Featuring Right thinking from a left brain, doing the job the American Media Maggots won’t, embracing ubiquitous, sagacious perspicacity and broadcasting behind enemy lines in Occupied Fornicalia from the veritable Belly of the Beast, the Bill Mill in Sacramento, Fornicalia, I continue to proffer my thanks to the SHR Media Network for allowing me to utilize their studio and hijack their air twice weekly, Tuesdays and Thursdays, thanks to my shameless contract, as well as appear on the Sack Heads Radio Show each Wednesday evening.
Thursday night BZ devoted his entire show — the full two hours — to an interview with Lily Tang Williams, the 2016 Colorado candidate for the US Senate via the Libertarian Party.
Hers is a wonderful yet cautionary tale about the search for freedom, Lily having fled Communist China on the heels of the Cultural Revolution. A bit of an inherent rabble rouser as she grew up, she came across
Lily Tang Williams appreciates the massive freedoms we enjoy here in the United States — the First Amendment, the Second Amendment. Essentially all the freedoms denied so many other people in China and around the globe.
Listen to the show. Listen to what she has to say about the country she left, the country she embraced — the United States of America — and the jeopardy in which the US now finds itself. Cautionary tale indeed.
If you care to listen to the show in Spreaker, please click on the yellow start button at the upper left.
If you care to watch the show on YouTube, please click on the red start button.
Please join me, the Bloviating Zeppelin(on Twitter @BZep, Facebook as the Bloviating Zeppelin and on Gab.ai @BZep), every Tuesday and Thursday night on the SHR Media Network from 11 PM to 1 AM Eastern and 8 PM to 10 PM Pacific, at the Berserk Bobcat Saloon — where the speech is free but the drinks are not.
As ever, thank you so kindly for listening, commenting, and interacting in the chat room or listening later via podcast.
Want to listen to all the Berserk Bobcat Saloon archives in podcast? Go here.
Want to watch the past shows on YouTube? Please visit the SHR Media Network YouTube channel here.
Want to watch the show live on Facebook? Go to the SHR Media page on Facebook here.
Want to watch the show on High Plains TV? Go here.
Thank you one and all for listening, watching and supporting the SHR Media Network: “Conservative Media Done Right.”
Immediate question: had Hillary Clinton won the presidential election, would she and fellow Demorats, Leftists and the American Media Maggots be calling for the obliteration of the Electoral College? You and I both know the obvious answer to that question.
Hillary has publicly stated she wants the Electoral College removed wholesale. From CNN.com:
Clinton: It’s time to abolish the Electoral College
by Dan Merica
New York (CNN) Hillary Clinton told CNN on Wednesday that it is time to abolish the Electoral College, part of a sweeping interview where the former Democratic nominee sought to explain why she lost the 2016 election.
Clinton, in the interview with CNN’s Anderson Cooper, displayed her animus for fired FBI Director James Comey, reflected on her love for the people — namely former President Bill Clinton — who helped her get through the crushing loss and blasted the arcane election body that she believes helped Donald Trump win the presidency.
I think it needs to be eliminated,” Clinton said of the Electoral College. “I’d like to see us move beyond it, yes.”
Hillary, of course, also referred to the 2000 election in which Al Gore lost to George Bush. But again, had Gore won and had Hillary won, would we be having this conversation? Of course not. Leftists won’t be honest and clear.
Tucker Carlson weighed in on the topic with a Demorat opponent.
Wanting the Electoral College gone, is that fanciful conjecture or is there more? From FoxNews.com:
Still bruised from Clinton loss, left takes aim at Electoral College in court
A liberal-led push to overhaul the Electoral College could be moving from the op-ed pages to the courtroom, as a Harvard professor who flirted with a dark-horse Democratic presidential bid last year vows litigation to change the system.
Criticism of the Electoral College was resurgent in the wake of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 loss. Clinton recently said she wants the system eliminated.
