February 9, 2023

What We Can’t See: Reaping The Rewards of Propaganda’s Brainwashing

“There is no news cycle. There is no national debate. There’s no Ed Murrow, no Walter Cronkite, no figure of authority from whom the public can learn the facts with a reasonable degree of trust. We have had so many iterations of lies, cover-up, cover-up malfunction, new lies, new cover-up and new cover-up malfunction that the experts are in information overload. What is going on in the head of an ordinary voter with a passing interest in politics and ten or fifteen minutes a day to devote to news?”<<<Read More>>>



After The Republic

*Editor’s Note* – There’s a lot in this entire article. However, it is quite interesting. It helps explain how what used to be in the country is no longer. It gives some time to the destruction of Science for political gain. Interestingly enough, this is the closest I have seen a writer, with enough knowledge to have a pretty good understanding of how things are, attempt to state that there are no differences between either of the political parties. I hope you will take the time to read this. It might hurt some though.

“What priorities will the ruling class’s notion of scientific truth dictate to the next Democratic administration? Because rejecting that true and false, right and wrong are objectively ascertainable is part of this class’s DNA, no corpus of fact or canon of reason restrains it or defines its end-point. Its definition of “science” is neither more nor less than what “scientists say” at any given time. In practice, that means “Science R-Us,” now and always, exclusively. Thus has come to pass what President Dwight Eisenhower warned against in his 1960 Farewell address: “A steadily increasing share [of science] is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.… [T]he free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution…a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity.” Hence, said Ike, “The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present—and is gravely to be regarded.” The result has been that academics rise through government grants while the government exercises power by claiming to act on science’s behalf. If you don’t bow to the authority of the power that says what is and is not so, you are an obscurantist or worse.”<<<Read More>>>


A Rigged Election?

Donald Trump claims the Republican Primary event is rigged. I wonder who gave him permission to say that? Of course it’s rigged. The Two Party system is designed to be that way. It ensures that the Ruling Establishment will get THEIR lackey into the White House. Anyone who participates in this charade is an enabler. Trump, like Cruz, Kaisich, Clinton and Sanders are all “riggers.” Should one actually dare to expose and oppose the rigged system, they would soon be DEAD!



The False Belief in the gOD Donald Trump

*Editor’s Note* – The below nonsense is working its way around the Internet. Suppose this were true (most all of it is utter nonsense), evidently people believe or have never researched, or don’t want to have understanding, that one man, one Donald Trump, with all his money, can win election as President of the United States. He is nothing but a flea on an elephants back in comparison to the money, power and control that exists that will, and has, determined who sits in the White House. It is intellectual bankruptcy to believe Trump and his money can win the White House and not think his measly few millions/billions will buy his way in by trumping (pun not necessarily intended) the money, power and control that exists for the very purpose of deciding world rulers.

There is only one way Trump would end up in the White House – that he is selected by the power and authority of the Council on Foreign Relations. If that happens, and it’s possible, then forget most everything you have just read because it makes Trump a “Connected Insider.” If you don’t think the CFR has that kind of power, you don’t have understanding of that entity.

Someone is getting very nervous. Obama. Valerie Jarrett. Eric Holder. Hillary Clinton. Jon Corzine…to name just a few. And I know why.

I wrote a book entitled, “The Murder of the Middle Class”about the unholy conspiracy between big government, big business and big media. They all benefit by the billions from this partnership and it’s in all of their interests to protect one another. It’s one for all, and all for one.

It’s a heck of a filthy relationship that makes everyone filthy rich. Everyone except the American people. We get ripped off. We’re the patsies.

Source: The Root For America Blog | The ROOT RANT:


Marbut Files Suit in Questionable Late Election Ballots

For immediate release – November 26, 2014
Candidate questions late-night turnaround in HD 94 race

MISSOULA, MONT. Independent House District 94 candidate Gary Marbut has filed a lawsuit in Missoula District Court questioning county-created ballots posted late on election night that turned the election in favor of his opponent.

In question are two small posts totaling 192 votes that were applied to the HD 94 race, at 11 PM on election night and 2 AM the next morning, that changed the outcome of the race. Two professional statisticians have examined this data and assert that there is less than a .00017% chance that these late ballots came from the same pool as the previous 3,191 ballots cast in the HD 94 race. Marbut asks the district court to allow examination of these questioned ballots.

The ballots in question were created by “resolution board(s)” appointed by Missoula County, and made to replace other ballots rejected by electronic, vote-counting scanners because of alleged defects in the ballots. An atypically disproportionate percentage of those recreated ballots favored Marbut’s opponent, thereby changing the outcome of the HD 94 race early in the morning after the election.

