Who Is The Loyalist One Of All?

[Flanders]

Hillary Clinton?

https://tse3.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.M4470f9d34ba8aea95f2f4c390ea8326eo2&pid=Api&w=249&h=181

Donald Trump is out to totally defeat Islamic radicalism; so let me begin with two links that define Hillary Clinton’s foreign policy. Woodrow Wilson’s speeches stand as the most destructive speeches ever delivered by an American anytime anywhere:

First World War.com - Primary Documents - Peace Without Victory, 22 January 1917

Making the World "Safe for Democracy": Woodrow Wilson Asks for War

Now I want zero in on two points from Trump’s great speech:

​

The first part of Donald Trump’s foreign policy speech culminates in this one sentence:

If I become President, the era of nation-building will be ended.​

The myth that Islam’s leaders support United Nations nation-building is probably the biggest lie Hillary Clinton will doublespeak to death in the weeks ahead. Clinton fears an end to nation-building more than she fears any other change Trump will make in foreign policy. In short: So long as Muslim governments get what they want from our government they will remain in the United Nations under any pretense. It is absurd to believe that Muslims agree with Christian countries nation-building Muslim countries. Muslims have their own interpretation of nation-building and it ain’t freedom, or universal brotherhood, or the democracy joke.

Immigrants

Mr. Trump’s views on how immigrants is correct in every way. I only wish he would have used the phrase “melting pot”:

Assimilation is not an act of hostility, but an expression of compassion. Our system of government, and our American culture, is the best in the world and will produce the best outcomes for all who adopt it.​

Full text: Donald Trump's speech on fighting terrorism
By POLITICO Staff
08/15/16 03:15 PM EDT

Full text: Donald Trump's speech on fighting terrorism​

America returning to its successful melting pot ideology is obviously the exact opposite of multiculturalism. Hillary Clinton & Company will choke on the difference if The Donald says “I stand for the melting pot while my opponent is multiculturalism’s champion tearing this country apart.”

https://tse4.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.M8928dbbcd0804baf4b2f4b74217ccdfdH0&pid=Api&w=249&h=181

In the days before credit cards were accepted as good coin of the realm America prided itself on being a melting pot. A melting pot meant that emigrants from different backgrounds would blend together over time, and eventually they would become Americans. Ever-increasing prices necessary in a Socialist form of government will never, can never, accommodate a melting pot. Social engineers saw the flaw in their system of government and came up with multiculturalism in order to justify a Socialist economy. Serendipitously, multiculturalism gave Socialists a moral foundation to abandon the melting pot altogether.

Emigrants are encouraged to remain what they are when they arrive from whatever inferno they came from rather than become Americans. Result: Neither immigrants, nor their descendants, will ever become the freedom-loving Americans that built this country. Stated in plain English, a Socialist economy had no choice but to discard the melting pot and replace it with multicultural anti-Americanism.

Also, government-dictated, and funded, multiculturalism requires the courts, the Ministry of Propaganda, and the education system to increase the help they give to immigrants in their push to eliminate Americans altogether. Sometimes I think Socialists controlling those three institutions hate Americans so much they can't wait to see them go down on their knees to illegal aliens.

One look at America today and it’s obvious that abandoning national identity abandons tremendous benefits derived from individual liberties. Dirty little multicultural moralists never mention that.​

Socialism’s Flawed Pricing Mechanism

Finally. Hillary Clinton’s governing differences from The Donald’s leave her surrogates no choice but to pump up her loyalty. So far —— they cannot find anything on Trump that will fly with lies; hence, this story about Paul Manafort is the first attempt to throw mud on Trump’s loyalty indirectly:

Hillary Clinton's campaign has called for Mr Trump's team to disclose any pro-Russia links.

"The simplest answer is the truth: I am a campaign professional. It is well known that I do work in the United States and have done work on overseas campaigns as well. I have never received a single 'off-the-books cash payment' as falsely 'reported' by the New York Times," the statement reads.​

US election: Trump adviser denies Ukraine 'cash payments'
15 August 2016

US election: Trump adviser denies Ukraine 'cash payments' - BBC News​

I sure as hell would like to see the New York Times compare Paul Manafort to Clinton on this one:

The Democrats’ newfound paranoia about Russian influence on American affairs was certainly nowhere to be found when Hillary Clinton was cheerfully selling them a huge chunk of America’s uranium stockpile, right after a Russian bank paid Bill Clinton $500,000 for a speech.​

Flashback: When the Clintons Loved Russia Enough to Sell Them Our Uranium
by John Hayward
25 Jul 2016

Flashback: When the Clintons Loved Russia Enough to Sell Them Our Uranium - Breitbart​

 

[Flanders]

Biden is the ripest pumpkin in the Democrat patch:

https://tse3.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.M69fd8a7837b183e2ad1d59493ada1cf0o0&pid=Api&w=270&h=181

he is smart enough not to praise Hillary Clinton’s questionable loyalty —— so he ties Trump to Stalin hoping to draw voters away from Hillary’s lack of loyalty:

On Monday, Vice President Joe Biden suggested that Donald Trump “would have loved Stalin.” Taking in this Olympian pronouncement requires a few gulps of fresh air. Never mind: The same day, the media bubbled with suggestions, or outright assertions, that the race was over.​

Trump the ‘Stalin-Lover,’ and Other Political Deceits
William Murchison
August 16, 2016, 12:01 am

Trump the ‘Stalin-Lover,’ and Other Political Deceits | The American Spectator​

The Democrat party’s pumpkin patch must be located in Cuckoo Land. Biden, who cannot be trusted with a firecracker on the Fourth Of July, does not trust Donald Trump:

Biden Says Trump Can't Be Trusted With Nuclear Codes, Then Tells Crowd He Has the Codes 'Right Back Here'
By Susan Jones | August 16, 2016 | 6:11 AM EDT

Biden Says Trump Can't Be Trusted With Nuclear Codes, Then Tells Crowd He Has the Codes 'Right Back Here'​

And how cuckoo is this? Biden will give the codes to a person who played a major role in giving nuclear weapons to Iran —— Hillary Clinton —— is one jump ahead of a fit:

Finally, in this video Hillary’s security guard had to stop her from beaming up to the mother ship. I can only hope she is not onboard the mother ship when that 3 am call comes:

Edith Clinton​

 

[Flanders]

let me begin with two links that define Hillary Clinton’s foreign policy. Woodrow Wilson’s speeches stand as the most destructive speeches ever delivered by an American anytime anywhere:

Isolationism, as it was understood and practiced in the first half of the twentieth century, is no longer possible. The charge of contemporary American isolationism is impossible to make it stick with any credibility. Ocean-hopping aircraft, global communications, legal immigration, tourism, a worldwide web of financial markets, business alliances, etc., have buried “Great Wall of China” type isolation as a national policy in most of the world. That reality does not mean sovereignty is also obsolete. Just the opposite is true. Territorial sovereignty is more important today than it has ever been. Nations can and should do business with other nations, and, at the same time, retain their national sovereignty. Sovereignty begins with the citizens in every nation controlling their borders. Border control was stolen from the American people by thieves, parasites, and traitors loyal to the New World Order’s agenda.

Sovereignty Is Not Isolationism​

Pat Buchanan nails the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) for its major role in creating every major problem in this country. The bigger problem Americans face is the influence less than 5,000 anti-sovereignty internationalists exercise over the federal government. Note that CFR influence has been growing like an inoperable tumor since the U.S. Senate refused to ratify Woodrow Wilson’s League of Nations:

The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), founded in 1921, is a United States 4900-member organization, nonprofit, publisher, and think tank specializing in U.S. foreign policy and international affairs. It is headquartered in New York City, with an additional office in Washington, D.C.. Its membership has included senior politicians, more than a dozen secretaries of state, CIA directors, bankers, lawyers, professors, and senior media figures. The CFR promotes globalization, free trade, reducing financial regulations on transnational corporations, and economic consolidation into regional blocs such as NAFTA or the European Union, and develops policy recommendations that reflect these goals.[citation needed]

The CFR meetings convene government officials, global business leaders and prominent members of the intelligence and foreign-policy community to discuss international issues.

Council on Foreign Relations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

As treasonous as CFR members are, they are joined with a much larger number of United Nations traitors. Should Hillary Clinton steal the election she will line up with a every predecessor cut from the same cloth. The danger is that Clinton will rely on CFR influence to back up executive orders that she will take much further than did the Chicago sewer rat.

Anyway, both the United Nations and the CFR should be major issues to Americans across the board. They will not because of a promise media gave in the early 1950s:

​

Caution: Do not rely on media to defend this country’s independence:

No, it was not “isolationists” who failed America. None came near to power. The guilty parties are the CFR crowd and their neocon collaborators, and liberal interventionists who set off to play empire after the Cold War and create a New World Order with themselves as Masters of the Universe.​

Who Got Us Into These Endless Wars?
Patrick J. Buchanan
Thursday Aug 11, 2016 1:28 PM

Who Got Us Into These Endless Wars? | Human Events​

Finally, every item in the New World Order’s agenda must be paid for with a loss of individual liberties. More to the point, a minute number of American internationalists apparently have the authority to give away something they do not own.

 

[Flanders]

Donald Trump is out to totally defeat Islamic radicalism;

Donald Trump urged the American people to give Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation "the benefit of the doubt" when it comes to questions surrounding the money they have received from foreign countries.​

Trump on the Clinton Foundation: 'Let's give them the benefit of the doubt'
By Ryan Lovelace
17/16 11:42 PM

Trump on the Clinton Foundation: 'Let's give them the benefit of the doubt'​

That money comes from America’s enemies; so how confused can Trump be?

http://www.lucianne.com/images/lucianne/DailyPhoto/2016-08-17.jpg

 

[Flanders]

America returning to its successful melting pot ideology is obviously the exact opposite of multiculturalism. Hillary Clinton & Company will choke on the difference if The Donald says “I stand for the melting pot while my opponent is multiculturalism’s champion tearing this country apart.”

I am not a big fan of the Olympics, but I do like this aspect:

The Final Five are indeed a victory for the melting pot–the idea that we all meld together into an American nation, forging out of many different elements one unified, stronger alloy. But their feat is a rebuke of diversity as it is indoctrinated in campuses and policed by all levels of government. The board rooms that USA Today refers to are in fact not diversifying fast enough even for the independent Securities and Exchange Commission, which is considering mandating stricter rules to force companies to disclose plans to make boards more diverse.​

Americans’ Triumph at Olympics Shows Greatness of Melting Pot, Not Diversity
Mike Gonzalez
August 21, 2016

Americans’ Olympics Wins Shows Greatness of Melting Pot​

 

[Flanders]

America returning to its successful melting pot ideology is obviously the exact opposite of multiculturalism.

Multiculturalism is not only opposite it is deadly:

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/lb160922cd20160921095300.jpg

 

[Unkotare]

Again, six posts ALL just you responding to yourself. You could do that without the computer and save on electricity, you know.

Out of pity, let me actually give you a response from someone other than yourself:

There is no need to "return" to the Melting Pot, because we have never stopped melting with it. New immigrants arrive and eventually assimilate today just as they always have.