Do We Really Want Trump?

I haven’t really talked too much about the presidential debates or the candidates running for the nominations on either side as I try and concentrate on the here and now and reach out to the millennial generation to get them to understand the ramifications of what is taking place right before our very eyes.  But one cannot help but get caught up in the hoopla surrounding those vying for the presidential nomination on both sides of the aisle.

On the Republican side we have Trump who is a rabble rouser and is stirring things up speaking on issues we all want addressed, we have Ted Cruz who is the true Conservative of the bunch and has tried numerous cases before the Supreme Court and attended both Princeton and Harvard Law school, and Marco Rubio who many aren't quite sure what he stands for as he has had differing opinions on issues like immigration.

I have also spoke about Bernie Sanders quite a bit because I feel that many in the millennial generation are beginning to buy into his ridiculous ideals that would lead us down the road to a socialistic society turning this country into something that would be unrecognizable within just a few years. With promises like free college for all and free healthcare the millennial generation is buying into his socialist style promises not realizing that eventually the rich who Sanders wants to foot the bill will eventually run out of money!

What I haven’t delved into much is the whole Trump debate and whether or not he would make a good president.

While it's looking like Hillary Clinton is a lock for the Democrat nod for president, the Republican nomination is still up for grabs. We are now faced with the decision of whether or not we want to Trump who is looking more like a tyrant or Cruz who is an accomplished Conservative minded individual to represent us as our parties pick for president come 2016.

This divisiveness within the Republican party that is becoming more prevalent today is a direct result of the inaction of many of the Republicans we have elected into both the House and the Senate! We have seen much infighting within the Republican party over the last decade or so between the establishment and the tea party, the tea party that has really gained momentum over the past few years.  As more and more people are beginning to finally wake up to what's going on, we are witnessing a quick rise in conservative minded individuals who are taking more of an interest in the Constitution.  The rise in the tea party and the witnessing of the rapid decline of the state of this country led me to gain more of an interest in the Constitution and motivated me to try and become more involved and do what I can to affect change.  I have been motivated to get the word out and speak to truth the constitutional principles this country was founded upon, that being life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

This further exemplifies the importance of the upcoming election where we are faced with a decision that could not only affect the upcoming 4 to 8 years but could have lasting ramifications that may be felt for generations! We are seeing Trump gain in popularity as he is playing off of the anger and emotions of the American people. As I previously explained, the American people are fed up with the inaction of many of our representatives in both the House and the Senate and this has led to the blind following that Trump is receiving! A following that eerily resembles what we witnessed with Obama in 2008 and we all know how that turned out!

As time has gone by we have seen many of the conservatives become angry at the direction in which this country is headed.  We have seen anger on social media, in the news, at protests, and each step along the way we have seen the radical left sit there at push the narrative about the “right wing nuts” as they like to refer to many of us as.  And then along comes an individual who truly said what we all conservatives wanted to hear.  This individual spoke about building a wall along our border with Mexico that we have wanted since the Reagan administration, this individual played on the fear and trepidation against muslims after various terror attacks, this person leverage any and every news incident of the day to his advantage to play on the heartstrings of the american people to get them riled up and motivated to affect change.  

While this all sounds dandy, but one must take a step back and truly ask themselves is the decision I'm making to back whoever it is one decides to back for the presidential bid a rational one. Am I acting based on emotion, or am I acting based I  sound reasoning and logic? Am I acting based upon my anger and frustration over the state of this country which is a direct result of the wussy Republicans in Congress who refuse to stand up for what it is we elected them to do? Please ask yourself these questions and do your due diligence before you make your decision as the ramifications of the decision you make could be felt for a long time to come!

-Young Conservative

@steve0423

www.facebook.com/YoungConservativeShow

www.news.youngconservative.net

Black Lives Matter Thugs Assault Marine

It is truly a sad state of affairs in this country when you see a former servicemen assaulted by a group of little thugs, and the idea that this was all done in the name of the black lives matter movement!

According to The Daily Caller,

A former Marine became the target of an alleged assault in a McDonald’s Friday night, as a crowd of youths cornered him and demanded he answer the question, “do you believe black lives matter?” Before knocking him unconscious and robbing him.

Christopher Marquez, a veteran of Iraq and recipient of the Bronze Star for valor, said he was dining at a McDonald’s in northwest D.C. when a group of black teenagers came up to him and allegedly began harassing him about the black lives matter movement. Marquez ignored them which prompted calls and shouts that he was a racist.

Marquez left the establishment after eating, but allegedly sustained a sudden blow to the back of his head outside the McDonald’s, which knocked him unconscious. When he woke up, his pants were ripped and wallet gone, which contained $400 in cash, three credit cards, his VA medical card, school identification, metro card and driver’s license.

