budbromley

Trump in his own words…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcUCLwWCihE

Abstract: “The hypothesis that the increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide is related to observable changes in the climate is tested using modern methods of time-series analysis. The results confirm that average global temperature is increasing, and that temperature and atmospheric carbon dioxide are significantly correlated over the past thirty years. Changes in carbon dioxide content lag those in temperature by five months.”  (Note date: 22 February 1990)

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1990Natur.343..709K

Nature 343, 709 – 714 (22 February 1990); doi:10.1038/343709a0

Coherence established between atmospheric carbon dioxide and global temperature

CYNTHIA KUO, CRAIG LINDBERG & DAVID J. THOMSON

Mathematical Sciences Research Center, AT&T Bell Labs, Murray Hill, New Jersey 07974, USA

The above work by Kuo et al is confirmed and strengthened in the following work using the availability of 20 years additional data.  Full paper available at the link below.

A re-evaluation of the coherence between global-average atmospheric CO2 and temperatures at interannual time scales. by Jeffrey Park in GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, VOL. 36, L22704, doi:10.1029/2009GL040975, 2009 (full article linked below.)

Abstract:  Frequency-dependent coherence between atmospheric CO2 and historical temperatures reveals climate feedbacks within Earth’s carbon cycle. Coherence between interannual fluctuations in global-average temperature and atmospheric CO2 has changed over time. Since 1979, at Mauna Loa and other observation sites, interannual coherence exhibits a 90 phase lag that suggests a direct correlation between temperatures and the time-derivative of CO2. …

Introduction:   Statistical correlations between atmospheric carbon dioxide and global temperatures have been found on multiple time scales. Simple autoregressive prediction filters that utilize CO2, CO2-proxy and solar-variability time series show that a handful of free parameters can explain well the secular progression of 20th-century temperatures [Thomson, 1997; Kaufmann and Stern, 1997; Tol and de Vos, 1998; Stern and Kaufmann, 2000]. On interannual time scales, carbon-cycle feedbacks are evident in correlation analyses that show CO2 fluctuation to lag several months behind correlated fluctuations in global temperatures [Kuo et al., 1990; Martin et al., 1994; Dettinger and Ghil, 1998; Adams and Piovesan, 2005]. The earliest study [Kuo et al., 1990] used spectral coherence statistics to correlate CO2 and temperature, but most later studies use time-domain correlations, some statistical, some visual [see Keeling et al., 1995, Braswell et al., 1997; Langenfelds et al., 2002; Lintner, 2002; Buermann et al., 2007].

Kuo et al. [1990] correlated global temperature with a 30-year record of monthly CO2 observations at Mauna Loa, Hawaii [Keeling, 2008].  20 additional years of data is now available from Mauna Loa and the largely coeval South Pole CO2 time series. A global network of stations [GLOBALVIEW-CO2, 2008; Masarie and Tans, 1995], now provides time series as long as the Mauna Loa series originally analyzed by Kuo et al. [1990]. It seems timely to ask whether the spectral correlations reported in the 1990s have persisted. …

Results: [9] Our estimate of C(f) between Hadley-Centre global average temperature and CO2-concentration at Mauna Loa USA over 1958 – 1988 (Figure 1) agrees largely with Kuo et al. [1990], but coherence over 1979 – 2008 differs significantly (Figure 2). For 1958 – 1988 jC( f )j 2 exceeds the 99% confidence level for nonrandomness over 0.2 < f < 0.6 cyc/yr, breaches the 90% confidence level for non-periodic variability near f = 1 cyc/yr, and breaches the 90% confidence level within 1.25 < f < 2.0 cyc/yr. For 1979– 2008 jC( f )j 2 exceeds 99% confidence over a narrower low-frequency bandpass and breaches 90% confidence modestly near f = 2.0 cyc/yr. A more telling comparison involves arg(C( f )). During 1958 –1988 a linear phase ramp mimics the effect of a 6-month delay in CO2 fluctuations relative to those in global DT. Kuo et al. [1990] reported a 5-month delay; the discrepancy might relate to updates in the historical SST dataset [Brohan et al., 2006]. During 1979 – 2008 the interannual arg(C( f )) 90 where jC( f )j 2 is significant, i.e., a constant phase rather than a phase ramp.

