The Iowa Caucus - What did we learn?

.

Only in America and only in Iowa could you have four different people making victory speeches when only two people won.

First was Marco Rubio stealing every line possible from Trump and Cruz as he profusely thanked the Iowa voters for helping him do the impossible against all odds.  Odd thing is he only finished third but he had a plane to catch to New Hampshire so he was pressed for time.

Then it was the actual GOP winner Ted Cruz and before he was halfway through the victory speech out came Hillary Clinton and the networks cut to her while cutting off Cruz.

Hillary gave a fiery and almost mad speech stealing every line possible from Bernie Sanders while hugging Chelsea and Wild Bill before running off to catch her plane for New Hampshire as if she had enough of the Iowa voters.  Since she was still in a dead heat at the time and no news network predicted she would win, it seemed a bit audacious and bizarre.

Bernie Sanders followed Hillary, although he did not claim a voting victory, but certainly was justified in claiming a great moral victory against the Clinton machine.  By the time all four victory speeches were done there was still just one winner and one dead heat.

What did we learn from the Iowa experience?

In terms of strategy, Cruz was best with his 12,000 volunteers who got him the victory.  Next best was Rubio who targeted just five of the ninety-nine Iowa counties and still managed to finish third breathing down the neck of The Donald.

Trump stunned the news media when he also spoke and gave a gracious and humble three-minute thank you to the Iowa voters, with nary a nasty word uttered.  As of the morning after there were still no nasty Tweets from Trump, an eerie silence.

In the Iowa Caucus only one winner since 1972 then won the presidency, Barack Obama in 2008, not much of a record of success over a forty-four year period.  It was the same with Republicans as just George W. Bush in 2000 won since 1976.

As for the Republican vote, it went like this.

Ted Cruz                    51,666             28%

Donald Trump          45,427             24%

Marco Rubio             43,165             23%

Carson at 9% and Paul at 5% rounded out the top five of the twelve GOP candidates.  No other candidate received more than 3% of the vote.  It is interesting to note that Rand Paul beat all four GOP candidates who were former governors, while two former winners of the Iowa caucus, Huckabee and Santorum, got just 2% and 1% respectively.

Records Broken

The top three GOP finishers all broke the record for the most votes in Iowa GOP caucus history, quite a remarkable feat.

The total Republican vote of 186,295 shattered the previous GOP record of 121,503 while 171,109 Democrats voted, well below the 240,000 Obama drew in 2008.  In fact, this may have been one of few times more Republicans than Democrats voted in the Iowa primary, perhaps not so good a sign for the Democrats in terms of new voter registration and turnout potential this year.

Bernie Sanders won the youth vote, age 17-29, by an astonishing 84% to 14% for Clinton, also a bad sign for the Democrat frontrunner.  Most notable in the GOP race was a significant increase in the Evangelical voters, the Cruz base.  It totaled about 64% of the GOP voters, but Cruz, Trump, and Rubio split the vote evenly.

Cruz and his highly proclaimed Iowa organization delivered as did Rubio and his five-county strategy.  As for Trump, he may need to beef up his ground organization in future primaries but for his first election effort and considering all the anti-Trump media for the past nine months, it was quite respectable.

.

The Iowa Caucus - Predictions from an Iowa Hayseed - Hillary or Bernie, Cruz or Trump?

.

Today is the beginning of the American Presidential campaign to replace Barack Obama as Iowans caucus to pick their choices for Democrat and Republican candidates in one of the most unusual methods used in the USA.

The "caucus" Iowa style is like no other form of primary in that it is the first test of the strength of candidates and first test of their ability to appeal to people, not the media, not the contributors, but the people.

The two parties differ somewhat in how to run the caucus, with the Democrats disqualifying anyone with less than 15% of the vote, which means a redistribution of the votes for O'Malley to the surviving candidates Clinton and Sanders.

