35 Burst results for "Eisenhower"
The Eric Metaxas Show
General Mike Flynn Describes Where We Are Domestically
"Talking to general, Michael Flynn. All right, you said you wanted to talk about where we are domestically, go ahead. Yeah, so domestically, you know, there is a so for people to understand that critical components of the U.S. government and we think about the House of Representatives in the Senate and all these other things. There's actually other institutions of the bureaucracy that control much of the levers of real power. One of them, you know, Eisenhower warned about the military industrial complex. JFK only a few years later started to really warn us about this intelligent system that was that was rearing its ugly head and of course we know what happened to JFK. But what has happened? We're not joking. This is the deep what we call the deep state today deeply nefarious. Which is to say the president said, warned us, that's right. So I mean, I have such deep knowledge of the history of some of this. So let's fast forward to the last couple of years. When we talk about the deep state and what's happening domestically, what we have the entirety of the intelligence community, which has really grown in such an extraordinary way. Frankly, since 9 11, and there's a lot there, but it's grown and it's over it's overreaching now into the lives of everyday citizens. And I want to be clear. And a lot of stupid conservatives, like Eric metaxas, cheered this on, utterly oblivious
AP News Radio
Jill Biden to represent US at King Charles III coronation
"The Biden administration is defending the decision to have First Lady Jill Biden attend King Charles the third's coronation next month instead of her husband. The president told the king in a call yesterday, his wife will attend on America's behalf. We're proud that she's going to be representing the United States asked why the president himself will not be at Westminster Abbey, National Security Council, spokesman John Kirby, said there's precedent. President Eisenhower didn't attend Queen Elizabeth's coronation either. In fact, no sitting U.S. president has ever attended a British royal coronation on the events invitations, Buckingham Palace officially identifies the king's wife for the first time as queen Camilla, Sagar Meghani, Washington.
The Hugh Hewitt Show: Highly Concentrated
Why America's Navy Is No Longer Best in the Sea
"Back in America, as I said the most important thing. Not just to the Hugh Hewitt show audience, but to the world is that the communist Chinese party had Xi Jinping. The strong man, the totalitarian ruler of all of China, head of the Chinese Communist Party has been in Moscow for two days, meeting whether he calls his junior partner Putin, it reminds you of Hitler and Mussolini, if you know your history in 39 getting together, that's why I asked doctor Hendricks to come on today, Jerry Hendricks will be on an hour three to discuss his brand new essay in the Atlantic, which is really caught the attention of Washington D.C.. Because the Atlantic is the last magazine that many people read in America in hardcover copy form. And the title of the article is the age of American naval dominance is over. The subheading is the United States has seated the oceans to its enemies. We can no longer take freedom of the seas for granted. And this is sort of something I talk about a lot for the last, I don't know, ten years. When Donald Trump was running and promising a 355 ship navy, that didn't come about the biggest failure of the Trump years was the failure to get the shipyards expanded up and running, getting a navy plan. And the key facts that I'll be talking about with doctor hendrickson an hour three is that the United States had 6700 chips at sea at the end of World War II. By the end of Eisenhower administration, we were down to a thousand, which is consistent with the Cold War, and then it fell and fell and fell until regular arrived and rebuilt the navy to 590 ships that had the deterrent effect on the Soviet Union. It fell apart. And then in our wisdom, we thought the end of history had arrived and we are now at 271 ships afloat. And doctor Hendricks says, the complications of that, the implications of that are so profound that people don't even see the obvious in front of them. So I'm
Mark Levin
International Court Issues War Crimes Warrant for Putin