The latest effort isn’t aimed at dismantling the structure entirely – but rather, the winner-take-all system used by 48 states in awarding electors, which ends up focusing presidential races on a handful of battlegrounds.
With a winner-take-all, most of America is ignored,” professor Lawrence Lessig said in previewing his legal case – which, like any challenge to the Electoral College, faces a steep uphill climb.
Does the phrase “Constitutionally Federated Republic” mean anything to anyone any more? Because, after all, we are not a Democracy. We are a Republic. It’s in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. These are the same documents that Leftists and Demorats wish to eliminate wholesale, when they gather sufficient power to do so.
Hillary Clinton, Leftists, Demorats and the American Media Maggots aren’t the only ones wishing to eliminate the Electoral College. So is a member of the US Supreme Court, and she makes no bones about it.
Ginsburg: I would back changing the Electoral College
by Mark Hensch
Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg says she would support changing the Electoral College.
“There are some things I would like to change, one is the Electoral College,” she said late Monday at Stanford Law School in California, according to CNN.
“But that would require a constitutional amendment, and amending our Constitution is powerfully hard to do,” she added.
Her words immured here.
Ginsburg’s remarks follow President Trump’s nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch to fill the Supreme Court’s vacancy left by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. Gorsuch sits on Colorado’s 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals.
The Demorats don’t understand the Electoral College — with purpose and, in this instance, due to outright ignorance.
Top Democrat Wrongly Asserts Electoral College Isn’t in Constitution
by Henry Rodgers
The head of the national Democratic Party incorrectly said the Electoral College is not “a creation of the Constitution.”
In a lecture at Indiana University Law School, Tom Perez, a lawyer who is chairman of the Democratic National Committee, said the Electoral College “doesn’t have to be there” and asserted that the national popular vote should be the principal standard.
Once again, because Demorats have a recent history of losing the Electoral College. Plain and simple.
The above map, if the Electoral College were to be eliminated, indicates which population areas would choose the president. The rest of the country could go to hell and would make no difference. Are you ready to cede a minuscule portion of the country such power? Did you not hear or read of what our Founding Fathers warned?
Are the clouds starting to part? But let’s continue with the lies of Perez.
“The Electoral College is not a creation of the Constitution. It doesn’t have to be there,” said Perez, who was secretary of labor during President Barack Obama’s second term and is a former assistant U.S. attorney general for civil rights.
Gospel, right? Stated by Demorat/Leftist Leslie Marshall so it must be true, correct?
Article II of the Constitution, however, clearly outlines the electoral process, dictating that states must appoint electors who meet and vote for the president:
Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.
Damn. Those pesky laws again. Those terribly inconvenient founding documents. Oh how they get in the way of a true political coup. And in the way of Tom Perez. Are you beginning to identify some kind of a trend or pattern?
The House of Representatives provides small states with some serious concern, as 435 humans representing the so-called popular vote overwhelm small states. Then the Senate weighs in with true equanimity: one state, two Senators. No matter what. Checks and balances, anyone?
Isn’t it odd how Marshall purposely fails to mention this aspect?
Here is another aspect that Demorats and Leftists conveniently decide to avoid.
In the election of 1992, Bill Clinton received a majority of electoral votes and was the duly elected president, despite the fact that he received only a plurality (43 percent) of the popular votes. A third party candidate, Ross Perot, received almost 19 percent. In fact, Bill Clinton did not win a majority of the popular vote in either of his elections, yet there was never any doubt—because he won an Electoral College majority—that he had the legitimacy to speak for the American people.
No kvetching there, eh wot, from the Demorats? Was there?
This points to the reason why the Electoral College should remain as an important element of our governmental structure. If we had a pure popular vote system, as many people who are disappointed with the 2016 outcome are now proposing, it would not be feasible—because of third party candidates—to ensure that any candidate would win a popular majority. Even in 2016, for example, although Hillary Clinton won the popular vote, she only received a plurality (48 percent)—not a majority; third party candidates took the rest.
This means that, in California for example, Proposition 187 would have won. It would be the law of that land. Uh-oh.
It would also mean that Mexicans or Muslims could procreate to the extent that their sheer numbers overwhelmed the politics. Oh wait. That’s happening now in Europe and becoming entrenched in the US. Caucasoids are so free that they are choosing Free Cheese over procreation. Ain’t it great?
Demography is truly prophecy.
But what happens when demography overrules the Demorat Caucasoids now and in potential future power? How will they respond to the back of the bus?
Identity politics, y’all.
Even Slate.com, for fuck’s sake, advocates the retention of the Electoral College.
Can there be a true “democracy”? Of course there can’t. No one is thinking of dissolving the House or the Senate.
What we know now is: When Demorats and Leftist lose, every manner of cheating is back on the table.
Why do Leftists, Demorats and the American Media Maggots demand elimination of the Electoral College?
Simple. Because it is one of the final steps impeding their being elected in perpetuity and taking control of the United States once and for all.
Our Founding Fathers were wise beyond their years.
Older man struck and injured by Antifa rioters in Berkeley, early 2017, for wearing a red baseball cap which read “make America great again.” Where would the American Media Maggots be if this were an older black man struck down during an “alt right” rally?
After the recent forcible and violent removal of various statues across the nation by elements of Antifa and aligned sympathizers — to include the City of Baltimore removing the Taney, Lee, Jackson and Confederate women’s statues in literally the dead of night . . .
. . . I and many others knew that we had to do what I term the Logical Extension: the waters will build to the point where one can only assume this will lead to the greater call for anything even remotely aligned with our Founding Fathers.
Just as President Trump suspected.
Because, after all, there was no blame on both sides. It was only the white supremacists who were fighting and becoming violent. Apparently they must have been fighting each other. To me, a startling revelation but good to know.
Tucker Carlson spoke about what I said on my radio shows this past Tuesday and Thursday. Where are we going?
Would it shock you to know that the bulk of America — 62% — doesn’t want anything done with Confederate monuments, as in “let them be?”
But, for Leftists, it’s just the beginning. “Never let a good crisis go to waste.” As I said, the Charlottesville event is peripheral to their ultimate goals. Goals that at once are clear and foggy, simultaneously. Clear because we know where Leftists wish to go. Foggy because much of their rhetoric and hate-filled bombast is predicated upon everything but history.
As I also said and wrote directly following Charlottesville, yes, this is about racism but actually — only peripherally. This is but one step in a prior set of steps and a continuing series of steps by Leftists. It’s all pointing to a much larger issue involving — just as Barack Hussein Obama publicly stated he wished to do — the fundamental changing of America.
Leftists, Antifa and BLM members are cheering nationwide. Have no doubt.
This is direct reflection on the temper of the times and has been brewing the prior 8 years under Mr Obama, who both tacitly condoned and openly supported these eventualities. Would anyone dare to intimate that Mr Obama could not see the eventual results of his words writ large across the land? We’re suggesting he was that daft?
A condemnation of Cambridge Police “before all the facts are in” by Mr Obama as he and Professor Gates appear to “match.”
An equally biased support of Trayvon Martin before the case was in and prior to a verdict, in which George Zimmermann, not a Caucasoid but an Hispanic, was found not guilty by a jury of his peers. FDLE, DOJ and FBI cases were dropped for lack of evidence.
This is called a trend, one of many biased statements, identified as a pattern.
How would the press react if President Trump said, regarding a case involving a black police officer shooting a young white suspect, that “if I had another son, he’d look like ______”? There would be chaos for days if not weeks, aided and abetted by our favorite American Media Maggots.
I am certain, and you cannot convince me otherwise, that Mr Obama isn’t looking upon the events of the past two weeks or so and not applauding and smiling, calling like-minded friends and politicians, confident in knowing that what he set in motion, despite the loss of Hillary Rodham Clinton, is still in play to a growing extent.