Discussion: [13] Interannual arg(C( f )) > 0 suggests that CO2 fluctuations are caused by fluctuations DT in global temperature. The correlation coefficient is 2 –3 ppm/ C for interannual periods. If Earth climate warms by 3C for a doubling of preindustrial CO2, the predicted greenhouse feedback for a global-average DT = 1C ENSO fluctuation would be less than 0.05C, that is, <5% feedback.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2009GL040975/pdf

Notice the snake is coiled and ready to strike, not stretched out.

Pull your head out just long enough to grasp this: It is true that we (US + NATO) have regime-changed them, funded them, armed them and trained them… and killed them, over and over again for 4 decades. But, historical evidence contradicts the point that we caused all of this jihadism and contradicts the notion that walking away will stop the violence.

Muslims were killing 10’s of millions of people (1) wherever they went BEFORE the U.S.A. existed. They have never stopped. Eighty million Hindu and other Indians were killed in India alone by the method taught by Muhammad and proudly documented in the journals of his generals. Since 9-11, muslims have been killing eight of their fellow muslims for each of us infidels.

World domination is the mission of islam’s holiest text, which muslims believe to be the literal word of their god, and that is explained by its prophet’s words and actions.

Abu jahl said to them: “Muhammad alleges that if you follow him you will be kings of the Arabs and the Persians. Then after death you will be raised to gardens like those of the Jordan. But if you do not follow him you will be slaughtered, and when you are raised from the dead you will be burned in the fire of hell.” The apostle[Muhammad] came out to them with a handful of dust saying: “I do say that.” (2)

So, no, stopping our repeated behaviors toward them and then leaving them alone will not stop them from trying to dominate us. But, yes, it is stupid to continue to waste resources on them and counterproductive and stupid to continue to kick their nests.

We must vigilantly maintain for our homeland the strongest national defense on the planet.  That defense must include profiling and removing jihadist muslims inside the U.S.  We must recruit peaceful, reformist muslims to accomplish this task.  The U.S. must close the gates which are currently letting in unvetted hordes of ever-cheaper labor.  We must halt the Obama-and-oligarchy-led national suicidal refugee programs such as those underway in Europe; if allowed to continue, this Trojan horse will result in certain defeat.

National defense and national interest does not include instigation of regime change in foreign lands, wars of convenience, or behaving like the world’s police force, under any theory of U.S. national interest or international human rights, or the open borders multiculturalist policies which, unfortunately, the U.S. has been following along with NATO allies for more than 30 years.

References

(1) “The Mohammedan Conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history…” — So wrote Will Durant on page 459, Volume 1, of his eight volume Story of Civilization

• Here are a few excerpts from pages 459-462 of the same volume:
• The Mohammedan Conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history…The first Moslem attack was a passing raid upon Multan, in the western Punjab (664 AD). Similar raids occurred at the convenience of the invaders during the next three centuries, with the result that the Moslems established themselves in the Indus Valley about the same time that their Arab co-religionists in the West were fighting the battle of Tours (732 AD) for the mastery of Europe…In the year 997 a Turkish chieftain…swept across the[Indian]frontier with a force inspired by a pious aspiration for booty. He met the unprepared Hindus at Bhimnagar, slaughtered them, pillaged their cities, destroyed their temples, and carried away the accumulated treasures of centuries…Each winter Mahmud descended into India, filled his treasure chest with spoils, and amused his men with full freedom to pillage and kill…he expressed his admiration for the architecture of the great shrine [at Mathura on the Jumna], judged that its duplication would cost one hundred million dinars and the labor of two hundred years, and then ordered it to be soaked with naphtha and burnt to the ground. Six years later he sacked another opulent city of northern India, Somnath, killed all its fifty thousand inhabitants, and dragged its wealth to Ghazni…The first of[the] bloody sultans [of the Sultanate of Delhi] was a normal specimen of his kind — fanatical, ferocious, and merciless. His gifts, as the Mohammedan historian tells us, “were bestowed by hundreds of thousands, and his slaughters likewise were by hundreds of thousands.” Sultan Muhammad bin Tughlak…killed so many Hindus that, in the words of a Moslem historian, “there was constantly in front of his royal pavilion and his Civil Court a mound of dead bodies and a heap of corpses, while the sweepers and executioners were wearied out by their work of dragging” the victims “and putting them to death in crowds.”..His successor, Firoz Shah, invaded Bengal, offered a reward for every Hindu head, paid for 180,000 of them, raided Hindu villages for slaves…Sultan Ahmad Shah feasted for three days whenever the number of defenseless Hindus slain in his territories in one day reached twenty thousand…The usual policy of the Sultans was clearly sketched by Alau-d-din, who required his advisers to draw up “rules and regulations for grinding down the Hindus…” Half of the gross produce of the soil was collected by the [Islamic] government; native rulers had taken one-sixth. “No Hindu,” says a Moslem historian, “could hold up his head, and in their houses no sign of gold or silver…or of any superfluity was to be seen…Blows, confinement in the stocks, imprisonment and chains, were all employed to enforce payment.”