"Over at mediocre I just in the ICC International Criminal Court issues arrest warrant for Putin Over alleged war crimes including unlawful deportation of children There's been nobody in broadcasting certainly nobody Whose conservative who's been condemning Putin for his War crimes as thoroughly as I have You know maybe it's because as somebody who used to watch a lot of these shows and films about World War II the world at war as a young man I would watch these shows and as part of those shows you would see the devastation I would take place I remember watching one of these black and white films Where Eisenhower was walking through one of the death camps I think he had Omar Bradley and Patton with him if memory serves I could be wrong And It was either patner Bradley got sick to their stomach They couldn't believe what they saw the stench was unbelievable even Ike said That he's never seen evil like this before There's a man that let our forces during World War II And I'm sensitive to this And I think about what happened in Rwanda During the Clinton administration when everybody turned their back and 800,000 people Were slaughtered in three months And mostly with knives and machetes and swords I remember those pictures too
America First with Sebastian Gorka Podcast
How Government Uses Anti-Terrorism Tools Against Us With Mike Benz
"Let me just share with you a comment that kind of shocked me that a very sober individual, one of the few, truly dedicated investigative journalists made on my radio show. Maybe about a year ago, and that man is John Solomon, a dogged investigative reporter who's worked for, you name it, AP Reuters, Washington Post, you name it. This is a good guy who actually still believes in journalism created his own company called Justin news dot com. And with regards to the Russia collusion hoax, that he reported on admirably in the afterwards was smeared by the mainstream media. He said the following to me on my show, he said, the tools of Cold War propaganda that had been used to target the Soviet Union are enemies, have in recent years been turned inward against U.S. citizens. I mean, that's a stunning statement to say, how do you react to John Solomon's commentary? The only addition I would make is to say before it was turned inward, it was given several shots of steroids to make it bigger, better and meaner than it ever was. You see, what happened was in the analog age, we had a Cold War propaganda apparatus that was also married to official government propaganda organs. We had a U.S. information agency. And at the time, in the Cold War, there really was no press by and for the people in the pure sense that it would come to be in the digital age. All of the traditional legacy media institutions that were popular during the Cold War were offshoots early offshoots of the office of war information, really from 1942 until the Eisenhower era, you had basically all of the means of mass communication you had, you know, since the invention of the printing press, you had newspapers, but the new also had the telegraph in the 1800s. You had wireless communications in the 1900s, TV in Hollywood, all of those modalities of mass communications were all rolled into the World War II effort through OWI, the office of war information, and remember Fox News didn't come along until the 1990s. CBS NBC and ABC were all run by former OWI guys. There was always a back channel. So the office, let's just repeat that in case people missed it. The handful of media organs we had until the explosion of cable news and the Internet. The handful of news platforms America had were being run by people who had been involved with the office of war information, correct? Correct.
America First with Sebastian Gorka Podcast
Lord Conrad Black Unpacks Trump's Latest Strategy
"Question president Trump's wisdom. I rarely do this, but I question it in this case where he's holding up the santas as a Reagan Republican. I don't think that's anything to be embarrassed about. And I guess it's the best he can do, but I wouldn't do it if I were him. I'd make my arguments at the he was a he Trump as a preferable candidate to desantis on another basis. But I think that Republican Party between Reagan and Trump, the bush McCain Romney party. I think they did basically they failed. And the Republican Party will not go back to them. And president Trump repositioned the Republican Party, approaching upon traditional democratic fiefdoms in less advantaged areas in particular. African American and Hispanic American areas and he did it by transporting traditional Theodore Roosevelt Dwight Eisenhower capitalism, Republican capitalism into those districts with the tax incentivized investments creating employment in those districts. And it was a stroke of genius. He used traditional Republican capitalism to attack the democratic stranglehold on African American Hispanic American voters and unless the Republican Party has a collective IQ in a negative area. I mean, less than zero.
AP News Radio
Fire breaks out at building near White House, no injuries
"A fire broke out today at a historic building next to The White House. Workers were told to evacuate but no injuries were reported after a fire at the Eisenhower executive office building this morning by half past 8 all was calm on the grounds. The large gray tower was finished in 1888, it stands next to the west wing and houses White House workers, the ceremonial offices of the vice president, and notable spaces like the Indian treaty room, District of Columbia fire and emergency medical services tweeted that a defective cooling motor in the basement was the cause of the fire in 2007 then vice president Dick Cheney's offices were damaged by a fire and a marine reportedly suffered injuries punching through a 5th floor window to escape. Jennifer King, Washington
History Unplugged Podcast
"eisenhower" Discussed on History Unplugged Podcast
"It had to maintain a healthy concern for Soviet expansion and progress without being alarmist. Eisenhower addressed this need for balance in his farewell address. Crises, there will continue to be. In meeting them, whether foreign or domestic, great or small, there is a recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties. A huge increase in newer elements of our defenses. Development of unrealistic programs to cure every ill in agriculture. A dramatic expansion in basic and applied research. These and many other possibilities, each possibly promising in itself. May be suggested as the only way to the road we wish to trap. But each proposal must be weighed in the light of a broader consideration. The need to maintain balance in and among national programs. Balance between the private and the public economy. Balance between the cost and hoped for advantages. Balance between the clearly necessary and the comfortably desirable. Balance between our essential requirements as a nation, and the duties imposed by the nation upon the individual. Balance between actions of the moment and the national welfare of the future. Good judgment seeks balance in progress. Lack of it, he eventually finds imbalance and frustration. To Eisenhower, maintaining this balance would be critical for the viability of our massive defense effort. But there was more at stake. It wasn't just about spending. Costs weren't limited to just dollars and cents. Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of ploughshares could, with time, and as required, make swords as well. But we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense. We have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security alone. More than the net income of all United States corporation corporations. Now this conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence, economic, political, even spiritual, is felt in every city, every state House, every office of the federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources, and livelihood are all involved. So is the very structure of our society. In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals. So that security and liberty may prosper together. Now
History Unplugged Podcast
"eisenhower" Discussed on History Unplugged Podcast
"One individual. While all of this was going on, the 1960 election was in full swing. Richard Nixon had been a loyal vice president throughout the two terms. He easily got the Republican nomination to succeed Eisenhower. By then, Eisenhower was 69 years old. The oldest man to ever be president. And Nixon was just 47. Not to be outdone, the Democrats nominated the 43 year old senator from Massachusetts. John F. Kennedy. I've been talking about the image of Eisenhower as a passive do nothing president. Well, JFK would make that image an issue in the campaign. He accused the Eisenhower administration, and by association, vice president Nixon, of standing still during the 1950s. He cited the Soviets accomplishments in space as a sign that America was lagging behind. He also claimed that there was a missile gap that we were being outmatched in nuclear and conventional capabilities. And he argued that Eisenhower had allowed the communists to get a foothold in Cuba. As you can imagine, Eisenhower took these criticisms to heart. He knew that if there was a missile gap, it was in America's favor since it was far ahead of Soviet military capability, especially with nuclear weapons. From Eisenhower's perspective, Kennedy had either gotten bad information or was lying. In fact, under Eisenhower, America's nuclear arsenal went from about 1000 atomic bombs to about 20,000 total nuclear weapons. And he felt for the new look policy that trying to outmatch the Soviets everywhere was foolish. And he felt that Kennedy was in over his head. That he had some real nerve as an inexperienced junior senator, claiming that he could do Eisenhower's job better than him. Eisenhower said, quote, I'll do anything to avoid turning over my seat and the country to Kennedy. It really irritated Eisenhower when people said that he was passive about national defense. And he said, quote, the idea of them charging me with not being interested in defense. Damn it. I've spent my whole life being concerned with the defense of our country. Unfortunately for the president, JFK's message was resonating. A new decade was coming, the 1960s, an Americans were starting to crave, energetic leadership. And John F. Kennedy exuded energy and youthful vigor. Let me say first that I accept the nomination of the Democratic Party. I accept it without reservation. And with only one obligation, the obligation to devote every effort of my mind and spirit to lead our party back to victory and our nation to greatness. Kennedy's charge that the nation was lying at anchor and drift, was a clear criticism, not just of Nixon, but of Eisenhower. Also, it didn't help that Eisenhower unwittingly damaged his chosen candidate's chances. Nixon was largely running on his experience as vice president and his participation in the administration. But when one journalist asked Eisenhower if he had adopted any of Nixon's ideas, he said, quote, if you give me a week, I might