Gravity, Black Holes and Washington, DC

Guest post by Richard Lowery, Jr.


Gravity, or gravitation, is a natural phenomenon by which all things with mass are brought toward (or gravitate toward) one another.” (1)

This definition is most of what I know about the physics of gravity. I do recall that Albert Einstein said that gravity was not really a force and it involved the curvature of space time. He also said that it was preferable to get the Russian dressing on the side when ordering a corned beef reuben. There is a famous story where Galileo wanted to experiment with gravity by dropping balls off the tower of Pisa. Given that Galileo was a really smart guy and all, I decided to replicate his experiment by dropping bowling balls to the ground but unfortunately dropped one on my foot. The gravity worked like a charm and I celebrated my success by having my friends and family sign the cast on my leg. Gravity is supposed to be the weakest of the four fundamental interactions of nature, but it is no slouch when it comes to dropping heavy objects on your body parts. I later read that four out of five dentists recommend that you should not drop bowling balls on your feet; therefore, you should never do this experiment at home, but if you do, then you should definitely wear very thick socks.

Gravity also involves the existence of black holes in outer space. I am the most layman of laymen so in the most laymen of terms black holes have gravitational fields that are so powerful that matter cannot escape and it disappears. Now when talking about black holes it seems to me that it would not be too much of metaphorical strain to also mention Washington, D.C. Popular culture has absconded with this term and we now sometimes say that a black hole is a place where things vanish without a trace which is quite apropos regarding our nation’s capital since billions of dollars disappear there on a regular basis. At this time I would like to apologize to any galactic black holes that are reading this article and I do not wish to insult them because many black holes that I personally know are very frugal with their money.

Now Washington, DC is awash with taxpayer money, centralized regulatory power and a culture of self-importance. It is chock full of industry associations, consumer groups, trade unions representatives and media types loudly advocating for their perceived notions that some action must be done about this, that or the other thing. Now toss the political class into the mix. These are ambitious carbon based forms of life and most are members of the human species; hence, it is quite normal for them to gravitate toward the concept of being viewed as people of action who will do things to fix a bunch of things.

Human beings like to be perceived as people of action. We generally do not admire the neighbor who lays around all day on the couch but we are attracted to the neighbor that mows the lawn, trims the hedges, paints the garage and builds an addition on to the house in one afternoon. He or she is a person of action. We naturally gravitate toward these types of people just like the bowling ball gravitated toward my foot. This is a good thing in that it builds individual character, strengthens local neighborhoods and has ameliorative effects on civic virtues. Action and movement are good things.

Did I say that action and movement are good things? Well, I still believe that but with the caveat that some action and movement is not so good – particularly much of the top down federal government action where the few boss around the many. The American Founders believed that some action is not so good too which is why they wrote into the U.S. Constitution all the arcane processes to throw sand into the gears of the political elites who endeavor to coercively use public resources get stuff for their constituent’s private benefit. (2) This is action that is misguided.

I herewith propose the theorem called Lowery’s Theory of the Gravitational Pull of Misguided Action:

Scads of Other People’s $$ + Central Power + Contemporary Perceived Notions That Things Must Be Done + Media + Political Elites = Lots of Misguided Expensively Wasteful Stuff Happening

Now I am not opposed to things being done. I like things being done as much as the next person. The American Founders likes things to get done too. But the issue is locational – where should the actions occur? The political observer Yuval Levin describes the U.S. Constitution as a vehicle to open up space where things can happen. Washington, D.C. has lots of good things to do such as secure the border, run the federal judiciary, create a stable monetary system, regulate some issues of moral hazard, and some social safety net management. It should set up broad rules for people to follow because this organizes an environment of space where we can get things done. But the specifics of the things that we choose to do within these spaces should not be promulgated by those at the top because too much action at the top clogs up things below and sucks the air out of the open spaces producing negative consequences. (3) This requires that the political elites trust us – the unwashed masses – and it requires that we stop rattling our tins cups at the political elites – our high and mighty betters – demanding that they do something about everything. But this conflicts with the contemporary popular mindset that the federal government must do something about our “problems” and this belief is sometimes as strong as the belief in the laws of gravity.

It was not so long ago that these notions were less prevalent. For example, there was a severe economic downturn following World War I. President Warren Harding basically did nothing and the economy quickly rebounded.

(Harding who was elected in 1920) inherited one of the sharpest recessions in American history. By July 1921 it was all over and the economy was booming again. Harding had done nothing except cut government expenditure, the last time a major industrial power treated a recession with classic laissez-faire methods, allowing wages (and prices) to fall to their natural level. (4)

Compare this approach to the Hoover/ Roosevelt methods of very active government interaction and centralized economic micromanagement of the 1930’s. The Harding low government action approach resulted in a short recession that was over by 1921, generated steady economic growth and low unemployment that empowered people to make their lives better. The Hoover/ Roosevelt high government action approach was concurrent with the decade long 1930’s economic trauma of an unstable economy, high unemployment, and a whole bunch of agony for whole bunch of people. In 1932 at the depths of the downturn, the U.S. unemployment rate was 23%. By 1938 after all the New Deal activity, the U.S. unemployment rate stood at 19%, the U.S. economy was only about the same size as is was ten years earlier and we had experienced the bitter recession of 1937. I am not suggesting that every New Deal intervention was bad, but why the twelve plus years of pain? Where there other forces that aggravated the downturn beyond the normal economic laws of supply and demand of the general public? Did all the direct government intervention, coercive federalism and misguided Central Bank policies contribute to downstream effects that further gummed up the works? Maybe there was a redistributionist and central planning mindset – a zeitgeist – created by the dominant political and intellectual elites that discounted the importance of private actions that soured investment, dampened entrepreneurial confidence and worsened the malaise of inertia? (5) I vote yes to all the above.

The contemporary gravitational pull to do something about “problems” by inserting the coercive powers of the federal government into the lives of people to micromanage their daily activities can have disastrous consequences just like it appears to have had in the past. Whether it is Mr. Obama or Mr. Trump, a hyperactive federal government cannot possibly anticipate, forecast, implement and adjust to the needs of 300 million people. The unintended consequences of misplaced federal government intervention often results in negative downstream effects that exceed the positive benefits of the initial action; to wit, Mr. Obama’s stiffing GM bondholders or Mr. Trump’s apparent penchant for using public resources and presidential influence to alter the capital investment decisions of private companies are micromanagement actions that should not be on the to-do-list of the central government portfolio. These actions should be left to others – be it other levels of government or private individuals.

Government action for the sake of action is not desirable and we need to recognize that beyond the initial perceived benefits often lies a smelly Pandora’s box of wasteful bad things and troublesome secondary effects. We can use the forces of gravity to our benefit, but we should refrain from dropping bowling balls on our feet. We can use the forces of the federal government for our benefit too, but hyperactive micromanagement – from the Left or the Right – is a black hole that should be avoided. (6)

Frightfully Yours,

Richard J. Lowery Jr.


  1. I googled Wikipedia
  2. Today we call this call these constituents “special interests”. The founders were well aware of this type of wealth redistribution skullduggerry and called these constituents “factions.”
  3. It also has a perverse cultural effect by creating dependancy and eroding private virtures. Perhaps these “soft” negative impacts are in the long term worse than the economic issues.
  4. Paul Johnson, Modern Times (Harper Row, 1983), page 216
  5. I googled the graph at Unemployment data source is at The citations in the graph are my own. Beyond government fiscal and regulatory intervention, the Great Depression was also exasperated by the Federal Reserve’s monetary practices and U.S. Trade policy. An excellent book for the general reader on this topic was written by Amity Shales called the “The Forgotten Man.” Certainly, not all 1930’s government action was wrong and some was necessary, but something – aside from a downturn – helped to extend the economic morass.
  6. I want to emphasize that Washington DC produces some good things too. For example, you can get a great corned beef sandwich at the Deli City Restaurant near Langdon Park.

The Lamest Duck Of All

Guest post by Dr. Robert Owens


The Lamest Duck of All

Long ago and far away, back in an America before Hope and Change changed our hope to dread, we used to have peaceful and dignified transfers of power when one party replaced the other in the Oval Office.  When Bill Clinton and Ross Perot defeated George the First he left Bubba the following note:


Dear Bill,

When I walked into this office just now I felt the same sense of wonder and respect that I felt four years ago. I know you will feel that, too.

I wish you great happiness here. I never felt the loneliness some Presidents have described.

There will be very tough times, made even more difficult by criticism you may not think is fair. I’m not a very good one to give advice; but just don’t let the critics discourage you or push you off course.

You will be our President when you read this note. I wish you well. I wish your family well.

Your success is now our country’s success. I am rooting for you.

Good luck,


That was a class act and a hard one to follow especially for people who allow partisanship and acrimony to eclipse good taste and good manners.

Even the Clinton loving New York Times reported that the transition from the Clinton Inter-lewd to George the Second was anything but dignified.  It was instead sophomoric. According to the Times:

The General Accounting Office, an investigative arm of Congress, said today that “damage, theft, vandalism and pranks did occur in the White House complex” in the presidential transition from Bill Clinton to George W. Bush. The agency put the cost at $13,000 to $14,000, including $4,850 to replace computer keyboards, many with damaged or missing W keys.

Some of the damage, it said, was clearly intentional. Glue was smeared on desk drawers. Messages disparaging President Bush were left on signs and in telephone voice mail. A few of the messages used profane or obscene language.

“A Secret Service report documented the theft of a presidential seal that was 12 inches in diameter from the Eisenhower Executive Office Building,’’ next to the White House, on Jan. 19, 2001, the accounting office said.

Six White House employees told investigators that they had seen graffiti derogatory to Mr. Bush on the wall of a stall in a men’s room. Other White House employees saw a sticker in a filing cabinet that said, “Jail to the thief,” implying that Mr. Bush had stolen the 2000 election.

Following in the tradition of the now discredited and finally discarded Clintons the classless exit is being delivered not by nameless faceless staffers but instead by POTUS himself on the world stage.  Unfortunately the last days of our first anti-colonialist president and his anti-American regime is marked by the only bi-partisan approach of his divisive reign.  RINOs in Congress are helping him in his efforts to torpedo the incoming Trump Revolution from accomplishing the work we have sent them to the swamp-on-the-Potomac to accomplish.

From the president who sent his own campaign team to Israel to defeat Benjamin Netanyahu in his election we get hyperbolic outrage at accusations of Russian hacking and leaks during the 2016 presidential campaign.  He says he knew about the hacks months ago.  Yet he didn’t think they were worth mentioning until his hand-picked successor and his policies were rejected at the ballot box.

Now he fires a salvo of impotent sanction at the Russians.  Putin laughs them off as the ineffective flailing of a lame duck.

Rep. Trent Franks of Arizona told MSNBC, President-elect Donald Trump was the real target of the sanctions, which booted 35 Russian intelligence operatives out of the U.S. and shut down Russian intelligence complexes in New York and Maryland.

“This administration somehow has the notion that this would change the election. They’re really trying to delegitimize the election itself. That’s the main motivation here,” said Franks, a member of the House Committee on Armed Services.

“And I think it’s just unfortunate that this president forgets that most of these e-mails came from WikiLeaks, who claimed they got them from disgruntled DNC staffers.”

In addition to being misdirected they were ineffective and merely showed the impotence and ineffectiveness of the Obama Administration.  According to former UN Ambassador John Bolton Putin showed utter contempt for Obama in his measured response to his President Obama’s better never than late response to the accusations of Russian hacking.

Kellyanne Conway, who will serve as Trump’s counselor to the president, told CNN Thursday, “I will tell you that even those who are sympathetic to President Obama on most issues are saying that part of the reason he did this today was to quote ‘box in’ President-elect Trump.”


Personally I would like to echo an astute observation by Fred Fleitz, a former CIA analyst “The perception that an outgoing U.S. president is trying to box in and sabotage the foreign policy of his successor hurts the global reputation of America’s democratic system.”

We also have BHO’s stunning reversal of American policy allowing the condemnation of Israel to go forward.  After protecting Israel with our veto power since 1949 in the waning days of his soon to be repudiated and reversed Progressive regime BHO ordered his team at the UN to abstain from a key vote.  Thus the anti-Jewish UN was finally able to condemn Israel and add fuel to the flames of hatred.  Not only did the Obama administration refuse to block the move they are accused by Israel of helping to write the resolution and for pushing others to vote for it.


The blizzard of economically strangling regulations continued to pour out of the Obama White House even as it slowly sinks beneath the political horizon.  President Obama poured on thousands more new regulations in 2016 at a rate of 18 for every new law passed, according to an analysis of his team’s expansion of federal authority.  While Congress passed just 211 laws, Obama’s team issued an accompanying 3,852 new federal regulations, some costing billions of dollars.


The 2016 total was the highest annual number of regulations under Obama.  The proof that it was an overwhelming year for rules and regulations is in the Federal Register, which ended the year Friday by printing a record-setting 97,110 pages, according to the analysis from the Competitive Enterprise Institute.


We only have one president at a time.  We all get that.  And until January 20th 2017 that is still BHO.  Unless he does an abrupt U-turn, ends his attempts to undermine his successor, thwart the will of the people, and show a little class to his everlasting shame he may well be remembered as the lamest duck of all.


Dr. Owens teaches History, Political Science, and Religion.  He is the Historian of the Future @ © 2017 Contact Dr. Owens  Follow Dr. Robert Owens on Facebook or Twitter @ Drrobertowens / Edited by Dr. Rosalie Owens



No Joke – This Is The Holiday Greeting Sent Out By My Liberal Town Government

Sorry I haven’t blogging lately, things are busy with my day job, the family business, and the kids. I hope you’re all doing well. I have a little bit of time off so I thought I’d take a few minutes to share the holiday message sent to residents of the Town of DeWitt by our town government.

Happy Holidays! 
The Town of DeWitt wishes you a joyous, happy, and safe holiday season. 
Try one or all of these eco-friendly tips to start off the new year (some are good for the waistline too):
1) Limit your consumption of meat  and
2) Reduce your dairy consumption, (livestock contribute significantly to greenhouse gasses)
3) Stop using palm oil (it is destroying the rain forests at alarming rates),
4) Use reusable containers instead of disposable ones,
5) Reduce your seafood consumption,
6) Buy less “stuff”,
7) Find creative recipes using leftovers and throw less food away.
It was even written in red and green, just like it is here. Isn’t that festive? Maybe next year they’ll send people out to inspect residents’ refrigerators to make sure we are all eating the proper foods and using our leftovers wisely.


Merry Christmas Or Mary’s Christmas?

The following is a guest post by Dr. Robert Owens.


Merry Christmas or Mary’s Christmas?

In December of 1914 in the first bitter winter of a long bitter war the solders of the German Empire and the soldiers of the British Empire defied the orders of their officers.  They abandoned their hastily dug entrenchments, that would soon grow into an elaborate maze of trenches stretching from Switzerland to the English Channel, to meet each other in no man’s land. They sang hymns and exchanged gifts in a spontaneous outpouring of the feelings of peace, fellowship, and forgiveness which were then the staples of a Christ centered Christmas season.

If you drench yourself in the torrent of Christmas movies that bombard us from Thanksgiving till December 25th you see that the spirit of Christmas in emotional America isn’t about the Christ child who came into a lost world to die as a payment for sin and to rise again to bring new life in harmony with God.  It is instead about the sentimental ideal of love and the boy gets the girl or is it the girl gets the boy?  Who knows, sometimes they throw in a curve that really builds the suspense.  There are movies about Santa Clause, his sons, his daughters, his elves, and wingless angels all of whom help people learn the true meaning of Christmas, which is never about Christ and always about family and friends and being nice people.

In commercial America, Christmas is about Black Friday and discounts so deep they remind me of the street vendor in Mexico who follows you shouting “I’ll give you 110% off if you buy two!”  The Chia Pets come out along with snuggies, pet rocks, and every other doodad imaginable to buy for people who already have too much.

The mountains of presents which obscenely bury Christmas trees in so many American homes are ripped apart by sugar-high children. Children who get into a frenzy of getting so intense they never have time to appreciate what they get. All they want is to get something else.  The beautiful wrapping paper, the miles of ribbon, and the forests of bows are stuffed unceremoniously into big green garbage bags soon on their way to landfills.

The problem with being a Historian is that you are constantly looking for the context, the background, the circumstances in the past that created the circumstances you face in the here and now.  Sometimes when you discover the story behind the story it isn’t what you thought it would be.  Sometimes it is the opposite of what you thought you would find.  Take Christmas for instance.

The early Church never celebrated Christmas.  Why didn’t the early Christians celebrate the festival honoring the birth of Jesus Christ?  For the same reason they didn’t honor either birthdays or anniversaries. It was known that the celebrating of any day or date was a custom of the pagans.  By the word ‘pagans’ they meant people who still lived in the darkness of superstition. In an effort to divest themselves of all pagan practices, they did not even set aside or note down the date of their Savior’s birth.

In the Fourth Century, Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire.  Controversy, heresy, and false teaching began to plague a church now swollen from small groups of dedicated disciples ready to suffer persecution with and for Christ to a massive bureaucratic organization crammed with those who wanted to be part of the religion mandated by the government.  Naturally the Church began to lose its fervor and fire: the zealous faith that exploded out of Israel and spread through the Roman world.  Unfortunately, just like today, the Christian leaders of that time not knowing the true secret of the Church’s growth, looked to outward sources to bolster their flagging faith. Celebrations and entertainment began to surface within the church.

In 354 AD – Bishop Liberius of Rome declared that Christians everywhere should celebrate the birth of Christ on December 25.  Since the early Christians didn’t record the actual date of Jesus’ birth how was December 25th decided upon?   Most scholars agree that the birth of the Redeemer did not take place in the month of December at all. In fact, the 25th of December was not even chosen by the Christians, but by the pagan Romans.

When the Romans of that age noticed that the days grew shorter each year during the months of November and December, they began to fear that the earth might be dying. Therefore with the ‘return of the sun’ at the end of December resulting in longer days, the Romans began to celebrate the “Feast of the Sol Invictus” (the Unconquerable Sun) on December 25. Soon many Christians began to join in this pagan festival and the various celebrations that went with it. Their faith wasn’t vibrant enough (or real enough) to stand against the strong pull of the festivity and celebration around them. They drifted with the crowd.

Thus, in order to keep the Christians away from all the pagan rituals that were part of this worship of the sun, Bishop Liberius of Rome declared, in 354 A.D., that all Christians everywhere should celebrate the birth of our Lord on December 25.

Did this celebration continue unbroken? No. During the rule of Oliver Cromwell, Lord Protector of Britain and the Commonwealth, the celebration of Christmas was banned because of “the heathen traditions surrounding this sacred event.” From 1649 to 1658 no celebration was allowed except for special church services on Christmas Eve. Cromwell was a dedicated Christian who lived by the commands and principles of Scripture.

We must recognize a parallel in what took place in church history and what is taking place in this day and age. The pagan festivities of the fourth century and Cromwell’s day are much like the commercial celebration of Christmas today.

Christians no longer participate in the worship of the sun or the sun god as in the fourth century. The centerpiece of Christmas is now no longer the sun but the unconquerable Santa Claus. This white bearded, chubby benefactor typifies the god of this age – materialism. It was Coca Cola who first gave the white bearded individual his red suit to go with the advertising color of the popular drink. What this plump, rosy cheeked individual has to do with the advent of the precious Lamb of God, I cannot even begin to understand! Writer Jonathan Skinner puts it this way: “A white-bearded old man has thrown the baby out of the cradle, and his trinket-filled grotto has replaced a rustic stable…The spiritual has been swallowed by the secular, the sacred obliterated by sentiment. Christmas has been gutted of its meaning.”

These humanistic and unscriptural traditions have quietly crept into the church when true faith and real worship were fading. All this is reflected in the entertainment aspect of much of the Christian worship of today. If we claim to be Christians and disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ, let us distance ourselves from the commercial (and pagan) celebration of the so-called Christmas season. Holy celebration is Scriptural but must begin from within in the hearts of those who claim to follow Jesus. The crazy rushing whirl that typifies the celebration of Christmas today has nothing to do with our servant Lord who had no place to lay His head.

Instead of obsessing over the war on Christmas waged by Progressives who desire to erase all that made America great, and instead of campaigning to get Christ back into Christmas perhaps we should pray for a revival that will get Christ back into Christians.  Instead of worrying about whether we are allowed to say Merry Christmas, we should be concerned that so many have lost sight of Mary’s Christmas.

Dr. Owens teaches History, Political Science, and Religion.  He is the Historian of the Future @ © 2016 Contact Dr. Owens  Follow Dr. Robert Owens on Facebook or Twitter @ Drrobertowens / Edited by Dr. Rosalie Owens  


The Left Needs To Get A Grip, And So Do Trump’s Biggest Fans

I made the mistake today of turning on the TV while The View was on. I didn’t keep it on for long, but long enough to know that the leftists need to get a grip on themselves. They were acting like the election of Donald Trump is going to bring back the KKK the likes of which we haven’t seen since the days of Bull Conner. (Oh, and isn’t it convenient how they always fail to mention that when the KKK had any influence it was run by a bunch of Democrats?)

It’s no secret that I’m not a big fan of Donald Trump, and I find the KKK people’s embrace of him kind of disturbing, but that doesn’t mean that the millions of people who voted for him are secret white nationalists. Just like all of the people who voted for Barack Obama aren’t all apostles of the church of Jeremiah Wright.

One thing that is pretty clear is that Obama didn’t have some left wing mandate when he took office. He might have thought he did, but the mid-term elections in 2010 and 2014 put that idea to rest. People just liked him, as a person, because he’s young and he’s cool. It wasn’t about policy.

As for Trump, he has a core of supporters that will stand behind him no matter what he does. But really, the only reason he won the election is that Hillary Clinton was such a horrible candidate. If Trump was that inspirational, if he truly led a massive movement, he would have won the popular vote and all of this talk of getting rid of the Electoral College wouldn’t even be happening.

So Stephen Moore’s declaration that the Republican Party is now the party of Trump, rather than the party of Reagan, is just preposterous. Yes, Trump won the Electoral College, but it was hardly a huge endorsement of Trumpism.

Let’s look at some figures:

In 1980, Ronald Reagan won the popular vote by 51-41% over an incumbent president. He won 44 of 50 states and smashed the Electoral College 489-49. In 1984, he was reelected in a stunning landslide, taking 49 of 50 states and obliterating his opponent in the Electoral College, 525-13. The only state that Walter Mondale in 1984 won was his home state of Minnesota.

In 1980 and 1984, Reagan twice won California, New York, New Jersey, Illinois, and even Massachusetts. He twice won pretty much everything.[…]

As Philip Bump notes in the Washington Post, Trump won Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin by 0.2, 0.7, and 0.8 percentage points, respectively — by 10,704, 46,765, and 22,177 votes. “Those three wins gave him 46 electoral votes; if Clinton had done one point better in each state, she’d have won the electoral vote, too,” Bump observes. “Or put another way: But for 79,646 votes cast in those three states, she’d be the next president of the United States.” Bump notes that more people were in attendance at the Ohio State Buckeyes football game in Columbus last weekend.

Moreover, as Nate Silver points out in an excellent historical analysis of Electoral College victories, Trump’s margin over Hillary in the Electoral College was a nice one but historically well below average (44 out of 54). It certainly ranks way below Reagan’s two massive victories (Reagan’s victories ranked 7th and 3rd out of 54).

(Read More)

If there is any mandate to be found, Republicans in the House and Senate have more of an argument to make than Trump does. They kept the majority in both houses, plus Republicans now control more state governments than ever before. They write the laws, what they need is a president who will sign off. Now they have that, hopefully. And hopefully they will finally be able to follow through on their promises. If so I might re-enroll in their party.

For now, I’m only cautiously optimistic, which is better than the dread of the thought of Hillary Clinton in the White House. Then again, the way Donald Trump and Mike Pence used the power of government to save a thousand jobs in Indiana is kind of disturbing. Sure, it’s great that those people will keep their jobs, but at what cost to the rest of us? Since when are conservatives all about crony capitalism and economic fascism?

Oh, and now there are reports that Trump’s daughter Ivanka is going to act as the First Lady instead of his wife. That’s kind of weird, but I guess people could overlook it. But then the reports of how the wannabe liberal darling’s top issue is climate change should be a big red flag.

But hey, what do I know? I’m just a suburban mom in the flyover part of New York state trying to raise a family and make ends meet. If only I had the time to drink the Kool Aid maybe I’d feel differently.

Why The Progressives Want A Recount They Know They Will Lose

The following is a guest post by Dr. Robert Owens.


Why the Progressives Want a Recount They Know They Will Lose 

The recount in Wisconsin and the coming ones in Michigan and Pennsylvania will not change the outcomes in any of those states.  Even though the party of Mayor Daley, Boss Tweed, and their big city machines are famous for winning recounts by finding bags of votes in candy store basements no recount has ever changed thousands of votes let alone tens of thousands.  I do not believe changing the outcome is the purpose.  It is instead changing the perception of it.  

I predict that they will demand the recounts are done by hand.  This would make them take so long these three pivotal States would not certify their results by the last day possible for directing their Electors how to vote.  If all three states miss the deadline, Trump is at 260, Hillary at 232.  No one hits 270.   

Then, according to the Constitution, the election would go to Congress.   The House votes with one vote per State.  The Republican House would then elect Donald Trump as the 45th president.  The Republican Senate would elect Pence Vice President.  

This has happened before.  In 1824, though Andrew Jackson had more popular votes and more electoral votes John Quincy Adams won in the House.  President Adams made a deal with the Speaker of the House Henry Clay who Adams then named as his Secretary of State, which at the time was considered the stepping stone to the presidency.  This was immediately termed the Corrupt Bargain by supporters of Jackson.  The antagonistic presidential race of 1828 began practically before Adams took office.  To the Jacksonians the Adams-Clay alliance symbolized a corrupt system where elite insiders pursued their own interests without heeding the will of the people. 

This is Hillary and the Progressives strategy to place the mantel of corrupt elite insiders on the Republicans now that they see the nation is incensed against the circle of Progressive power brokers who led us from the pinnacle of prosperity to the brink of bankruptcy.  This is akin to how the Democrats have successfully placed the mantel of racist on the party of Lincoln and the Emancipation Proclamation.  What a masterful stroke of political maneuvering that convinced the descendants of slaves that their natural allies are the descendants of Jim Crow. 

If this goes to the US House and Senate, and the result is the same as the result from the Electoral College without the recounts, why do it?  The answer is to make Trump seem completely illegitimate. They and their obedient shills in the media will tell us every day and at every opportunity that Trump did not win the popular vote saying he lost by over 2.1 million ignoring the fact that millions of illegals voted.  He did not win the Electoral College since in this scenario he would not have attained 270.  They will say just as they did about Bush the Younger that he was not elected he was selected by members of his own party in Congress. 

However, there is one wrinkle in this strategy.  If a state never gets to name electors, the number needed to win does not remain the 270 needed if every state names every elector.  In that case it would once again be a majority of those named.  Even with 260-232, Trump would still win.  Then again the thugs on the left are sending death threats to electors already named trying to frighten some of them into becoming faithless electors who do not vote as instructed by their States.  I don’t foresee this happening.  The number of faithless electors in American History doesn’t make a handful. 

So if after all these devious machinations Trump still wins without the election being thrown into Congress this would only be used by the Sandernistas and the Clintonites to cry rigged system.  They would keep their bully boys from Black Lives Matter and Move On in the streets for years while they hope and pray that Trump’s policies don’t make America great again which could solidify his hold over the working men and women throughout the nation. 

No matter how this evil strategy plays out, whether the election is thrown into Congress or if Trump wins with a majority of a short electoral count, we will have four years of the Democrats calling this another Corrupt Bargain.  They will try to disrupt the inauguration.  They will have protestors outside the White House from day one.  They will have demonstrations everywhere President Trump goes.  They may even try to incite mass marches and violence in the rotted hulks of our once magnificent cities they control like medieval fiefdoms.  Using their big megaphone in the media they will use print, broadcast, movies, and songs to agitate their followers for the 2020 rematch between the Donald and perhaps Senator Elizabeth Warren or whoever they can scrape up to be the new face for their shopworn collectivist movement. 

In other words they know the recount won’t change anything but they hope it will be enough to energize their low information base for a restoration of corporate socialism in four more years. 

Dr. Owens teaches History, Political Science, and Religion.  He is the Historian of the Future @ © 2016 Contact Dr. Owens  Follow Dr. Robert Owens on Facebook or Twitter @ Drrobertowens / Edited by Dr. Rosalie Owens 


A Republic Is Not Mob Rule

The following is a guest post by Rod Eccles.


A Republic Is Not Mob Rule

By Rod Eccles

There has been renewed talk, mostly from the left, about the problem with our Electoral College as it pertains to electing a President.

The leftists are upset that their candidate, Hillary Clinton, won the popular vote (although that is not actually the case due to known voter fraud) yet lost to Donald Trump in the Electoral College count.

They scream that it’s not fair.  That the Electoral College is out dated, old fashioned and has no place in a modern Democracy.

Well that is the problem right there.  We are not a pure Democracy.  We are a Representative Republic.  And that means our representatives have to be elected via the entire population in which that representative represents.

Let me simplify.

In local elections, it’s easy to elect via popular vote.  Local elections are small compared to the whole of the nation.  So it makes sense that the popular vote prevails in small amounts.

But since we are a UNION, not an actual and technical COUNTRY, you cannot simply elect the Union’s Representative via a simple popular vote.

Example: Let’s say you have 7 people, 3 women and 4 men.  Let’s assume that there is a referendum in front of these seven people.  The referendum is about sex.  Let’s say that the referendum is that men can have sex with any woman they want at any time and the women have to happily capitulate.

By a simple vote, it might go down as 4 men say yes and 3 women say no.  Mob rule, the women lose.  But now let’s say that the men represent a portion of the population and the women represent another portion of the population.

Let’s say that in order for this referendum to pass, they need 10 points or delegates.  Those delegates are distributed by population numbers.  The men have 4 points and the women have 6 points in total.

Now let them vote.  The men all vote for the referendum and thus garner 4 points.  The women decide they don’t like it and vote against.  They represent a larger percentage of the population in total even though they are in the minority in voting numbers.  They vote no.  They have 6 points.

The women have defeated the referendum even though there were fewer of them.  This means the mob of men cannot run rough shod over the women.

This is how the Electoral College works.  But instead of men and women, we are talking states.  So in other words, large states cannot run rough shod over small states simply because the large states have a larger population.

The Electoral College is there to make things fairer.  To make all states more equal on a national level.  So if you believe in FAIR elections then there is nothing more fair than to try and treat all states in the Union as equal as possible.

And that, boys and girls, is why the Electoral College system is not outdated.  But a brilliant way to make the Union more fair for everyone.

The Rod Eccles Show Distribution Channel by Zinc Media

Happy Thanksgiving Post-Turkey Coma!

Sorry I didn’t get a chance to wish you a Happy Thanksgiving earlier in the day. I worked yesterday and even though we stayed home this year I was busy all day preparing our feast. It was a great day, with the exception of Aretha Franklin’s rendition of the National Anthem at the beginning of the Detroit vs. Minnesota game. I like her just fine, but, yikes!

I hope you all had a great day. I certainly hope you didn’t need to read all of those therapy “news” stories about how to spend time with your family on a holiday if you disagree with some of them on politics. I think the folks who write those things are so immersed in everything political that they forget that most Americans don’t live it and breathe it every moment of their lives. Someone even wrote a poem. Whoever wrote that needs Netflix or therapy or something.

Oh well. Enjoy the Black Friday sales, if that’s your thing, and the leftovers, your family, friends and beloved pets. I hope you have as much to be thankful for as I do. We all have struggles, and life can be difficult at times, but as Americans we are truly blessed. Let’s try to keep it that way.