Thursday October 20th, 2016

"It Is Not A Question of Who Is Right Or Wrong But What Is Right Or Wrong That Counts."
--Geoff Metctalf

Updated  hrs PT           


By Geoffrey M. Metcalf
Paperback, 214 Pages
Click HERE to Buy

or HERE / Amazon

Call anytime(888) 283-5051

Values for a New Millennium: Activating the Natural Law to Reduce Violence, Revitalize Our Schools, and Promote Cross-Cultural Harmony | [Robert Humphrey]

Please Listen to Geoff's Audio Books
(and tell ten people to tell ten people to tell ten people

World & National

Hillary: 'I know nothing' about Democratic dirty tricks exposed in videos
           Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, center, accompanied by Campaign Manager Robby Mook, left, and traveling press secretary Nick Merrill, right, waves after speaking with members of the media aboard her campaign plane at McCarran International Airport in Las Vegas, Wednesday, Oct. 19, 2016, following the third presidential debate. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)

Democrat Hillary Clinton pleaded ignorance Wednesday when asked about undercover videos linking her campaign to Democratic dirty tricks before shutting down a press confab shortly after the final presidential debate.

“I know nothing about this. I can’t deal with every one of his conspiracy theories,” said Mrs. Clinton at a post-debate press conference on her campaign plane, referring to Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump.

She then cut off questions in footage posted by MSNBC, saying, “But I hope you all have something to eat and something to drink on the way back to New York. Thank you!”

The brief exchange represented her first public remarks about hidden-camera videos released this week by the conservative group Project Veritas showing top Democratic operatives discussing voter fraud and planting protesters to incite violence at Mr. Trump’s campaign events.

Trump, Hillary clash on policy, personality in final debate

              Donald Trump gestures toward Hillary Clinton during the third presidential debate Wednesday in Las Vegas. (Associated Press)

Hillary Clinton accused Donald Trump of being “a puppet” for Russian President Vladimir Putin and urged voters to send a signal in this presidential election by rejecting the kind of candidate who has been accused of demeaning and assaulting women, mocking the disabled and inciting violence, as the two candidates faced off Wednesday in their final debate.

Mr. Trump came out flat but quickly turned combative, repeatedly interrupting Mrs. Clinton with one-line gibes. He also refused to agree to accept the results on Election Day, saying there is too much evidence of potential fraud for him to do that right now, and he will have to “look at it at the time.”

The debate, held at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, and moderated by Fox News’ Chris Wallace, finally delved deeply into social issues but also featured some of the toughest questions of the campaign on the fitness of either candidate to hold the White House.

Both candidates agreed — a rare point for the campaign — that the Supreme Court was at stake, and that they have very different visions for who the next justices should be.
Chris Wallace Grills Clinton on Corruption...
'I'll Keep You in Suspense' About Accepting Election Outcome...
FLASHBACK: Gore explains why he won't concede election...
Last week Hillary agreed he 'won' 2000...
Hillary 2002: Bush 'Selected, Not Elected'...
8 Times Liberals Claimed An Election Was Stolen...
Scarborough Lashes Out At Media Hypocrisy...
POLL: 72% have concerns over voting security...
FL Dem Party wants ballots allowed -- before registration verified...
Judge reopens voter reg in Virginia...
PA old voting machines could be problem if outcome in doubt...
PODESTA: OK for Illegals to Vote With Driver's License...
*Was most accurate in 2012...

Debate grades: Chris Wallace the clear winner

For any swing voters left in the U.S., the third presidential debate put the focus on the issues and highlighted the stark policy differences between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.

All of that credit is due to Fox News moderator Chris Wallace — who led with substantive questions — and pressed both candidates hard (Mrs. Clinton on her paid speeches, Mr. Trump on the rigged election). Mr. Wallace had his facts down cold, and asked questions that led to more than the candidates’ prepared sound-bites. For that, Mr. Wallace is the clear winner of the night.

Mr. Trump, who needed to come out swinging in order to save his campaign, didn’t hit a home run. Mrs. Clinton, who couldn’t make an error, remained posed and in control. For those reasons, the trajectory of the race will probably remain unchanged.

