

• Boosted the arrests of illegals inside the U.S.

• Doubled the number of counties participating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement charged with deporting illegals.

• Removed 36 percent more criminal gang members than in fiscal 2016.

• Started the end of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival program.

• Ditto for other amnesty programs like Deferred Action for Parents of Americans.

• Cracking down on some 300 sanctuary cities that defy ICE but still get federal dollars.

• Added some 100 new immigration judges.
Protecting communities

• Justice announced grants of $98 million to fund 802 new cops.

• Justice worked with Central American nations to arrest and charge 4,000 MS-13 members.

• Homeland rounded up nearly 800 MS-13 members, an 83 percent one-year increase.

• Signed three executive orders aimed at cracking down on international criminal organizations.

• Attorney General Jeff Sessions created new National Public Safety Partnership, a cooperative initiative with cities to reduce violent crimes.


• Trump has nominated 73 federal judges and won his nomination of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court.

• Ordered ethical standards including a lobbying ban.

• Called for a comprehensive plan to reorganize the executive branch.

• Ordered an overhaul to modernize the digital government.

• Called for a full audit of the Pentagon and its spending.
Combatting opioids

• First, the president declared a Nationwide Public Health Emergency on opioids.

• His Council of Economic Advisors played a role in determining that overdoses are underreported by as much as 24 percent.

• The Department of Health and Human Services laid out a new five-point strategy to fight the crisis.

• Justice announced it was scheduling fentanyl substances as a drug class under the Controlled Substances Act.

• Justice started a fraud crackdown, arresting more than 400.

• The administration added $500 million to fight the crisis.

• On National Drug Take Back Day, the Drug Enforcement Agency collected 456 tons.

Helping veterans

• Signed the Veterans Accountability and Whistleblower Protection Act to allow senior officials in the Department of Veterans Affairs to fire failing employees and establish safeguards to protect whistleblowers.

• Signed the Veterans Appeals Improvement and Modernization Act.

• Signed the Harry W. Colmery Veterans Educational Assistance Act, to provide support.

• Signed the VA Choice and Quality Employment Act of 2017 to authorize $2.1 billion in additional funds for the Veterans
Choice Program

• Created a VA hotline.

• Had the VA launch an online “Access and Quality Tool,” providing veterans with a way to access wait time and quality of care data.

• With VA Secretary Dr. David Shulkin, announced three initiatives to expand access to healthcare for veterans using telehealth technology.

Promoting peace through strength

• Directed the rebuilding of the military and ordered a new national strategy and nuclear posture review.

• Worked to increase defense spending.

• Empowered military leaders to “seize the initiative and win,” reducing the need for a White House sign off on every mission.

• Directed the revival of the National Space Council to develop space war strategies.

• Elevated U.S. Cyber Command into a major warfighting command.

• Withdrew from the U.N. Global Compact on Migration, which Trump saw as a threat to borders.

• Imposed a travel ban on nations that lack border and anti-terrorism security.

• Saw ISIS lose virtually all of its territory.

• Pushed for strong action against global outlaw North Korea and its development of nuclear weapons.

• Announced a new Afghanistan strategy that strengthens support for U.S. forces at war with terrorism.

• NATO increased support for the war in Afghanistan.

• Approved a new Iran strategy plan focused on neutralizing the country’s influence in the region.

• Ordered missile strikes against a Syrian airbase used in a chemical weapons attack.

• Prevented subsequent chemical attacks by announcing a plan to detect them better and warned of future strikes if they were used.

• Ordered new sanctions on the dictatorship in Venezuela.
Restoring confidence in and respect for America

• Trump won the release of Americans held abroad, often using his personal relationships with world leaders.

• Made good on a campaign promise to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.

• Conducted a historic 12-day trip through Asia, winning new cooperative deals. On the trip, he attended three regional summits to promote American interests.

• He traveled to the Middle East and Europe to build new relationships with leaders.

• Traveled to Poland and on to Germany for the G-20 meeting where he pushed again for funding of women entrepreneurs.

Folks, you have a clear choice this year. Vote to continue to make our country strong again, to make our country safer, more prosperous, and to maintain American values, by voting for those politicians who WILL SUPPORT OUR PRESIDENT.

Or vote for a Democrat Party which has gone over the edge, who promotes violence, supports violent, domestic terrorists, open borders, open harassment of those who disagree with them, and who look up to Saul Alinsky as a role model.

Both the Clintons and Obama stated that they look up to Saul Alinsky as their mentor. If you have never read his book, Rules for Radicals, you don’t truly understand where the Democrat Party is coming from or how they think. Read it and it will open your eyes to how their leaders think and what they are willing to do to stay in power.

I don’t often write about politics, but I have children and grandchildren now, and this election is too important for me to be silent. For God sakes, vote for those politicians who will put a stop to the garbage that the new Democrat Party stands for! VOTE FOR THOSE WHO WILL SUPPORT OUR PRESIDENT if you have any love for your country or intelligence at all!!

THAT is the only choice for clear-thinking Americans this during this election! Don’t listen to the media. They have turned into nothing more than propagandists. Do your own research for vote for WHAT IS BEST FOR YOUR COUNTRY, not for one fraternity or the other. Vote to support the man who is helping our country, not trying to destroy it, and who is doing it almost single-handedly.

There has never been a president who has been attacked as much as President Trump and yet is strong enough to handle it, hit back, and continue to be successful and HAS DONE EXACTLY WHAT HE PROMISED TO DO. Please help him by only voting for those who will support him! Bohdi Sanders, Ph.D.