This is the type of behavior motivated by the black lives matter bullshit!! These lowlife, piece of shit, thugs walk up to a decorated Marine while he's out to eat by himself and ask if he knew about black lives matter and he ignored the assholes. Surely enough when he left he was mugged and robbed!

Where's the outrage over this? If the black lives matter people claim to be a legitimate organization where are their supposed leaders coming out condemning this heinous incident? You won't hear anything from anyone over this because it was a bunch of little THUGS robbing a white guy and frankly when these types of things occur no one really gives a shit.

And on top of that I'll be called a racist for speaking out and condemning the jack asses that did this. I'll be told I just don't understand black lives matter and the struggle and the idea that these were probably just misguided youth who had it so hard they just didn't know any better than to assault and rob someone in the name of "black lives matter".

The Daily Caller goes on to explain,

Credit card transactions reviewed by The DCNF reveal that the assailants charged over $115 on his various credit cards at a liquor store, Five Guys and Walmart. Mason, the McDonald’s store manager told Marquez that police have been looking for the group of teens for a previous incident.

“I believe this was a hate crime and I was targeted because of my skin color,” Marquez told The DCNF. “Too many of these types of attacks have been happening against white people by members of the black community and the majority of the main stream media refuses to report on it.”

Of course the mainstream media refuses to report on issues like this because it doesn't fit their agenda. They are in bed with the Obama administration which has stirred the pot of racism throughout his entire presidency! He ran on hope and change and duped the black community to vote for him under the guise he really cared about trying to help them all the while he has proved to be just like every other democrat. Just like every other democrat who has used the black community for votes and power. The black lives matter movement is a direct result of this failed president and his constant persistence to fan the fire creating a racial divide in this country that hasn't been seen in decades!

-Young Conservative

What Really Happened to Supreme Court Justice Scalia?

As I’m sure you have probably heard by now, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has passed at the age of 79 while on a Quail hunting trip at the Cibolo Creek Ranch in the big bend region of Texas.  This is tragic not only for the Scalia family but for the United States as a country as Justice Scalia was known as the lone Conservative hold out on the bench. As this is the case there are many questions still to be answered as to just what happened to Antonin Scalia as there were no reports that he had any underlying health conditions.  Individuals do not typically just go to bed and not wake up especially if they are deemed healthy.  Not to mention the fact that someone of his stature and the idea that he held such a prominent position within the United States government it is hard to fathom that he would have been able to literally just go to sleep and not wake up.  

In case you cannot read between the lines, I am insinuating that there is something fishy going on here. I know this sounds like what many like to call a “conspiracy theory” but if one can back it up with logical reasoning no one should be willing to leave it out of the realm of possibility. Reports are coming in that there will be no autopsy on the body of Justice Scalia and in addition to that reports are suggesting that the person who determined the cause of death did so over the phone and wasn’t even present to examine the body.

Add in the fact that Justice Scalia was the lone true Conservative hold out on the court and you have the final piece to the puzzle.  We have seen President Obama fight tooth and nail with congress as he has been trying to pass more and more legislation with regards to the first and second amendments. Who is to say that there couldn’t be some connection between what took place Saturday evening and the push to replace Mr. Scalia on the court before the end of Obama’s time in office.  What better way to push through legislation when all other avenues have failed than to replace the most conservative voice on the court with a liberal leaning judge that could essentially tip the balance of power within the court to pass through any legislation he so chooses.  

According to WND.com,

Yet just hours later, after missing both breakfast and lunch, Scalia was found dead of apparent natural causes. Later, media outlets reported he had suffered a heart attack.

Poindexter knocked on Scalia’s door about 8:30 the next morning. The door was locked and the judge did not answer. Three hours later, Poindexter returned from an outing and determined Scalia was still missing.

“We discovered the judge in bed, a pillow over his head. His bed clothes were unwrinkled,” said Poindexter.

“He was lying very restfully. It looked like he had not quite awakened from a nap,” he said.

“His hands were sort of almost folded on top of the sheets,” Poindexter told the New York Times. “The sheets weren’t rumpled up at all.”

So the sheets weren’t wrinkled, his hands were sort of folded as he lay there with a pillow over his head.  For someone who apparently had a heart attack that doesn’t really seem like a way in which they would be found dead.

The Washington Post is also reporting,

It then took hours for authorities in remote West Texas to find a justice of the peace, officials said Sunday. When they did, Presidio County Judge Cinderela Guevara pronounced Scalia dead of natural causes without seeing the body — which is permissible under Texas law — and without ordering an autopsy.

As official Washington tried to process what his demise means for politics and the law, some details of Scalia’s final hours remained opaque. As late as Sunday afternoon, for example, there were conflicting reports about whether an autopsy should have been performed. A manager at the El Paso funeral home where Scalia’s body was taken said that his family made it clear they did not want one.

To add to the speculation surrounding the death of Justice Scalia, we have the Washington Post now reporting that the individual who determined the cause of death did so without even seeing the body!  We have witnessed the killing of Michael Brown in Ferguson which was followed up with multiple autopsies and investigations by federal agencies to determine his cause of death.  We have a Supreme Court Justice found dead of “natural causes” determined by an individual who wasn’t even present at the scene and we’re just supposed to sit here and believe that?  You cannot possibly tell me that there is something more going on than meets the eye.

The Washington Post then went on to explain,

In a statement Sunday, the U.S. Marshals Service, which provides security for Supreme Court justices, said that Scalia had declined a security detail while at the ranch, so marshals were not present when he died. “Deputy U.S. Marshals from the Western District of Texas responded immediately upon notification of Justice Scalia’s passing,” the statement said.

Couple the skepticism around the cause of death of Justice Scalia with the idea that he “declined a security detail” and one simply cannot help but wonder what is going on here.  Why would a Supreme Court Justice randomly decide to decline a security detail?  I’m not saying for sure that there is foul play involved but given the lack of factual evidence surrounding his death and the lack of any real investigation one must look deeper and ask what is really going on here.  Not to mention the significance his passing has politically as there is now a fight underway between Obama and the Senate over whether or not they will approve any of his nominations before his term in office is up.

Young Conservative
@Steve0423
www.facebook.com/youngconservative

Young Conservative Show February 24, 2016

Young Conservative Radio Show February 7, 2016

Young Conservative Radio Show February 6, 2016

Free Internet Courtesy of the American Tax Payer

Well isn't that great, another freebie courtesy of the federal government. As if the government isn’t already taking over enough of the industries in this country, they now have their sights set on Internet access for the masses.  We have seen the government subsidize industries like the green energy industry, the ethanol industry in Iowa, and plenty of other industries throughout the country. And in case you thought they were satisfied with controlling those aspects of our lives you thought wrong!

According to The Hill,

The Federal Communications Commission will finish up rules in the “not to distant future” to help subsidize Internet service for low-income Americans, according to FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler.

The FCC started work last year to update Lifeline, the program that now only offers subsidies for traditional voice-only phone service. The update has faced resistance from Republicans who point to lingering inefficiencies in the $1.7 billion program.

So what you have here is the federal government by way of the FCC attempting to regulate Internet service as they do traditional voice-only phone service.  Let’s take this a few steps back and look into whether or not the government should be regulating any of these services to begin with.  The original intent of the federal government was to operate within the confines of the Constitution, I know most don’t like to hear this especially the millennials of today who like to rely on the federal government for everything, but it is not within the purview of the federal government to regulate such an industry. We have become so consumed with relying on the federal government that we are now relying on them to instruct companies which are part of the free market to provide a specific service, at a specific quality, at a specific price.

The other issue here is when the federal government is instructing these companies to provide this service they are compensating those companies, and whose money are they using?  You guessed it, the taxpayers money.  For instance, this program that is intended to cover Internet service for low-income Americans is a plan that is projected to cost $1.7 billion. We have become trained to overlook these types of costs and think they don’t necessarily mean anything. This is thanks in large part to the Marxist style of thinking in which you overwhelm the average citizen with numbers that are far outside the realm of comprehension.  Honestly, what everyday citizen can even come close to rationalizing the concept of $1.7 billion?

The article by The Hill then goes on to explain,

The first principle of Lifeline reform is allowing the program to support both fixed and mobile broadband service,” Wheeler said during a speech Wednesday about digital equity. “We will propose having minimum standards of service that Lifeline providers must deliver to receive funds.”

The FCC has not yet defined a minimum standard of service for service providers, like Comcast or Verizon, to join.  

So the same government that is going to instruct private entities to provide a specific service are going to than going to institute “minimum standards” as to the type of service being provided.  You can rest assured the government hasn’t fully looked into what the real cost will be of the service they are instructing the companies to provide or are they really taking into consideration what the long term ramifications are of the service down the road.  That’s ok though because the government has an open ended bank account funded by the American people.  

The Hill sums up their report on the government funded Internet project,

A report released Wednesday found that 91 percent of people below the poverty line have some form of Internet access. But that includes 23 percent of low-income homes that only have access on their smartphones.

Only 7 percent of those living in poverty have ever signed up for discounted home Internet service. Researchers found 40 percent of those who did not have service listed cost as a factor. Other responses included a lack of need, slow speeds, or the use of smartphones instead.

Of course at the end of the report we find out that 91% of people below the poverty line have at least some sort of Internet access albeit it may be from a smartphone.  Nonetheless we have to realize that it is not the responsibility of the government to provide this service and it is not the responsibility of the citizen to fund it.

Young Conservative

@Steve0423

www.facebook.com/youngconservativeshow