Megyn Kelly vs. Donna Brazile

DNC interim chairwoman Donna Brazile categorically denied that she received a debate question on the death penalty in advance in an interview with Megyn Kelly after the third presidential debate (unrelated to the debate in question). The question was for a Democratic primary town hall hosted by CNN and co-moderated by Roland Martin, the journalist who asked it at the forum. This information was revealed in a recent Wikileaks dump of John Podesta's emails.

"From time to time I get the questions in advance," the email subject was titled in a letter written from Brazile delivered to Podesta's Gmail.

Majority of Republicans side with Trump over Ryan for GOP's vision

By a nearly 20-point margin, Republican and GOP-leaning likely voters chose Donald Trump over House Speaker Paul D. Ryan as to who better matches what they think the party should stand for, according to polling released Thursday.

Fifty-one percent of Republicans and GOP leaners said Mr. Trump’s view better matches their own view of what the Republican party should stand for, compared to 33 percent who chose Mr. Ryan, according to the Bloomberg Politics poll. Fifteen percent said they weren’t sure.

Mr. Trump’s favorable rating stood at 76 percent in the poll, which was down from 81 percent in late September. Mr. Ryan’s favorable rating was 50 percent - down 11 points since September.

Russia taunts US with biggest smilitary offensive since Cold War

Russia has begun its biggest surface deployment since the end of the Cold War as it aims to effectively end the war in Syria on the eve of the US election, Nato officials warned last night.

The Kremlin is sending the full might of its Northern Fleet and part of the Baltic Fleet to reinforce a final assault on the city of Aleppo in a fortnight, according to Western intelligence.

The final bombardment is designed to shore up the Assad regime by wiping out rebels – paving the way for a Russian exit from the civil war.

Democratic operative plotted to have men bully women at Trump rally

The White House moved Wednesday to distance itself from a Democratic dirty-tricks scandal amid Republican calls for an investigation and newly released footage revealing that a Hillary Clinton campaign consultant schemed to have women bullied at a Donald Trump rally.

The latest hidden-camera video posted by Project Veritas shows Aaron Black, an associate at the Democratic consulting firm Democracy Partners, brainstorming about how to make sure pro-Trump men bully hired female agitators.

“So we get people behind Trump when he’s at a rally, but we make sure it’s women and they are positioned next to men,” said Mr. Black. “We want images of the men bullying the women who are trying to hold their signs up. That’s what I’m going to do. That is what we’re going to do. That is the hit.”

WikiLeaks claims sham U.S. firm is trying to smear Assange

The anti-secrecy group WikiLeaks is claiming that an elaborate and somewhat wacky smear campaign has targeted the group’s founder, Julian Assange, to paint him as a pedophile and Russian client.

WikiLeaks said the smear efforts, which it’s outlined in tweets and a series of documents over the past two days, include a sham offer from the Russian government to pay Assange $1 million to promote a women’s dating site and a separate scheme to link Assange to a criminal case in the Bahamas.

The assertions are the latest twist in events that have kept Assange and WikiLeaks at center stage of the presidential campaign. The smears come as WikiLeaks releases tens thousands of emails hacked from the Democratic National Committee and from the personal email account of campaign chairman John Podesta.

Ted Cruz calls for criminal probe into 'voter fraud operative' visits to White House

Sen. Ted Cruz called for a “serious criminal investigation” into multiple visits to the White House by Democratic consultant Robert Creamer after undercover videos showed he was involved in hiring protesters to disrupt Donald Trump events.

“Voter fraud operative: 45 meetings w/ Obama—this merits a serious criminal investigation (not a James Comey ‘friends and family’ cover-up),” the Texas Republican tweeted Wednesday, referring to Mr. Comey, FBI director.

Mr. Cruz’s comment came after the Daily Caller reported that White that Mr. Creamer has paid 342 visits to the White House, including 47 with Mr. Obama, since 2009.

Recovering the Endangered Species Act

The late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia once described the Endangered Species Act as imposing “unfairness to the point of financial ruin — not just upon the rich, but upon the simplest farmer who finds his land conscripted to national zoological use.” His comment resonates with far too many landowners across the country.

The target of his criticism was the Endangered Species Act’s “take” prohibition, which broadly forbids any activity that affects a single member of a protected species or its habitat. This incredibly burdensome provision bars a wide range of ordinary land uses, and subjects anyone who violates it to costly lawsuits, substantial fines and even imprisonment.

When Congress passed the Endangered Species Act in 1973, Sen. John Tunney, California Democrat, acknowledged that this is a “stringent prohibition.” He wasn’t kidding.

Hurting the seriously ill rather than helping

Physician-assisted suicide would degrade respect for life in D.C.

The D.C. Council voted this week to add a physician-assisted suicide bill to their legislative agenda. Proponents insist that such suicides be viewed as a purely private matter between an autonomous adult who desires to die and another autonomous adult who can provide medical assistance in death.

But no man is an island. Allowing doctors to prescribe deadly drugs to assist in the suicides of their patients is not simply a one-off interaction between two consenting adults. Changing the laws that govern how doctors operate will change the entire ecosystem of medicine. It will change how doctors relate to their patients and how much patients can trust their doctors.

Ultimately, it will change how society views the weak and the marginalized and affect our family relationships. It will change how we view our elders and our duties toward them.

"It is discouraging to think how many people are shocked by honesty and how few by deceit."

-- Noel Coward
     (1899-1973) British playwright

Medal of Honor
Army Medal of Honor

The Medal of Honor is the highest award for valor in action against an enemy force which can be bestowed upon an individual serving in the Armed Services of the United States.
GeneTrerally presented to its recipient by the President of the United States of America in the name of Congress.
The first award of the Medal of Honor was made March 25, 1863 to Private JACOB PARROTT.The last award of the Medal of Honor was made September 15, 2011 to Sergeant DAKOTA MEYER.

Since then there have been:  • 3458 recipients of the Medal of Honor.
    • Today there are 85 Living Recipients of the Medal of Honor.

Rank: Captain
Organization: U.S. Army
Date of Issue: 07/08/2002

Captain Humbert R. Versace distinguished himself by extraordinary heroism during the period of 29 October 1963 to 26 September 1965, while serving as S-2 Advisor, Military Assistance Advisory Group, Detachment 52, Ca Mau, Republic of Vietnam. While accompanying a Civilian Irregular Defense Group patrol engaged in combat operations in Thoi Binh District, An Xuyen Province, Captain Versace and the patrol came under sudden and intense mortar, automatic weapons, and small arms fire from elements of a heavily armed enemy battalion. As the battle raged, Captain Versace, although severely wounded in the knee and back by hostile fire, fought valiantly and continued to engage enemy targets. Weakened by his wounds and fatigued by the fierce firefight, Captain Versace stubbornly resisted capture by the over-powering Viet Cong force with the last full measure of his strength and ammunition. Taken prisoner by the Viet Cong, he exemplified the tenets of the Code of Conduct from the time he entered into Prisoner of War status. Captain Versace assumed command of his fellow American soldiers, scorned the enemy's exhaustive interrogation and indoctrination efforts, and made three unsuccessful attempts to escape, despite his weakened condition which was brought about by his wounds and the extreme privation and hardships he was forced to endure. During his captivity, Captain Versace was segregated in an isolated prisoner of war cage, manacled in irons for prolonged periods of time, and placed on extremely reduced ration. The enemy was unable to break his indomitable will, his faith in God, and his trust in the United States of America. Captain Versace, an American fighting man who epitomized the principles of his country and the Code of Conduct, was executed by the Viet Cong on 26 September 1965. Captain Versace's gallant actions in close contact with an enemy force and unyielding courage and bravery while a prisoner of war are in the highest traditions of the military service and reflect the utmost credit upon himself and the United States Army.

Archives: Geoff Metcalf/NewsMax January 14, 2010

Plunging Approval Shouldn't Surprise Democratic Bullies  
 By Geoff Metcalf  
Reasonable people can disagree (or should be able to) reasonably when they honestly consider facts that may contradict their preconceived opinions and prejudices.

 However, unfortunately, especially in the partisan environment of politics, reason, honest analysis, and fairness too quickly become victims of the “us-vs.-them” thing. Politics has become a blood sport in which the only golden rule is “the team with the gold makes the rules.”

 Politicians who were elected to represent the best interests, wants, and desires of their constituents morph into petty, agenda-driven competitors quick to eschew reason for partisanship. Sadly, this axiomatic reality is universal and not exclusive to any one party.

 Politics is supposed to be the art of compromise. However, it increasingly has become a blood sport personifying the absolute worse elements of abuse of power under the color of authority.

President Barack Obama, a year after promising "change" and a kumbaya tsunami of bipartisan cooperation, now reluctantly admits that he has not succeeded in bringing the country together. In a recent People magazine interview, the president begrudgingly acknowledged an atmosphere of divisiveness that has washed away the lofty national feeling surrounding his inauguration a year ago.

 "That's what's been lost this year. . . that whole sense of changing how Washington works," Obama said.

 "What I haven't been able to do in the midst of this crisis is bring the country together in a way that we had done in the inauguration," he said, referring to last Jan. 20, when hundreds of thousands flooded into Washington to see him sworn in as America's first black president. . . before reality and buyer's remorse.

 The simple reality is that Obama has failed because he and his party's leadership (or, critics will argue, LACK of leadership) have failed — failed to do what they said they would do, and failed to do anything the "way" they promised.

 Notwithstanding lofty eloquence, consensus, and "unity" cannot be mandated by imperial decree. Partisan acrimony is not and cannot be bridled by harangue, bullying, or bludgeon. Politics is the art of compromise, and the facts in evidence demonstrate that this administration and this Democrat-led Congress have not been disposed to engage in compromise.

 Rather, the Democrats have embraced a ham-fisted, "our-way-or-the-highway" forced imposition of their will.

Now, in the wake of spelunking poll numbers, rampant buyer's remorse, and a previously unimagined nostalgia for the Carter administration, Democrats seem shocked, amazed, and confused that more than half the country not only does not approve of what they are trying to do but also dislikes how they are doing it.

 Blaming the dark sky and coming ice age on Bush (or Reagan or Nixon or Eisenhower or Lincoln) is a worn-out dog that flat-out ain't gonna hunt.

 When Mr. Cool was promising "change," little did anyone assume that change might result in a Republican's winning Teddy Kennedy's Senate seat. (But that could happen, and soon.)

 It is a sad reality that, at the same time our military significantly has improved the quality of the U.S. troops who serve, the civilian leadership and politicians have regressed to a level reminiscent of uneducated feudal bullies.

 The military is smarter, more fit, better equipped, and as committed as any generation from Valley Forge to Iwo Jima or Pleiku to Bosnia. We have an all-volunteer military that is dedicated to protecting you. Conversely, the political arena is littered with disingenuous, duplicitous partisans who long since have abandoned their constituents for the next political victory (and/or pork-laden earmark).

 I recently re-read Robert Humphrey's "Living Values for a New Millennium" in preparation for a seminar entitled "Clarifying American Core Values" in February.

 In a 1997 speech before professor Humphrey passed away, he said that top leadership, in both our civilian or military government, is afraid even to discuss this apparent decisive need for new thinking both at home and overseas. Thirteen years ago, he observed that the news media and public opinion polls advise, "The people sense a moral bankruptcy in Washington" with a bickering inability in government to face these deeper problems.

Wherever you go, you are little bit safer because of the military and yet more at risk because of the coat-room shenanigans of Congress. Wherever the military sets a boot, everyone has a friend, a defender, and a champion. However, politicians seem more concerned about the next PAC contribution than the wants, needs, or well-being of the very people they were elected to represent.

 Ambrose Evans-Pritchard once wrote, “Moral relativism has set in so deeply that the gilded classes have become incapable of discerning right from wrong. Everything can be explained away, especially by journalists. Life is one great moral mush — sophistry washed down with Chardonnay.”