http://quotingislam.blogspot.com/2011/06/mohammedan-conquest-of-india-is.html

(2) “Alfred Guillaume’s authoritative translation of the Sira of Ibn Ishaq presents in English the complete history of the life of Prophet Muhammad. No book can compare in comprehensiveness, arrangement, or systematic treatment with Ibn Ishaq’s work.” (Amazon review)

Abu jahl said to them: “Muhammad alleges that if you follow him you will be kings of the Arabs and the Persians. Then after death you will be raised to gardens like those of the Jordan. But if you do not follow him you will be slaughtered, and when you are raised from the dead you will be burned in the fire of hell.” The apostle[Muhammad] came out to them with a handful of dust saying: “I do say that.”

http://www.dailywire.com/news/2071/most-comprehensive-assault-global-warming-ever-mike-van-biezen#

Here are 10 of the many scientific problems with the assumption human activity is causing “global warming” or “climate change”:

1. Temperature records from around the world do not support the assumption that today’s temperatures are unusual.

The all-time high temperature record for the world was set in 1913, while the all-time cold temperature record was set in 1983.  By continent, all but one set their all-time high temperature record more recently than their all-time cold temperature records.  In the United States, which has more weather stations than any other location in the world, more cold temperature records by state were set more recently than hot temperature records.  When the temperature records for each state were considered for each month of the year, a total of 600 data points (50 states x 12 months), again cold temperature records were set in far greater numbers more recently and hot temperature records were set longer ago.  This is directly contradictory to what would be expected if global warming were real.

2. Satellite temperature data does not support the assumption that temperatures are rising rapidly:

Starting at the end of 1978, satellites began to collect temperature data from around the globe.  For the next 20 years, until 1998, the global average temperature remained unchanged in direct contradiction to the earth-bound weather station data, which indicated “unprecedented” temperature increases.  In 1998 there was a strong El Nino year with high temperatures, which returned to pre-1998 levels until 2001.  In 2001 there was a sudden jump in the global temperature of about 0.3 degrees centigrade which then remained at about that level for the next 14 years, with a very slight overall decrease in the global temperatures during that time.

3. Current temperatures are always compared to the temperatures of the 1980’s, but for many parts of the world the 1980’s was the coldest decade of the last 100+ years:

If the current temperatures are compared to those of the 1930’s one would find nothing remarkable.  For many places around the world, the 1930’s were the warmest decade of the last 100 years, including those found in Greenland.  Comparing today’s temperatures to the 1980’s is like comparing our summer temperatures to those in April, rather than those of last summer.  It is obvious why the global warming community does this, and very misleading (or deceiving).

4. The world experienced a significant cooling trend between 1940 and 1980:

Many places around the world experienced a quite significant and persistent cooling trend to the point where scientists began to wonder if the world was beginning to slide into a new ice age period.  For example, Greenland experienced some of the coldest years in 120 years during the 1980’s, as was the case in many other places around the world.  During that same 40-year period, the CO₂ levels around the world increased by 17%, which is a very significant increase.  If global temperatures decreased by such a significant amount over 40 years while atmospheric CO₂ increased by such a large amount we can only reach two conclusions: 1. There must be a weak correlation, at best, between atmospheric CO₂ and global temperatures, 2. There must be stronger factors driving climate and temperature than atmospheric CO₂.

5. Urban heat island effect skews the temperature data of a significant number of weather stations: 

It has been shown that nighttime temperatures recorded by many weather stations have been artificially raised by the expulsion of radiant heat collected and stored during the daytime by concrete and brick structures such as houses, buildings, roads, and also cars.  Since land area of cities and large towns containing these weather stations only make up a very small fraction of the total land area, this influence on global average temperature data is significant.  Since the daytime and nighttime temperatures are combined to form an average, these artificially-raised nighttime temperatures skew the average data.  When one only looks at daytime temperatures only from larger urban areas, the “drastic global warming” is no longer visible.  (This can also be seen when looking at nearby rural area weather station data, which is more indicative of the true climate of that area).

6. There is a natural inverse relationship between global temperatures and atmospheric CO₂ levels:

Contrary to what would be assumed when listening to global warming banter or while watching An Inconvenient Truth, higher temperatures increase atmospheric CO₂ levels and lower temperatures decrease atmospheric CO₂levels, not the other way around.  Any college freshman chemistry student knows that the solubility of CO₂ decreases with increasing temperatures and thus Earth’s oceans will release large amounts of CO₂ to the atmosphere when the water is warmer and will absorb more CO₂ when the water is colder.  That is why the CO₂ level during the ice ages was so much lower than the levels today.  That doesn’t take away the fact that we are artificially raising the atmospheric CO₂ levels, but just because we do, that doesn’t mean that this will cause temperatures to increase in any significant way.  The 40-year cooling period between 1940 and 1980 appear to support that premise.  What we can conclude is that the ice ages were not caused by changes in the atmospheric CO₂ levels and that other stronger factors were involved with these very large climate changes.

7. The CO₂ cannot, from a scientific perspective, be the cause of significant global temperature changes:

The CO₂ molecule is a linear molecule and thus only has limited natural vibrational frequencies, which in turn give this molecule only limited capability of absorbing radiation that is radiated from the Earth’s surface.  The three main wavelengths that can be absorbed by CO₂ are 4.26 micrometers, 7.2 micrometers, and 15.0 micrometers.  Of those 3, only the 15-micrometer is significant because it falls right in range of the infrared frequencies emitted by Earth.  However, the H₂O molecule which is much more prevalent in the Earth’s atmosphere, and which is a bend molecule, thus having many more vibrational modes, absorbs many more frequencies emitted by the Earth, including to some extent the radiation absorbed by CO₂.  It turns out that between water vapor and CO_2, nearly all of the radiation that can be absorbed by CO₂ is already being absorbed. Thus increasing the CO₂ levels should have very minimal impact on the atmosphere’s ability to retain heat radiated from the Earth.  That explains why there appears to be a very weak correlation at best between CO₂ levels and global temperatures and why after the CO₂ levels have increased by 40% since the beginning of the industrial revolution the global average temperature has increased only 0.8 degrees centigrade, even if we want to contribute all of that increase to atmospheric CO₂ increases and none of it to natural causes.

8. There have been many periods during our recent history that a warmer climate was prevalent long before the industrial revolution:

Even in the 1990 IPCC report a chart appeared that showed the medieval warm period as having had warmer temperatures than those currently being experienced.  But it is hard to convince people about global warming with that information, so five years later a new graph was presented, now known as the famous hockey stick graph, which did away with the medieval warm period.  Yet the evidence is overwhelming at so many levels that warmer periods existed on Earth during the medieval warm period as well as during Roman Times and other time periods during the last 10,000 years.  There is plenty of evidence found in the Dutch archives that shows that over the centuries, parts of the Netherlands disappeared beneath the water during these warm periods, only to appear again when the climate turned colder.  The famous Belgian city of Brugge, once known as “Venice of the North,” was a sea port during the warm period that set Europe free from the dark ages (when temperatures were much colder), but when temperatures began to drop with the onset of the little ice age, the ocean receded and now Brugge is ten miles away from the coastline.  Consequently, during the medieval warm period the Vikings settled in Iceland and Greenland and even along the coast of Canada, where they enjoyed the warmer temperatures, until the climate turned cold again, after which they perished from Greenland and Iceland became ice-locked again during the bitter cold winters.  The camps promoting global warming have been systematically erasing mention of these events in order to bolster the notion that today’s climate is unusual compared to our recent history.

9. Glaciers have been melting for more than 150 years

The notion of melting glaciers as prove positive that global warming is real has no real scientific basis.  Glaciers have been melting for over 150 years.  It is no secret that glaciers advanced to unprecedented levels in recent human history during the period known as the Little Ice Age.  Many villages in the French, Swiss, and Italian Alps saw their homes threatened and fields destroyed by these large ice masses.  Pleas went out to local bishops and even the Pope in Rome to come and pray in front of these glaciers in the hope of stopping their unrelenting advance.  Around 1850, the climate returned to more “normal” temperatures and the glaciers began to recede.  But then between 1940 and 1980, as the temperatures declined again, most of the glaciers halted their retreat and began to expand again, until warmer weather at the end of the last century caused them to continue the retreat they started 150 years earlier.  Furthermore, we now know that many of the glaciers around the world did not exist 4000 to 6000 years ago.  As a case in point, there is a glacier to the far north of Greenland above the large ice sheet covering most of the island called the Hans Tausen Glacier.  It is 50 miles long ,30 miles wide and up to 1000 feet thick.  A Scandinavian research team bored ice cores all the way to the bottom and discovered that 4000 years ago this glacier did not exist.  It was so warm 4000 years ago that many of the glaciers around the world didn’t exist but have returned because of the onset of colder weather.  Today’s temperatures are much lower than those that were predominant during the Holocene era as substantiated by studying the many cores that were dug from Greenland’s ice sheet.

10. “Data adjustment” is used to continue the perception of global warming:

For the first several years of my research I relied on the climate data banks of NASA and GISS, two of the most prestigious scientific bodies of our country.  After years of painstaking gathering of data, and relentless graphing of that data, I discovered that I was not looking at the originally gathered data, but data that had been “adjusted” for what was deemed “scientific reasons.”  Unadjusted data is simply not available from these data banks. Fortunately I was able to find the original weather station data from over 7000 weather stations from around the world in the KNMI database.  (Royal Dutch Meteorological Institute).  There I was able to review both the adjusted and unadjusted data as well as the breakout of the daytime and nighttime data.  The results were astounding.  I found that data from many stations around the world had been systematically “adjusted” to make it seem that global warming was happening when, in fact, for many places around the world the opposite was true.  Following will be a few of the myriad of examples of this data adjustment.  When I present my material during presentations at local colleges, these are the charts that have some of the greatest impact in affecting the opinion of the students, especially when they realize that there is a concerted effort to misrepresent what is actually happening.  Another amazing result was that when only graphing the daily highs from around the country, a very different picture arises from the historical temperature data.

There are many more specific areas that I have researched and for which I have compiled data and presentation material, equally compelling regarding at exposing the fallacies of global warming.  A new twist has swept the global warming movement lately, especially since they had to admit that their own data showed that there was a “hiatus” on the warming, as illustrated in the 2014 IPCC report; their data showed an actual cooling over the last 10 years.  The new term: “climate change” is now taking over, such that unusual events of any kind, like the record snowfall in Boston, can be blamed on the burning of fossil fuels without offering any concrete scientific data as to how one could cause the other.

Mike van Biezen is adjunct professor at Compton College, Santa Monica College, El Camino College, and Loyola Marymount University teaching Physics, Mathematics, Astronomy, and Earth Science.

More at this link:  http://www.dailywire.com/news/2071/most-comprehensive-assault-global-warming-ever-mike-van-biezen#

A lot of ambitious and dangerous powers are watching Obama assume a fetal position, and as a consequence they may well act foolishly and recklessly this year.

The man is a narcissist. He conceives of his legacy in more global places than the mere U.S. Presidency. He is still plotting his future and “We the people” are merely a means to his end goals.

Obama’s chief adviser is Iranian. Hillary’s chief adviser as SOS was Iranian. Obama  was a student of and teacher of the revolutionary methods of Saul Alinksy.  Obama’s father, his grandparents and his mentor as a boy were all communists. His preacher for 20 years, Jeremiah Wright, says things like, “Our Halfrican-American president—he don’t want to talk about reparations. It’s not personal responsibility. You’re missing the point. Let’s talk about white-on-black crime.” Obama’s friend, professor Bill Ayers, is and was a revolutionary, anti-US, anti-capitalist bomber and creator of Common Core. Obama served as a lawyer for ACORN and sued big banks to reduce their home loan requirements to junk, which led to the Great Recession. He was a member of the board that funded the development of carbon credit derivatives and trading. His excessive spending has doubled the official securitized, socialized debt of the federal government to $19 trillion, an amount exceeding the entire annual GDP of the nation. His goal is to subjugate America.

https://budbromley.wordpress.com/2015/11/03/get-on-your-knees/

This truly is the rape of America, Europe and South America led by our academics. For the globalist oligarchy, radical islam is just another means to their end goal…which is regime change. (The oligarchy already believe they dominate and a recent study by Princeton confirms it.)  They don’t hesitate to use savagery to attain that goal.

The global oligarchy believe that when the time comes they will be able to buy fealty from islamists or communists or fascists just as they have from christians (small c), and until then, the oligarchy will use the destruction of western values by the violence, chaos and disruption that islam causes as a means to first align the people against a common enemy and then remove liberty and property from western societies.

Global bankers among the globalist oligarchy literally don’t care about the form of government or religion.  They believe in money and power…period.  From their own prospective, bankers are as innocent as a prostitute. Wars are just another money making opportunity for them. Do the deal, get the bonus. It’s not conspiracy theory, it’s business as usual. The conspiracy – the revolutionary idea – was in the Declaration of Independence and U.S. Constitution which established unalienable rights for men derived from God instead of kings or government.  That was radical and is still a revolutionary idea today.

Alexander Hamilton was the banker spy among those revolutionaries and immediately began subverting the rights of the people and states to debt.  William Pitt, chancellor of the exchequer in England, said of the establishment of the first national bank in America under Alexander Hamilton: “Let the American people go into their debt-funding schemes and banking systems, and from that hour their boasted independence will be a mere phantom.” He was right.

And so, here we are, progressively becoming debt slaves while listening to our slave master extol the benefits of the dictatorship he has bestowed on us. Romans and historians like Gibbon discovered the result of moral decay like ours today.  It is known as the Dark Ages. May God help us all.

This is the key to ending to the largest fraud by far in world history, the biggest bubble in world history by far, the enormous government debt bubble which is enabled by the U.S. Federal Reserve.

Unfortunately, today, the U.S. Senate was unable to invoke cloture to end debate on the Motion to Proceed to S. 2232 (Federal Reserve Transparency Act of 2015 – Ron Paul’s mission) so that finally the Federal Reserve will be audited.

Federal Reserve policy is devaluing the U.S. dollar by inflating the money supply by 1% to 2% per year and has been doing that since it was founded by big banks in 1913, when the Federal Reserve Act was signed into law by progressive Democrat President Woodrow Wilson, who later said it was the worst mistake he ever made. Your dollar has lost 99% of its original value as a result of this Fed policy and U.S. citizens are in debt by $19 trillion to $65 trillion dollars (depending on how the debt is counted).

Here is the new expose’ by Project Veritas, the undercover group that revealed the truth about Planned Parenthood. Now they blow the cover for Common Core. Excellent.

http://projectveritas.com/explosive-new-series-about-common-core

Consider the effect of carbon dioxide on global warming by the so-called greenhouse effect. There is a relatively constant amount of solar radiation entering the atmosphere which is available to be absorbed by CO2. So, as the concentration of CO2 increases in the atmosphere, there is progressively less and less solar radiation available to be absorbed by any newly produced CO2 molecules, because that solar radiation has already been absorbed by other molecules already present. Thus the process is self-limiting, i.e. logarithmic, the inverse of exponential. This is not a point the climate scaremongers like to be drawn to attention!

The question is what would Donald do in the job of President?  Isn’t Donald the benevolent dictator that you have been wanting for years?  See, you are crazy.  Donald and Obama are narcissistic tyrants in their respective domains.  Turning either of them to serve the position and the people is probably impossible.

This has to be a nation of laws…instead of men and personalities…and that defines a republic.  I would still vote against Hillary or Bernie or Elizabeth Warren.  Donald would be the best among that lot.  Donald will be just more Obama, and Obama should be impeached and tried.  I would love Donald to prove me wrong.

Your job, if you choose to accept it, is to discern which candidate among all candidates proposed would best serve the sum and cumulative interests of the 50 member states of the United States of America? After all, it is the contract among the states that holds this nation together… and in turn holds us all together as citizens.  The states in convention contracted for a limited federal government.   If you are going to elect Donald as a dictator, is not it reasonable to know what Donald would do?

When a people give dictatorial power over themselves, they are all but lost.  “We” did that with Obama and here we are, lost.  Handing our problem to another dictator will only make it worse.  Once we have allowed our laws to be changed by executive action of the President, we have no idea whether the next dictator elected will be benevolent or not.  The next President could be Nero.  We have to revert to our republican nation of laws and restore the U.S. Constitution. Rule by executive order is tyranny.

Naturally, from all candidates including Donald, we need to know if they will serve the position – the office – of President of the United States and the people precisely as defined in the Constitution.  We already knew or should have known that Obama had no intention of doing any such thing.  Obama intended fundamental change.  He did that.  The outcome of the Obama tyranny is not good for the position, is not good for the states, and is not good for the people.

I would very much like to know what you discern.

Happy New Year!

Bud