Before the questioned ballots were applied to the race, Marbut was ahead by 1.16%. After the questioned ballots were applied to the race, Marbut was behind by .86%. Where the ballots previously counted in the race had been nearly split, 50.43% for Marbut and 49.57% for his opponent, the late-applied and race-changing ballots were atypically 2/3 for Marbut’s opponent.

About this legal challenge, Marbut commented, “Many of my supporters noticed the anomaly in the sequence of posted vote numbers for HD 94. Heck, even the Missoulian had declared me the likely winner in HD 94 before everyone went to bed. My supporters insist that I look into this. That’s why I have asked the court to review the atypical, late ballots that changed the election. I just want to be confident that the correct result was obtained.”

“It is important to remember, ” Marbut continued, “that these 192 ballots were not ballots voted by voters, but were new ballots created in a locked room at the Fairgrounds to replace scanner-rejected ballots. These replacement ballots should be examined, if for no other reason than to bolster public confidence in the election apparatus and process. If these ballots are actually as evenly divided as the previous 3,000+ were, the outcome of the race changes.”

Quentin Rhoades of Missoula is the attorney representing Marbut. Marbut’s opponent and Missoula County have been noticed on the court filings.

Many Missoula-area residents remember the famous mill levy election of 2011, where mysterious, late-applied votes changed the outcome of the election. Such after-hours turnarounds in local elections may erode public confidence in elections.


Montana Congressional and Legislative Candidate Grades and Endorsements

(for immediate release – April 30, 2014)

MSSA issues legislative endorsements for Primary Election
and Grades for Congressional Candidates

MISSOULA – The Montana Shooting Sports Association today announced its endorsement of 23 legislative candidates for the June, 2014, Primary Election. Endorsements have been made only in races with contested primaries, and only in those races where a candidate clearly superior for gun owners and hunters can be identified.

MSSA has recommended candidates in contested races where information on issues significant to gun owners issues is available. This usually includes voting records for incumbents, and returned candidate surveys for candidates for open seats or candidates challenging incumbents.

MSSA is the primary political advocate for gun owners and hunters in Montana, having gotten 64 pro-gun and pro-hunting measures through the Montana Legislature in the past 30 years.

Legislative Candidates

The candidates endorsed for the June, 2014 Primary Election include:

Montana Senate
Mark Blasdel – Senate District 04
Kris Hansen – Senate District 14
Tonya Shellnutt – Senate District 24
Cary Smith – Senate District 27
Joanne Blyton – Senate District 29
Jedediah Hinkle – Senate District 32
Marissa Stockton – Senate District 42
Scott Boulanger – Senate District 43

Montana House
Ronalee Skees – House District 07
Mike Hebert – House District 11
Ann Morren – House district 18
Ryan Osmundson – House District 30
Sarah Laszloffy – House District 53
Jeff Essmann – House District 54
Seth Berglee – House District 58
Debra Lamm – House District 60
Mike More – House District 65
Matthew Monforton – House District 69
Bob Wagner – House District 71
Mike Miller – House District 80
Theresa Manzella – House District 85
Edward Greef – House District 88
Dan Salomon – House District 93


Congressional Candidates

Note: The grades below are derived from everything MSSA knows about the candidates. MSSA FAR prefers to have a candidate’s voting record, than a response to MSSA’s Candidate Questionnaire. It’s too easy for a candidate to espouse one position on a Candidate Questionnaire and then vote differently. MSSA believes voting records are the most reliable measure of a candidate’s affinity for issues of interest to MSSA, its members, and Montana gun owners. Some candidates have no voting record and also declined to return MSSA’s Candidate Questionnaire. MSSA scores these candidates with a “?” and views them as hiding anti-gun sentiments.

Only candidates with in a contested Primary Election are graded for the Primary.

U.S. Senate
Democrat Primary
Name Grade Basis
Dirk Adams D Candidate questionnaire
John Bohlinger C- Voting record
John Walsh ? No information

Republican Primary
Susan Cundiff ? No information
Steve Daines A- Candidate questionnaire
Champ Edmunds A Voting record – 100% + CQ

U.S. House of Representatives
Name Grade Basis
Democrat Primary
John Driscoll ? No information
John Lewis ? No information

Republican Primary
Elsie Arntzen A+ Voting record – 100% + CQ
Matt Rosendale A Voting record – 100% + CQ
Corey Stapelton A Voting record – 100% + CQ
Drew Turiano B Candidate questionnaire
Ryan Zinke B Voting record – 85%

All endorsed candidates were sent a copy of the endorsement letter attached below.


Day 54 – No Executive Orders


After 54 days, there are no executive orders on gun control posted on the White House website.

Firearms companies who refuse to sell arms to states, counties and local governments who restrict ownership of guns to citizens at a level below that of government, has grown from 34 to 118.

It seems we just finished a crooked and nauseating election cycle and already the lying, cheating, double-dealing politicians are beginning to gear up for another mid-term election. This is a time where the corruptocrats polish up their speeches to insure that the lies they tell the people are what is necessary to win another election. We, the voters, after decades of this charade, have yet to figure it out and fall for their baloney every time.

The assault on Second Amendment rights comes on the heels of a Council on Foreign Relations’ victory getting Obama, the destroyer, reelected and just before the onslaught of mid-term chicanery. Voters need to be aware that EVERYTHING out of the mouth of a campaigning sycophant is not the truth and will never be the truth.



Where Once A Man’s Word Had Honor, Now Lies Have Become Truth

The dictionary defines a progressive as being someone who “favors progress or reform, especially in political matters”. Progress and reform are both gray issues; meaning there is no specific description of what each means. That in and of itself presents an array of troublesome quandaries that have led this fine nation into a spiraling abyss of immorality, or at least can be perceived by anyone maintaining some semblance of an honest and ethical lifestyle. One such example of “favors progress or reform”, in order to achieve a desired result, is lying. Where once a man’s word retained a wealth of value and was as good as good can get, now lying is not only prevalent but eagerly accepted among the masses of progressive, secular Americans. But why?

One of the things I managed to accomplish this summer while at my camp in the woods of Maine was to read. One particular book I read – one that I bought for .50 cents at the library book sale – was another in a growing collection of books I have about Abraham Lincoln, but in particular the conspiracy to assassinate him. The book is: “The True History of the Assassination of Abraham Lincoln and of the Conspiracy of 1865”. The content of the book is essentially the account as told by Louis J. Weichmann.

Weichmann was a friend of John H. Surratt and the Surratt family, including Mary Surratt. He also met and had relationships of varying degrees with many of the so-called conspirators, including John Wilkes Booth, in the killing of Abraham Lincoln and the attempted assassination of others. Because of this association, Weichmann was initially held by authorities as a possible conspirator but eventually much of his testimony was used to convict members of this group.

The book details the testimony and trial of the conspirators (all were charged and tried together). A few years after the initial trial, John H. Surratt was captured and tried and Weichmann details this as well.

Aside from the complicated mess of evidence, real and fabricated, it doesn’t take long to realize that the words and written testimony of those involved in the trial, are held in high esteem by both the author and the courts. Seldom was a person’s word brought into question unless it could be accurately proven to be a falsehood. Time was not wasted attempting to blur the evidence or present a person’s testimony as something it wasn’t in order to have influence over the jury. Words were either fact or fiction and if fiction you better have real proof. If it was proven a man lied, nothing that specific individual had to say or offer in the case had any value and was completely disregarded. Otherwise, a man’s word was seldom questioned as society still viewed a person’s word as something to honor and respect.

Can the same be said for today? We witness courtroom testimony and the words of witnesses, judges, lawyers, etc. and much of what they say, if not an outright lie, is misleading and meant to be so. Each side strives for a desired outcome and subjective morals and subjective truths are used in order to get there.

This is not relegated to just the courtrooms however. Take our media for example. Where once it was mostly taken as a “journalist’s” moral responsibility and obligation to tell only the facts as can be substantiated, now it’s more about ratings and who can be the first to tell a story about an event regardless of the accuracy of the content.

We Americans find ourselves once again mired in another presidential campaign, along with elections of certain member seats in the House and Senate. Honest and unbiased reasoning shows us there is little justification to trust a politician’s word about anything and yet as sure as flies are attracted to garbage, voters are drawn to the words, not perhaps because of the truths they may hold but for the want of what those recitations promise. We care not if anything uttered is truth, just that what they say images our desired subjective truths and morals. We are so fickle!

It is readily discussed these days, and surely who can argue, that what once was news is now entertainment. One coined word for this is “infotainment”. While it may be entertainment, and some members of this “news” entertainment might willingly agree to its description, it certainly is not presented to the masses of people as entertainment. Shouldn’t it be? Or has everything that involves truth and morality become subjective? Of course it has. American people take comedy and entertainment shows like The Daily Show with Jon Stewart or Colbert Nation with Stephen Colbert as legitimate news shows. We are so volatile!

At essentially every level of American society, progressiveness, i.e. the “development of an individual or society in a direction considered more beneficial than and superior to the previous level”, exists to some degree. We are all guilty. But what happens when one’s desires and idealism become the driving force in their life? To what lengths will they go and what conservative values are they willing to abandon in order to achieve that thought of as a, “superior level”?