And about all of that political correctness…

September 18, 2018

It was interesting to say the least. A neighbors woman child that is attending college as a journalism major took issue with me over some previous posts here as well as on my Facebook page. In a nutshell here are my thoughts about this issue. No, I am not going to bother with citation because any first year English student could locate the various supporting information quite easily. In other words do your own research if you don’t like what I have to say.

First, I call this monstrosity “The Political Correctness of the day.” Why? Because it changes over time as societal populism morphs. It is indeed a form of “Direct Democracy.” That happens to be true whether it is based upon a time tested moral ideology, or upon a passing fad.

And you know what? That is just fine for those that want to live in such a place. Give up what ever freedom or liberty you care to so as to please the masses that surround you. Slavery was, and in some places, is still an accepted way of life. Interracial social mixing is abhorrent to some people. Partaking of wine or pork gets the same response in some communities. Fealty to ones nation is viewed as sin by some groups. The list goes on in a never ending litany…

I live in what is called a “Republic.” While I am not the sort of person that lives with my life or religion on my sleeve? I have respect for those that do so. Just so long as they do not attempt to force their way of life upon myself or anyone else. Where I live there is what is called “The Bill of Rights.” That set of Laws covers many things. All of which are related to personal freedom, and liberty. Guess what? Those liberties are not subject to the currant whims of the populism of the day. Not just for myself but for everyone.

Well? The girl child just could not accept that social premise. Imagine that… And she really became angry with me when I told her that her way of thinking was nothing more than an overt expression of Mob Rule…

Which? Like it or otherwise is exactly what The Political Correctness of the Day happens to be.

Perhaps that is just one reason why one of my nicknames is;


An American “Hero.”

August 28, 2018

A decades long cover up…

Guest commentary…

August 17, 2018

Mexico is angry…

Wow! And make certain you read, at the bottom of this page, the part that says it will take 30 more seconds to read!   Please forward to all you know and ask them to forward to all they know.

 The shoe is on the other foot and the Mexicans from the State of Sonora , Mexico do not like it.  Can you believe the nerve of these people? It’s almost funny. The State of Sonora is angry at the influx of Mexicans into Mexico!

The state legislators from the Mexican State of Sonora traveled to Tucson to complain about Arizona’s new employer crackdown on illegals from Mexico. It seems that many Mexican illegals are returning to their hometowns and the officials in the Sonora state government are ticked off. 

A delegation of nine state legislators from Sonora was in Tucson on Tuesday to state that Arizona’s new ‘Employer Sanctions Law’ will have a devastating effect on the Mexican state. At a news conference, the legislators said that Sonora, – Arizona’s southern neighbor – made up of mostly small towns – cannot handle the demand for housing, jobs and schools that it will face as Mexican workers return to their hometowns from the USA without jobs or money.

 The Arizona law, which took effect Jan. 1, punishes Arizona employers who knowingly hire individuals without valid legal documents to work in the United States. Penalties include suspension of, or loss of, their business license.  The Mexican legislators are angry because their own citizens are returning to their hometowns, placing a burden on THEIR state government instead of ours.

“How can Arizona pass a law like this?” asked Mexican Rep Leticia Amparano-Gamez, who represents Nogales. ‘There is not one person living in Sonora who does not have a friend or relative working in Arizona” she said, speaking in Spanish. “Mexico is not prepared for this, for the tremendous problems it will face as more and more Mexicans working in Arizona and who were sending money to their families return to their hometowns in Sonora without jobs,” she said “We are one family, socially and economically,” she said of the people of Sonora and Arizona.


The United States is a sovereign nation, not a subsidiary of Mexico, and its taxpayers are not responsible for the welfare of Mexico’s citizens. It’s time for the Mexican government, and its citizens, to stop feeding parasitically off the United States and to start taking care of its/their own needs.

Too bad that other states within the USA don’t pass a law just like that passed by Arizona.  Maybe that’s the answer, since our own Congress will do nothing!

*New Immigration Laws*

Be sure to read to the bottom or you will miss the message…

  1. There will be no special bilingual programs in the schools.
  2. All ballots will be in this nation’s language.
  3. All government business will be conducted in our language.
  4. Non-residents will NOT have the right to vote no matter how long they are here.
  5. Non-citizens will NEVER be able to hold political office.
  6. Foreigners will not be a burden to the taxpayers. No welfare, no food stamps, no health care, or any other government assistance programs. Any who are a burden will be deported.
  7. Foreigners can invest in this country, but it must be an amount at least equal to 40,000 times the daily minimum wage.
  8. If foreigners come here and buy land, their options will be restricted. Certain parcels including waterfront property are reserved for citizens naturally born into this country.
  9. Foreigners may have NO protests; NO demonstrations, NO waving of a foreign flag, no political organizing, NO bad-mouthing our president or his policies. These will lead to deportation.
  10. If you do come to this country illegally, you will be actively hunted and, when caught, sent to jail until your deportation can be arranged. All assets will be taken from you.

Too strict? The above laws are the current immigration laws of MEXICO!  If it’s good for American’s to obey Mexican laws, then it’s good vice versa!!!

This will take less than thirty seconds to read. If you agree, please pass it on. An idea whose time has come: Somehow, that doesn’t seem logical. We do not have an elite that is above the law. The self-serving must stop. This is a good way to do that. It is an idea whose time has come. Have each person contact a minimum of twenty people on their address list, in turn ask each of those to do likewise.

In three days, most people in The United States of America will have read the message. This is one proposal that really should be passed around.

You are one of my 20.  If you don’t have twenty, pass it on to whatever number you can!

“The problems we face today exist because the people who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.”

Three guesses who wrote this!

Some things just never change!

July 29, 2018

Image may contain: text

%d bloggers like this: