"Our Ruling Class wants us to lose this war

 

I have "Blogged"before about our feckless "ruling class" and that they want to see us lose, to be humiliated, to be lessened on the world stage because they believe that we are evil and deserve it.  They have forgotten that their fortunes are tied to this country, if we are lessened, so are they  This touched upon a blogpost that I have percolating in my head and I will try to get it posted this weekend.

   I snagged this from Townhall and "Kurt Schlichter"   The cartoons came from my "Stash"

What’s more treacherous and treasonous than wishing your own country gets defeated in war, especially by a bunch of goat-molesting seventh-century pagan savages whose primitive mindset is matched only by their grotesque perversions? Well, the disgusting perversions part is merely a collateral reason why members of America’s donkey party seem to have such an affinity for Iran’s rulers – the mullahs, with their bizarre bestiality and grotesque handmaiden dogma, and the San Francisco Democrats, with their furry-friendly gender-spazz grossness, collectively share the worst figurative collective browser in the history of ever. Yet, it’s more than their joint commitment to degeneracy that binds them together in a desire for America to lose this campaign. The Democrats hate America, and they think it will help them politically if America can be humiliated. But more than that, seeing America lose also satisfies the evil lurking inside them

It’s not just about Donald Trump. That’s where people get confused. Oh, they hate Donald Trump, to be sure. He is aesthetically displeasing to them, rejecting their carefully curated image of what it means to be in the American ruling class. It’s not just his style, but his attitude. They find him vulgar and crude because he ignores their complex and emasculating social conventions that enforce collectivist commie conformity. They also hate him because he has money, and much of our ruling class really doesn’t – for example, most regime media scribblers would double their income if only they knew how to do plumbing or drive a truck. There’s a gulf between their prestige and their pay, and Trump’s flagrant celebration of his own riches generates the greenest of envy.

But they also hate him because he’s a class traitor. He understands them because he was one of them until he got tired of them, and he has nothing but contempt for them. He knows they’re weak, stupid, and greedy, and he won’t honor their pretensions to intelligence and competence. Trump was a guy who had to build tall buildings. He either did it right, or the buildings fell. His opponents build nothing. They talk and write. They suffer no consequences for failure, and his critique of their fecklessness is the closest they’ll get to accountability. They hate him for that.

But that’s all personal. That’s why they hate Trump as an individual. But Donald Trump also operates as an avatar for the normal Americans he represents. What the ruling caste really hates is you. They hate normal people. They hate people who devote themselves to faith, family, and the Flag. They have to. They need to hate you because, through hating you, these unaccomplished hacks find a purpose and meaning. They don’t go out and slay dragons. They go out and nag people on Twitter. We, on the other hand, largely live real lives. Many of us are veterans – and we have seen it get real. Occasionally, someone in the ruling class does a tour in the Army and milks it forever – Happy March 29th, Vietnam Veterans Day, to the hero of the Tet Offensive, Senator Dick Blumenthal! – but being in the military is dirty and icky, and you’re stuck with people who are also dirty and icky. You know, Americans.

They do jobs where they talk and despise Americans who have jobs where they sweat. Remember, among our ruling class, the ultimate gig is to sit and run your mouth. Look, there’s nothing wrong with running your mouth for a job – I do it – but if that’s the only thing you’ve ever done, that breaks your mind. I’ve worked at McDonald’s, been fired from Denny’s for gross incompetence, been a private in the army, and jockeyed rental cars at San Francisco Airport, where everyone in the lot was either a college student on break or a convict on parole. Your past is probably similarly colorful. But the color of our ruling class’s past is flat white. They went to the University of College, then they started writing somewhere, and that’s it. They never sweat, never bled, and probably never drove a car with a stick shift or a V8.

We are not the same. They were the student government geeks and drama dorks in high school. As all adults know, adulthood is simply high school writ large. Much of our ruling class is collectively trying to get revenge on us for never getting invited to drink Coors behind the gym in high school.

Barack Obama gave the game away with his clinging to their guns and religion quote, as did Hillary Clinton with her basket of deplorables gaffe. Our ruling class, to which the Democrats are devoted – the party hasn’t been a workingman’s party since back when everybody agreed that a man can’t menstruate – distinguishes itself by its great self-regard rather than by its great achievements. It has no great achievements. What has our ruling class achieved in the last 60 years? Vietnam? The Iranian Revolution? The Iraq War? The Wall Street collapse? Obamacare? Grindr? Our ruling class has failed and everything. Is there anyone out there who thinks the world is better now than it was in the 80s? Certainly not anyone who lived in the 80s. Sure, the Berlin Wall fell, and the Soviet Union collapsed, but that was despite our ruling class, thanks to the efforts of Ronald Reagan, who is a lot Trumpier than the Trump haters will ever give him credit for. Yet despite failure after failure after failure, our ruling class still believes they are geniuses.

We, normal people, know the truth, and our failure to genuflect to our alleged betters grates at them. How dare we! We, normal people, are the essence of America, and that makes our ruling class hate America. It seems strange that they would hate what they seek to rule over, but Satan does, so why not The Squad? Understand that they are powered by an all-encompassing contempt for people like you and me, and our patriotism and love of country require that these people despise their own country. America is bad, they believe, built on a foundation of racism, genocide, and transphobia, and all sorts of other badnesses. Since none of them has a religion, this ideology has to serve as a substitute. We are their heretics, their demons, their anti-wokes, and they want us to pay.

Which means they want our country to pay. They were positively giddy when a lucky drone shot killed a half-dozen Americans. They were delighted when a random missile hit took out one aircraft on the ground in Saudi Arabia. They are hoping against hope that they can somehow turn a military campaign of unprecedented skill and daring into a disaster. In the first few days of this war, we decapitated the entire Iranian government. We shattered their nuclear program. We destroyed their air force, sank their navy, and generally blew the snot out of anything worth blowing the snot out of. Our planes fly through their skies unmolested. The Democrats and their allies among the disaffected grifter class are reduced to claiming that Iran’s ability to fire the occasional missile indicates America has been completely defeated. They are aided in this propaganda initiative by the regime media, which got the memo. They must turn this victory into defeat, and they’re trying to do it. They’re not doing it very well, in the sense that anyone who is not a complete moron sees through it. But then again, nearly half of America voted for Kamala Harris, so America has a significant moron problem.

They want us to lose because they think America, and therefore Americans, deserve defeat. They also want Trump to lose because they think it’s going to help them politically. So, we now have our ruling class largely rooting for these retrograde barbarians to somehow pull victory from the jaws of defeat. And the regime media will help; no matter how this ends, all the networks and the newspapers are going to tell you that this war was a failure. But you know how you know it’s not a failure? Because there’s no head ayatollah running around. The former one got blasted to bits. His son probably did too; right now, his legendary impotence is the least of his medical concerns. Oh, and the fact that all of Iran’s ships are resting at the bottom of the ocean, there are no planes left, and they can only squeeze off a couple of shots from random drone and rocket launchers every day, is a pretty good indicator of victory. Never in history has there been such a comprehensive defeat of an entire modern nation in such a short time.

Still, people in our own country wish for our defeat, and if those wishes aren’t granted, they’ll try to manufacture a defeat. It’s bizarre to see so many Americans so eager for America to lose, but that’s where we are right now. We’ve got Americans who want Americans to lose a war to a generational enemy with American blood on its paws. They ought to be ashamed of themselves, but they have no shame. Shame goes hand in hand with accountability, and they can’t accept the idea that they are accountable to anyone other than their own class. But just remember what’s happening here. Remember how much they must hate you to want their own country to be defeated by a bunch of fanatical freaks. And govern yourself accordingly.

"Why the U.S.S Enterprise NCC 1701-A was retired?

 

Sorry for not posting, got hit with a lots of Overtime and I worked it..   Real life got in the way.  By the time I got home, I was too tired to do anything on the computer.

Anybody that knows me for any length of time knows that I am a SCI-Fi geek, especially for the older Sci-Fi shows.  I always liked the "older Star Trek" and I always thought that the U.S.S. Enterprise(Refit) was the coolest ship in the Star Trek world. way better than the ships that replaced her in the films and series.   I ran across this article on farcebook and decided to let my geek flag fly.

The story of the USS Enterprise-A is one of those fascinating “end of an era” moments in *Star Trek* history. On the surface, it does seem strange — a starship that felt brand new in *Star Trek V* was already being retired by *Star Trek VI*. But when you zoom out and look at the bigger picture of Starfleet engineering, history, and politics, it actually makes a lot of sense.

To understand this, we have to go all the way back to the original Constitution-class starships.

The Constitution class first entered service around 2245, during a time when the Federation needed ships that could do *everything*. Exploration was the priority, but there was also a need to stand firm against rival powers like the Klingon Empire. Ships like the USS Enterprise (NCC-1701) were designed as heavy cruisers that could travel deep into unknown space, operate independently for long periods, and still hold their own in tense situations.

What made the Constitution class special was its adaptability. These ships were designed with long-term upgrades in mind. Over the decades, they received major refits — the most famous being the redesign seen in the 2270s, which dramatically changed their appearance and internal systems.

But by that point, Starfleet technology was evolving rapidly.

A major shift came with the development of the Excelsior-class starships. These ships introduced a completely new warp drive system that used a vertical warp core design. This was very different from the older horizontal systems used in the Constitution class. To bring older ships up to this new standard, engineers had to essentially rebuild them from the inside out.

The refit worked — but it came with compromises.

One of the biggest issues was how tightly packed critical systems became. In order to fit the new vertical warp core into a spaceframe that was never designed for it, engineers had to place major components much closer together than ideal. In particular, the warp core and the photon torpedo systems ended up positioned in close proximity within the ship’s “neck” section. This created a structural and engineering vulnerability that couldn’t easily be resolved without designing an entirely new class of ship.

Now let’s bring in the USS Enterprise-A.

The Enterprise-A wasn’t truly “brand new” in the way people often assume. It was most likely a renamed and reassigned Constitution-class vessel — possibly one that had already been in service. By the time it was handed over to Captain Kirk and his crew, the Constitution design itself was already nearing the end of its lifespan.

So while the ship looked fresh and carried the legendary name, underneath it was still based on aging architecture that had been stretched to its limits through decades of upgrades.

By the time of *Star Trek VI*, several factors came together.

First, Starfleet was transitioning to newer ship classes like the Excelsior class, which were more efficient, more powerful, and designed from the ground up to handle modern systems without compromise.

Second, the political climate was changing. The Federation and the Klingon Empire were moving toward peace, reducing the need for older heavy cruisers that had been built for long-range standoffs and uncertain borders.

And finally, there’s a symbolic layer.

The retirement of the Enterprise-A wasn’t just about the ship — it was about the crew. Kirk, Spock, McCoy, and the rest had defined an era of exploration. Decommissioning the ship marked the closing chapter of their journey and the beginning of a new generation within Starfleet.

So in the end, the Enterprise-A wasn’t retired because it failed — it was retired because everything around it had moved forward. Technology, strategy, and storytelling all aligned to bring a legendary ship gracefully to its conclusion.

Monday Music "RhineStone Cowboy" by Glen Cambell

 

 I was driving in to work this morning, no surprise there and was listening to my Sirius/XM and had it on the 70's channel and this song came on, and I decided to continue my 70's run that I have been doing for the past few weeks, perhaps I will throw some Disco out to give "Old NFO" some warm and fuzzies of his yuuth, well anyway,  I tend to surf the channels while I drive, In the afternoon I listen to the Patriot Channel with the "Wilcow Majority", I rate him up there with with Rush, and way better than Hannity, personal preference.  Hannity comes on later.  Hannity to me is white collar whereas Andrew Wilcow to me is "blue collar".  Both are good, but I prefer Wilkow, he is more my speed, but I digress.  Well anyway, the overtime that I have been working for soo long has been shut off.......I ain't gonna know what to do with myself.*Insert horror face*.  so I am gonna try to start posting more on my blog that has been sadly neglected because real life got in the way.  Well again as I chase the shiny that is my thought, I caught this song, and I recall Glen Campell and John Wayne in "True Grit" and they played well off each other.  Still one of my favorite movies.  

     "Rhinestone Cowboy" is a song written by Larry Weiss and most famously recorded by American country music singer Glen Campbell. The song enjoyed immense popularity with both country and pop audiences when it was released in 1975.
   

Background and writing

Weiss wrote and recorded "Rhinestone Cowboy" in 1974, and it appeared on his 20th Century Records album Black and Blue Suite. It did not however, have much of a commercial impact as a single. In late 1974, Campbell heard the song on the radio and, during a tour of Australia decided to learn the song. Soon after his return to the United States, Campbell went to Al Coury's office at Capitol Records, where he was approached about "a great new song" — "Rhinestone Cowboy."
Several music writers noted that Campbell identified with the subject matter of "Rhinestone Cowboy" — survival and making it, particularly when the chips are down — very strongly. As Steven Thomas Erlewine of Allmusic put it, the song is about a veteran artist "who's aware that he's more than paid his dues during his career ... but is still surviving, and someday, he'll shine just like a rhinestone cowboy."

Chart performance

Released in May 1975, "Rhinestone Cowboy" immediately caught on with both country and pop audiences. The song spent that summer climbing both the Billboard magazine Hot Country Singles and Billboard Hot 100 charts before peaking at No. 1 by season's end - three non-consecutive weeks on the country chart, two weeks on the Hot 100.
During the week of September 13 — that was the week the song returned to No. 1 on the Billboard country chart, after having been nudged out for a week by "Feelins'" by Conway Twitty and Loretta Lynn — "Rhinestone Cowboy" topped both the country and Hot 100 charts simultaneously. This was the first time a song had accomplished the feat since November 1961, when "Big Bad John" by Jimmy Dean turned the trick.
"Rhinestone Cowboy" was one of six songs released in 1975 that topped both the Billboard Hot 100 and Billboard Hot Country Singles charts. The other songs were "Before the Next Teardrop Falls" by Freddy Fender; "(Hey Won't You Play) Another Somebody Done Somebody Wrong Song" by B.J. Thomas, "Thank God I'm a Country Boy" and "I'm Sorry"/"Calypso," both by John Denver; and "Convoy" by C.W. McCall.
The song was also the sole Glen Campbell track in a promotional-only compilation album issued by Capitol records entitled "The Greatest Music Ever Sold" (Capitol SPRO-8511/8512), that was distributed to record stores during the 1976 Holiday season as part of Capitol's "Greatest Music Ever Sold" campaign, which promoted 15 "Best Of" albums released by the record label.

"Polish servicing of future Apache fleet.

 

I have blogged about this in the past "Poland" is taking their defenses seriously, they spend more than the 2% of GDP required of their NATO charter, they have the Ukraine on their border and they have a potentially hostile Soviet er Russian power fighting with the Ukrainians and if the Ukrainians fall, then the hostile power will be on their border and the Poles have already been under the boot of the Russians one time before and have no desire to be under the "Cossacks" again.  Yes the animosity between the poles and the Russians goes deeper than the soviet/poles of the cold war era.  They also restrict the islamic migration that brussels has been pushing on the west, the Poles see the writing on the wall and they don't like it, so they prepare.

Poland's National Defense Minister Paweł Bejda, Deputy Prime Minister Władysław Kosiniak-Kamysz and Prime Minister Donald Tusk (L-R) are framed by an Apache attack helicopter ahead of a signing ceremony for offset agreements between Military Aviation Works No. 1 and Lockheed Martin.

Credit: Krzysztof Niedziela/Polish National Defense Ministry

Poland’s government has signed offset agreements with Lockheed Martin to enable the servicing of sensors and systems fitted to the country’s new fleet of Boeing AH-64 Apaches.

 

Lockheed Martin supplies the TADS/PNVS sighting system, the associated Day Sensor Assembly as well as the Longbow fire control radar that equips the attack helicopter.

 

Through the agreements, announced March 23, Lodz-based Military Aviation Works (WZL-1) will perform maintenance on these sensors and others produced by Lockheed Martin, a move that defense officials say will increase helicopter availability for the Polish Armed Forces and bolster domestic maintenance capabilities. The deal follows on from similar arrangements between GE Aviation and WZL-1 in Deblin signed in August 2024 to provide MRO support for the T700 engines that power not only the Apaches but also Poland’s S-70i Black Hawks, and Leonardo AW149 and AW101 helicopters.

 

According to Polish government officials, the latest agreements formally launch the process of construction for a specialized Apache helicopter repair base at WZL-1 in Lodz.

 

"This is an extraordinary moment when the Military Aviation Works in Lodz gains the ability to service Apaches, but also other helicopters in service with the Polish Army,” said Poland’s defense minister, Władysław Kosiniak-Kamysz, speaking at the signing ceremony.

 

Poland is acquiring 96 AH-64E Apaches to support its growing land forces. The $10.8 billion program is the largest of all Poland’s defense programs in terms of value.

 

Once delivered, Poland’s Apache fleet will be the largest outside the U.S. and is part of a wider recapitalization of the Polish military that will remove Soviet-era equipment from the inventory and build a deterrent that would discourage a potential Russian attack.

 

The attack helicopter was selected in September 2022 over Bell’s AH-1Z Viper to meet the requirements of Poland’s Kruk program, closing a near-decade-long search to find a replacement for its Russian-built Mil Mi-24/35 “Hind” gunships.

 

While the aircraft were purchased to support land forces, Poland also sees them performing an air defense role combating uncrewed aerial vehicles such as one-way attack drones.

 

Poland is currently leasing eight AH-64D Apaches from the U.S. Army to shorten the transition process and ease the training burden. Several dozen Polish technicians and pilots have already completed Apache training in the U.S.

 

In January 2026, a new training program for professional non-commissioned officers to become military helicopter pilots was launched at the Air Force Academy in Deblin.

"The Honor Deficit"

  I remember reading way back at the turn of the last century that the people that graduated from our elite schools were imbued with a sense of duty, (besides making money) of a sense of altruism, a sense to do what's is good for the country also, to temper their judgement and decisions as to not hurt the country in their pursuit of fame and fortune, and most did just that, and those that didn't were shunned by high society.  But now how things have changed, our "elites" work at cross purposes to the needs of the country, like they want us to fail, not realizing that if we fail, they will also, somehow believing that they money and power will protect them, but it won't...Where could they go...Europe?   That place is more of a dumsterfire than we are, the middle East?...nope China has a lot of influence there as does the Mullah's.  Short sighted they are, their fortunes are tied in with this country, and they have forgotten it.   The word is "Honor", most of them mock that word now, it used to mean something, but now it is an old word, archaic word of a bygone era, and few of them follow the edicts of it, like the word of "integrity", another word that has lost its meaning.  I don't know how its going to end, but it seems that the seamier the politician, the more popular he/she is.

    I shamelessly clipped this from Michael Smith...

Through nearly 50 years of management and leadership experience, I have come to believe the most important aspects of leadership—and relationships more broadly—come down to four basic things: honor, credibility, competence, and trust. These are the four cornerstones of true leadership. Honor is the supreme core value among equals. It is the foundation upon which everything else rests. My definition of honor consists of three basic elements: honesty, loyalty, and service. First, honesty. No value can exist without honesty as its foundation. Truth is essential to every relationship—political, professional, or personal. Once honesty is compromised, everything built upon it begins to decay. A leader who is not committed to the truth cannot maintain the confidence of those he leads for long. Second, loyalty. Honesty begets loyalty. Loyalty is unwavering commitment to purpose, obligations, and ideals. It does not mean blind allegiance to personalities or factions. True loyalty is loyalty to principles and to the mission at hand. It means standing by commitments even when circumstances become difficult. Third, service. There are times when things must be done simply because they need to be done. Service means recognizing that leadership is not primarily about status or recognition but about responsibility. Necessary things are done without regard for recompense, reward, or applause. The leader serves the mission and the people—not the other way around. Credibility and competence are equally essential. Credibility combines honor with action. A leader must do what he says he will do and live up to his commitments, even when keeping them becomes inconvenient or costly. Words are easy. Promises are easy. Credibility is built only when those promises are honored in difficult circumstances. Credibility cannot exist without competence. A leader who lacks competence cannot sustain credibility no matter how sincere his intentions may be. True leaders make personal commitments to learn as much as possible about the problems they face, the situations they encounter, and the people they lead. Continuous learning, self-discipline, and the desire to improve are the basic elements of competence. Leadership requires the humility to understand that mastery is never complete. Trust is the final product of these qualities working together. Honor establishes the moral foundation. Competence ensures that decisions are grounded in knowledge and ability. Credibility proves that words and actions align. When these elements come together consistently over time, trust naturally follows. It is my belief that honor—or the lack of it—is one of the key factors behind many of the social, political, and economic struggles facing America today, and perhaps much of the Western world. For most of human history, leadership was judged first through the lens of honor. A person’s word was expected to mean something. Reputation mattered. Among peers, the loss of honor could be more devastating than the loss of office or influence. A leader who could not be trusted with the truth was not simply criticized; he was discredited. Modern public life operates very differently. One aspect of the United Kingdom’s parliamentary system that I admire is the tradition of open debate in the House of Commons. Members of Parliament must stand before their political opponents and defend their positions directly. Prime Minister’s Questions forces leaders to answer criticism in real time before the entire chamber. The exchanges can be theatrical and combative, but they also create a moment of accountability where argument, wit, and knowledge are tested publicly. Contrast that with what now passes for debate in much of American political life. Today, most “debate” does not occur between political opponents at all. It occurs through media intermediaries. Politicians repeat rehearsed talking points to cable news hosts, sympathetic podcasts, or carefully curated social-media audiences. Instead of persuasion, the goal is performance, to produce a thirty-second clip that energizes supporters and generates attention. The audience is no longer fellow legislators or serious critics. The audience is the tribe. When that shift occurs, the incentives change dramatically. A politician who embarrasses himself before thoughtful critics may still receive applause from his own supporters. Loyalty to faction becomes more important than loyalty to truth, logic and evidence become secondary to messaging and narrative. The result is a public conversation increasingly detached from reason. Arguments are replaced with slogans. Complex issues are reduced to emotional cues designed to trigger outrage or applause. Truth itself becomes negotiable depending on which side of the political divide happens to be speaking. In such an environment, honor inevitably declines. Honor requires commitment to truth even when that truth is inconvenient. It requires the willingness to admit errors and the discipline to engage opponents honestly rather than caricature them for political advantage. Above all, it requires the understanding that leadership carries obligations that extend beyond the immediate demands of political victory. Those expectations once formed an informal code of conduct among leaders. They did not eliminate disagreement—far from it—but they imposed certain boundaries on behavior. Debate was expected to be fierce, but it was also expected to be grounded in argument, evidence, and reason. Without those boundaries, public life begins to resemble something closer to an MMA fight than governance. The deeper danger is not merely political dysfunction. It is the erosion of trust across society. When leaders abandon honor, credibility collapses. When credibility collapses, trust disappears, then institutions that once held a society together begin to fracture. A healthy republic ultimately depends on more than laws and procedures. It depends on the character of the people who operate within those institutions. Honor, credibility, competence, and trust are not abstract ideals, they are practical requirements for leadership in any human endeavor—from running a company to governing a nation. When those values weaken, the entire system becomes unbalanced and begins to spin apart. Restoring them will not come from better messaging strategies or more sophisticated political marketing. It will come only when citizens demand more—and when leaders once again understand that their reputation, and their honor, must matter more than the next election.