None of this is new. This idea that morals and truth is subjective, meaning that one’s mind and thoughts can rightly justify the devaluing of objective truth, has been around in the minds of men for many centuries. Søren Aabye Kierkegaard, a Danish philosopher who died at age 42 and lived from 1813 – 1855, said: “…the thing is to find a truth which is true for me, to find the idea for which I can live and die.” He also was quoted as saying: “When he is nearest to being in two places at the same time he is in passion; but passion is momentary, and passion is also the highest expression of subjectivity.”

Because someone is passionate about what they might believe, say and do, this can justify subjective truth and the lack of adherence to a moral compass? Wasn’t it James Madison who said that the only way our founding Constitution and Bill of Rights would ever survive was if the nation maintained a moral backbone. It has not. As a matter of fact, the so-called progressives have managed to convince our American youth that the worship of God Almighty played no role in the construction of our constitution and thus the end result is a promotion of subjective morals and truth, leaving a nation lacking in leadership to seek Kierkegaard’s truth – that which is true to me.

When considering this kind of thought and the results of those thoughts, also acknowledge how this enters into the many debates that exist in this country that are “passionate” and often, if not always, embroiled in one’s subjective truth. In the work that I do, this is prevalent in the debates about wildlife management and the environment. Just pick a subject.

The Bible says in John 14:6, “I am the Way, the Truth and the Life. No man cometh unto the Father except through Me.” For those who still adhere to objective truth and morals, God told us in his Word, that He alone was the Truth. Man’s words therefore can only be held to account of the Word of God in seeking truth. When’s the last time that happened in this country?

For the secular minded, be it told that Nazi Germany based its “truth” to justify the murdering of innocent humans on Darwin’s principle of “survival of the fittest”, therefore discovering their Kierkegaard kind of truth in killing those they believed to be inferior human beings. They also relied on Friedrich Nietzsche’s belief that: “Since there is no God to will what is good, we must will our own good. And since there is no eternal value, we must will the eternal recurrence of the same state of affairs.”

Not that the United States has now become Nazi Germany but provided that this nation, including each of us as accountable individuals, as well as our governments, powerful media sources, non governmental agencies, etc., continues down this road of dissing the Truth of God’s word and seeking their own truth to fit their agendas and ideals, we can only expect to witness a more blatant and intended bunch of lies in order to accomplish our goals.

God’s word is Truth. Every moral compass of the world should point to the Truth. When it does not, the lies become commonplace and those creating and perpetuating those lies will have succeeded in convincing themselves that “their truth” is what works for them and therefore all others become the lies.


Contrary to MSM, Ron Paul Is Still in Presidential Race

Last December, Montana Shooting Sports Association endorsed congressman Ron Paul for the Republican nomination for President, and for good reason.

Let me address two more points:

1) The major media wants you to think that Ron Paul has dropped out of the race. NOT TRUE. Ron Paul has chosen to focus remaining resources and energy on getting his delegates elected to the national Republican nominating convention in Tampa, Florida, in August. He knows he cannot go head-to-head with remaining contender Mitt Romney in buying expensive television time, not when Romney is supported by many of the major financial institutions in the US. And, Ron Paul has been collecting lots of delegates to Tampa. The media recently declared that Romney won Texas. The truth: Romney didn’t get a single national Republican delegate from Texas. He only won the beauty contest of the public Primary Election, which doesn’t matter at all for the nominating convention in Tampa. What matters are delegates. Delegate selection in Texas will be coming soon, but was not decided by the popular vote in the Primary. In many states, Ron Paul has been winning the majority of delegates (are you surprised that the media is not telling you this?) He may do that in Texas too. The bottom line is this: RON PAUL IS STILL VERY MUCH IN THE RACE.

2) Mitt Romney supports gun control. I don’t know Romney personally, but my take is that he’s a pretty decent guy. However, there’s no arguing that he’s a pretty decent LIBERAL guy. He has supported a ban on semi-autos and a ban on normal-capacity magazines. He’s supported a mandatory five-day waiting period to purchase a firearm. Worst, he’s supported a mandatory registration system of gun owners with a verification ID card for all gun owners, a step that led to all of the World’s genocides of about 165 MILLION people during the 1900s, according to Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership. Rest assured, no matter how decent a guy Romney may be, he is NOT a friend of gun owners. About the right to keep and bear arms, Romney is very much like Obama.

So, when you go to vote on election day, please vote a Republican ballot so you can vote for Ron Paul, a lifetime supporter of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

Gary Marbut, president
Montana Shooting Sports Association
author, Gun Laws of Montana


Bill Whittle: The Vote Pump