What the media failed to note until today, is that if Bernie and Hillary tie as the polls seem to reflect, and Clinton is the establishment candidate while Sanders is the outsider, it seems logical that the O'Malley votes are anti-Clinton and therefore will go to Sanders.

If there is a high voter turnout, and there most certainly will be, Sanders and Trump stand to benefit the most.  If the anti-establishment mood of the nation is real, and all evidence points to that fact, again Sanders and Trump benefit.

On the Republican side, there are a dozen good candidates, including two who won the Iowa primary previously.  Then there is the only true outsider championing the "silent majority" of Americans Trump, who has never run for public office.

Challenging Trump is Cruz, claiming to be an outsider but after winning a Senate seat in 2012 and personally managing the shut down of the US government a couple of years ago, he hardly qualifies as an outsider.  He also failed to mention he received one million dollars in last minute loans from Goldman Sachs and Citibank in order to win a runoff for the Senate seat.

In my mind, the anti-establishment mood of the nation is a direct result of control of our government by special interests, specifically the financial and banking powerhouses and pharmaceutical drug makers, through the failure to have adequate campaign financial limits.

In this election year, the most special of special interests finance and support two candidates.  First is Hillary Clinton, whose family received millions and millions of dollars from Goldman Sachs dating back to Bill Clinton's impeachment, while Hillary has received millions from the financial giants and corrupt hedge funds.

The second is Ted Cruz, who not only violated federal campaign laws by failing to report the Goldman loans, he also failed to mention in his bio that his wife is a twelve year employee and director of Goldman Sachs.

The news media chooses to make qualified predictions of what will happen today, sort of hedging their bets since they have been wrong about every aspect of the election this year.  If the turnout is very high, they say, there is a chance Sanders and Trump will win, but the odds seem to be a lower turnout and wins by Clinton and Cruz because both spent more money and have the best organization in Iowa.

I say nonsense a qualified prediction is like a wimp whose idea of taking a chance is going out on a limb that is two feet off the ground.  Perhaps we should throw the media into the establishment category as they have done as much as the big bankers and beholden politicians to undermine our country.

Did I mention Barack Obama is the third politician who represents the best office holder money can buy because of his own decade long relationship to Goldman Sachs?

At any rate, the Coltons Point Times is not afraid to make real predictions on the Iowa race and here they are.

The Winners

The American people who know our government, financial system, our political parties, and campaign financing system are corrupt to the bone.

Bernie Sanders who will send shock waves throughout the Democrat establishment machine by beating heavily favored Hillary Clinton with his multitudes of young, energetic, and untested volunteers.  At the same time, he will help strike a mortal wound to the equally corrupt political party machines that have controlled our elections.

Donald Trump who is the other side of the double-bladed sword that will lead to the destruction of the special interest control of America, and who, like Bernie, comes to the party with no strings attached.  Like Sanders, Trump is bringing millions of Americans back into the political process in order to slay the mighty machine that has bled America dry.

America has seen nothing like this avalanche of support for outsiders since Andrew Jackson became our seventh president in 1829 when he ran against the corrupt financial establishment trying to take control of the young America.

"It is to be regretted that the rich and powerful too often bend the acts of government to their own selfish purposes."

                                                                                    Andrew Jackson

Jackson served two terms, founded the Democrat party, and closed down our national bank, the Second Bank of the United States.

Rand Paul considered inconsequential by the media and Republican Party but who can be invaluable in shaping a future America free of special interests.  I sense he will far exceed expectations.

The Losers

Hillary Clinton who finds she is no longer heir-apparent to the presidency and must stand accountable for all her bizarre acts in government.

Ted Cruz who discovers a conservative with no personality is largely boring and cannot be trusted.

Goldman Sachs who thought they had both political parties compromised but might just be wrong.  Even if she loses in Iowa, Hillary still is the prohibitive favorite to win the Democrat nomination since Bernie is not even a real Democrat and he is a socialist.

Barack Obama who is counting on Hillary to protect his presidential legacy even though trusting the Clintons to protect anyone other than a Clinton is not a good sign for our president.

Finally, Harvard and Yale could easily be losers as the two Ivy League schools have controlled the American presidency for the past 28 years.  There are 2,618 accredited colleges and universities in America, give someone else a chance.

Hillary (Yale) or Cruz (Harvard) is the standard-bearer expected to maintain the stranglehold on the presidency that Obama (Harvard), Bush, Jr. (Yale and Harvard), Clinton (Yale), and Bush, Sr. (Yale) have preserved through four straight presidencies.

  

Trump crowds

As for the caucus in general, I expect the Republican turnout to set a new record and the Democrats to be very close, if not break, the Obama record in 2008.

Bernie crowds

In addition, since Trump and Bernie will both win the New Hampshire primary in another week, the shock waves will continue to reverberate through the political parties and media as the campaign unfolds.

A side note, the Democrat winning the Iowa caucus won the presidency in 2008 but the Republican winning the caucus has not won the presidency in 20 years.

.  

"Eugenics" America's Darkest Secret - African American Abortions Equal Nearly 50% of Black Population

This article first appeared November 10, 2009 as written.

As Congress and the White House continue their bickering over provisions of the health care bill the latest snag was approval of the Anti-abortion amendment to the Pelosi House bill, an action that began as a clever way to compromise and get enough Democrats to support the effort.

What resulted was a glimpse into the soul of America as 240 House members supported the so called Stupak-Pitts Amendment restricting abortions, including an astonishing 64 Democrats, while just 192 opposed it. In the House 218 votes are necessary to approve a bill or amendment. There are 258 Democrats and 178 Republicans in the House right now. The 64 Democrats supporting Pro-life means Pelosi has only 192 votes at most supporting Pro-abortion.

That means for the first time in years there is more Pro-life support than Pro-abortion support in the House, a turn of events that caught the pro-abortion forces by total surprise. Immediately the liberal leftists moved to get House and Senate members and President Obama to say they would have to modify the amendment because it went too far in preventing abortions.



Abortions were first promoted by Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood and one of the first to endorse eugenics at the turn of the 20th century. Present Pro-abortion people want to forget the sad chapter in America's abortion movement when eugenics was the motivation behind "choice" for women and it is a secret they wish would remain forever buried.



You see, abortion was never meant to be a "freedom of choice" for women in America but a sinister way to keep the nation from being populated by undesirables which included the handicapped, institutionalized, the insane, criminals and the poor lower classes including the African Americans. In short, it was the vehicle for creating America's own super race long before Hitler adopted the Aryan Master race program. Margaret Sanger's own foundation was strongly supported by the Ku Klux Klan and helped train the German Nazi's in the science of eugenics lest there be any doubt as to their intent.



In the late 1800's, after the Civil War and the difficult adjustment to the freedom of the slaves in 1865, eugenics started to take a heretofore unknown twist. Up until that time eugenics was a science defined as; "The quality of breeding well of freely; the production of young by the union of individuals of different species or stocks." By the middle of the 20 century the definition had changed to; "The science which deals with the improvement and culture of race, especially the human race, through improved conditions in the relation of the sexes." It pertained to genes, race and family, and the nobleness of birth.

Margaret Sanger advanced the cause of science even farther by promoting a way to dispose of undesirables while purifying the race through abortion and targeted birth control of the lower classes. Here in America the advocates of eugenics using abortion and birth control were every bit as sinister as the Nazi advocates of the Master race as both served the same purpose, human intervention to purify mankind of undesirables.

Make no mistake, among other targets the African American population was a primary target of the eugenics movement. The battle for eugenics raged during the 20th century with the pro-abortionists fighting the Christian churches and in the end came Roe versus Wade in 1973, a landmark bill that did not approve abortion as pro-abortionists claimed but did state that life began in a fetus at the age of 27 weeks, and as early as 24 weeks. Thus it legalized abortions up to that stage.



Now in the 36 years since Roe versus Wade a lot has happened. In America there have now been 50 million legal abortions. Worldwide there have been one billion legal abortions. Medical advances have made it possible to save a fetus before the age of 24 weeks. And there has now been a lot of statistics gathered on abortions.

So what have we learned? Of the 1.2 million annual abortions in America less than 5% involve the popular cries of the pro-abortion forces who demand abortions in the case of rape, incest, a threat to the life of the mother and a threat to the life of the fetus. It was thought for many years that these cases would dominate the abortions and would justify the humanity of the practice.



But the truth is a far different story. The comprehensive analysis shows that 95% of abortions are not for the humanitarian reasons as anticipated but are out of convenience to the pregnant mother. What do the numbers really tell us? For one, they prove beyond doubt that the Sanger inspired eugenics is alive, well and prospering as abortions have now killed 18.5 million African American children, a number equal to nearly 50% of all African Americans alive today.

Whites constitute 221 million Americans, 79.8%, and there are 11 abortions for every 1000 White births. Hispanics total 47 million in America including illegal immigrants, 15.4% of the population, and there are 28 abortions per 1000 births. Blacks total 39 million, 12.8% of the population, and there are 50 abortions per 1000 births.



The Black abortion rate is 5 times higher than the White rate while the Hispanic is 2 times higher than the White rate. That means 18.5 million Black babies have been aborted since 1973, and who knows how many were aborted during the prior years when it was illegal but practiced at the encouragement of the eugenic movement. As stated, total Black abortions now equal nearly 50% of the current Black population in America.



Eugenics is very much alive and well in America. If Blacks had not been the victims of eugenics about 18% of the US population would be Black today, a number approaching the highest point in our history back in 1790 when 19.2% of our population was African American. The continued accelerated use of abortions by Blacks will ensure a continued loss of population as the Hispanic, Asian and White populations in America all have much greater birth rates.

Yes, the current health care debate opened Pandora's box and now that we are allowed a glimpse into our abortion history and the results, will prominent African Americans and others finally realize what abortion is doing and bring it to an end? Will they realize their political party and their social pro-abortion rallying cry that Blacks blindly support and follow is leading them into extinction?



Will they tell their leaders to end this heinous practice at once rather than support the destruction of the African American race? And finally, will they also tear back the lid to hell and expose the truths about the international abortions, now totaling over 1 billion and progressing at a rate of 50 million every year, and take a careful look at what races and cultures are being wiped off the face of the Earth by their so called friends?

The right to choice often gives us a difficult decision to make. Is claiming our freedom of choice the right choice when it means contributing to the extinction of races and cultures? Beware of what choice you embrace. One person's freedom can be another's slavery or extermination.
-

The Most Tragic of all Issues - Abortion in USA - The Brain Wave Test of Life and Death!

[After three previous years of articles on various aspects of the abortion issue, this article first appeared February 23, 2012 as a solution!  With over 58 million abortions performed in America through 2015, it is time to act!]

Abortion Policy - Where Choice can end Life

Abortion is perhaps the most complex of all social issues.  A way to accommodate both sides of the Pro-Life and Pro-Choice movements must be found that does not make our young girls and women victims between factions.

The Facts as of February 23, 2012:

54,559,615

Total abortions since 1973

Based on numbers reported by the Guttmacher Institute 1973-2008,

with estimates of 1,212,400 for 2009-2011. GI estimates a possible

3% under reporting rate, which is factored into the total.

Race                Abortions                  Population

White             19.6 million              211.4 million

Hispanic        13.6 million                46.8 million

Black              16.4 million                38.1 million

Other races     4.9 million                  3.7 million

Total               54.5 million              310.0 million

Just the sheer volume of abortions are staggering.  In the USA 55.4 million since 1973, worldwide 1.7 billion.  Those are millions and billions of incidents.  Yet there are also disturbing trends in those statistics that represent real lives.

Most abortions are from unwanted pregnancy, as if that would not be obvious.  However, abortion was never intended to be just another form of contraceptive.  Yet analysis now shows that as many as half of all women receiving abortions have had a previous abortion.  Are abortions so readily available that women are using the abortion to exploit sexual promiscuity at the government expense?  What does this say about the value of life in America? 

Annually the number of abortions has ranged from about 1.6 million to 1.2 million since 1990.  Only four cities in the United States have a higher population than the annual abortions, New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago and Houston.

Since the automobile was invented and records started in 1900, one hundred and eleven years ago, there have been 3.5 million killed in America.  Since 1973 there have been 15 times as many abortions as auto deaths since 1900.

There have been almost as many abortions in the US as the total number of people living in Great Britain, France or Italy, men, women and children combined.

Compared to Worst Health Disasters in History

Between 1348 and 1350 the Black Death or bubonic plague is estimated to have killed 30–60 percent of Europe's population, more than 50 million people, reducing the world population from an estimated 450 million to between 350 and 375 million in the 14th century. 

The Great Influenza, 1918 - 1919, also known as the Spanish Flu, the Great Influenza was most likely the deadliest plague in history. The extremely virulent influenza virus killed an estimated 50 million or more people in the space of just six months.  The world’s population at the time was just 1.8 billion.

For comparison, the total abortions in America equaled the total world deaths from either of the two worst disease outbreaks in history, the Black Death and Spanish Influenza.

Worldwide abortion deaths of 1.7 billion are more than three times the total world population in 1350, and nearly equal to the entire world population in 1919, the years of the health disasters.

The debate over Abortion - Choice or Life or both

By all public opinion measures Abortion is the most volatile and controversial of all social issues in America.  The Pro-Choice (Pro-Abortion) movement defends the right of women to control their body while the Pro-Life movement defends the right of the unborn human life.

Roe versus Wade in 1973 set the standard for federal law on abortion yet it is often wrongly credited with also legalizing abortion at any time during the nine months of pregnancy.  In fact it was limited to the question of personal rights versus legitimate government rights.

Specifically what is the government's legitimate interest in protecting the rights of the embryo or fetus?  Since an embryo or fetus do not have rights themselves then what determines when they are human persons?

In 1973 medical science and forensics was far from the level of sophistication of today in being able to determine the moment life begins and when the fetus acquires human rights.

Four decades have passed since the landmark ruling.

During that time Pro-Life and Pro-Choice movements have become rich and powerful and abortion continues to be one of the most decisive issues of the day.  The special interests in the abortion debate are every bit as powerful and demanding as any from the financial or other sectors.

Yet there is something different about abortion than most social issues.  It is the only one in which there is a living entity as the victim and thus it elevates the issue to a real matter of life or death depending on your definition.

Now I don't know of anyone in the Pro-Choice or Pro-Life movements who would say any baby can be aborted.  The dispute is over when they are a human person, which allows a fetus to not be considered a human.  I don't think anyone wants to be seen as a baby killer.

When Does Human Life Begin?

The problem is determining the moment life begins, at least in the eyes of the courts.  That is what Roe versus Wade did nearly 40 years ago.  Science has now proven otherwise.

Advocates claimed abortion was needed in three cases, rape or incest, a threat to the health of the baby, or a threat to the health of the mother. History has proven them wrong. Multiple studies performed with the advantage of actual statistics show only 1% of all abortions resulted from rape or incest, just 2% resulted because of the health of the baby, and 2% resulted from the threat to the health of the mother. In other words the three major causes for passing Roe versus Wade actually represented no more than 5% of the total abortions performed.

Based on the claims in the debate over Roe versus Wade we should not even have a law since so few abortions performed meet the primary needs used to justify the law. However, there is another reason to reconsider the language of the law besides 50 million deaths and no justification for the law, that is what the law did do in the first place.

Roe versus Wade was a ruling by the Supreme Court that centrally held that a mother may abort her pregnancy for any reason, up until the "point at which the fetus becomes ‘viable'". The Court defined viable as being potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid. In 1973 viability usually occurred at about seven months (28 weeks) but might occur earlier, even at 24 weeks. Medical breakthroughs since the ruling and prenatal advances have demonstrated that the ability of the fetus to live outside the mother's womb can come at a much earlier time.

In fact in recent years the youngest baby in history was delivered in Florida at 21 weeks and 6 days, survived and has now gone home to live a normal life.  She is living proof that Roe versus Wade is scientifically wrong, a baby can survive at 21 weeks, not 28 weeks.

Clearly the language of the law is flawed, so what should it be? Here is the test for all pro abortion groups who claim they really aren't advocating taking lives.   If you are sincere in wanting to protect human lives while pursuing an abortion option, then you should have no problem accepting the newest scientific evidence of when life begins.

Scientific Proof of Life versus Death

 There is one medical test widely accepted and upheld by the courts to establish that a human is legally alive or dead.  All 50 states have used this test for over 30 years.

The Uniform Determination of Death Act, promulgated in 1980 and supported by the President’s Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Research, has served as a model statute for the adoption of state legislation that defines death. The act asserts: “An individual, who has sustained either irreversible cessation of circulatory and respiratory functions, or irreversible cessation of all functions of the entire brain, including the brainstem, is dead. A determination of death must be made in accordance with accepted medical standards.”

Since brain activity is the legal measure for the cessation of life, then it must also be the legally accepted measure of the beginning of life. A fetus becomes a living baby when brain activity can be first measured. According to established science with the use of an electroencephalogram, or EEG, activity in the brain can be detected as early as six weeks gestational age (6). Whether brain activity begins at this time or started earlier but becomes detectable at this time is uncertain; it is known that neural connections begin forming as soon as neurons begin forming, as early as 14 days gestation.

A Constitutional lawyer like President Obama should embrace scientific advances that have proven when brain activity is detected, at six weeks, and since the courts accept brain activity as a reliable measure of life or death, then life can be scientifically proven at six weeks.

As science improves, the brain wave activity will consistently be detected some time between 14 days and six weeks.  All hospitals are equipped with EEG machines and they could be adapted to complete these tests for pregnant women.

Roe versus Wade Needs a Scientific Overhaul

Roe versus Wade, adopted nearly four decades ago, is medically and scientifically obsolete in the determination that life begins at 28 weeks. Responsible members of Congress and the White House should advocate, in the interest of scientific accuracy, a change in the law to reflect the latest scientific advances. With nearly 55 million abortions already performed, do we really want to keep terminating the lives of babies we know are living beings?

Abortion is not a matter of pro choice when the baby being aborted is a living, human being in the eyes of science. Pro Life and Pro Choice advocates should join in seeking this correction of a flawed law and the Obama Administration and Congress should make it the law of the land.

Implementing the New Scientific Findings

In the end this could be the easiest huge policy change regarding a volatile social issue in history.  It would not appear to require any action by Congress or the President.  Since the courts have recognized The Uniform Determination of Death Act as the national standard for scientifically proving death over life, then the same standard and same tests, can determine when the fetus becomes a "human" life or person, when life begins according to science and the courts.

Most governors or state attorney generals could find a way to incorporate the missing language from Roe versus Wade, the lack of a court tested determination of the difference between life and death, through executive order or the many remedies used in the judicial process.

Another option to clarify this issue would be for a legislature to amend whatever their determination of death law to use it as a determination of life or death.  There are many avenues open to those who really want to end the debate and protect those children who are not protected under the current flawed laws.

Get your governor or state attorney general to act and act now and this debate can be brought to a close.  We will have a scientific determination of when life begins and ends, and we will stop using abortion as just another form birth control to terminate unwanted pregnancies.


Most of all, we will all agree on life.
.