think of one. I don't remember. The Kennedy campaign gleefully reminded everyone that Eisenhower seemed to be admitting that Nixon didn't play as big of a role in the administration as he was claiming. That November, JFK defeated Richard Nixon in one of the closest elections in American history. Kennedy would become the 35th president of the United States. Remember when I said second terms are usually rough? Well, it was the same for Eisenhower. Yes, he had had his successes like in Lebanon. Yes, he had gotten out a back down once again in the Taiwan strait. But the perception that he had been asleep at the wheel, which allowed the Soviets to take the lead in the space race, persisted. And the entire YouTube episode dashed any hopes for a legacy making peace treaty. And it seemed that with Kennedy's election, the American people were endorsing his view that the country had been standing still. To Eisenhower's critics, his presidency was 8 years of drift. After years of holding down the defense budget, preventing what he felt could be national bankruptcy and getting bogged down in foreign wars, Eisenhower feared that a Kennedy presidency would be a disaster. Kennedy was ambitious, and he opposed massive retaliation in favor of flexible response, which Eisenhower felt might lead to more wars. He lamented, quote, all I've been trying to do for 8 years has gone down the drain. But Eisenhower worried about something else. He still believed very much in his policies, especially new look. He believed that it had kept the peace and allowed for unprecedented prosperity. But he saw that Americans might be abandoning it. He feared that abandoning new look meant America would turn to deficit spending. He still feared that America would bankrupt itself trying to outmatch the Soviets. He saw the outcry and the call for massive spending after the Soviets launched Sputnik. He also feared that relying less on nuclear weapons would make war more, not less likely. He worried that the new and more popular flexible response doctrine would tempt American policymakers to use force. Especially since the new president elect was a supporter of the doctrine. Eisenhower knew that the Cold War meant that things had changed. America couldn't demobilize as it had in years past. But he also worried about what that meant. He worried about the impact government defense spending would have on American society. As he said in his famous speech years earlier, he believed that defense spending had an opportunity cost that it robbed from American productivity and innovation. Eisenhower crafted his federal address with all of this in mind. It ranks among the most famous by a modern president in history, and is perhaps the most famous farewell address after George Washington's. It was delivered on January 17th, 1961. Three days before he stepped down from office. The major theme here is balance. Eisenhower knew that in America in the Cold War, he had to walk a fine line in many ways. He had to maintain fearsome weapons of war in order to preserve the peace. He had been willing to go to the brink of nuclear war. But also was willing to sit down with America's enemies to reduce tensions. The United States had to spend much on weapons, but not too much, or else we would bankrupt ourselves.
History Unplugged Podcast
"eisenhower" Discussed on History Unplugged Podcast
"Scott here wishing you a very happy president's day week. In honor of that, you're going to hear a short clip from the Parthenon show. This American president. Some people remember Dwight D. Eisenhower's presidency is a time of peace and prosperity, but in reality it was an era of constant global crises. In this episode preview, host Richard Lim explains how Eisenhower skillfully navigated the perils of the Cold War. And if you've heard the series I did presidential Fight Club, you'll know that Eisenhower was a dark horse in that race. And overall, what I consider to be a vastly underrated president. Hope you enjoyed this snippet from this American president. Now there were several things that happened during Eisenhower's last couple of years in office. Secretary of State dulles health declined. His cancer had spread, and, on May 19 59, he died. Just a few months later, Ike's old mentor, George Marshall, died as well. In a short period of time, Eisenhower had lost the two men that perhaps did more to shape his military and presidential careers. Also, a communist regime took over in Cuba, led by Fidel Castro. He soon began befriending many of America's communist enemies and imposing a dictatorship on the island. Some of Eisenhower's critics felt that he had allowed the communists to get a foothold on the island, a dangerous situation considering Cuba was so close to American shores. But there was one specific instance that defined those last couple of years. Now, another four power summit was being planned for Paris in May of 1960. As you will recall, a previous one was held in Geneva in 1950 5 where Eisenhower proposed his open skies initiative, which was rejected by the Soviets. Well, Eisenhower decided to give another summit a chance. Again, the British French and Soviets would be attending. Since Eisenhower was near the end of his presidency, he was in legacy mode. He was working with the British to forge a treaty, banning nuclear tests, and hoped khrushchev would join in. He had engaged in brinksmanship throughout his presidency, but if he could get a treaty among the world powers, he could add to his legacy of being a peacemaker. But an incident would happen that would destroy those hopes. For years, Eisenhower had approved aerial spy missions over the Soviet Union. U2 spy planes were flying high above the Soviet Union, where the CIA promised they would not be shot down by Russian defenses. These missions gave America intelligence on Russian military capabilities and readiness. This all related back to Eisenhower's fears about the fence spending. Those who advocated for increased spending would claim that the Soviets were way ahead of the United States and military capability, especially in terms of bombers. If Eisenhower could get intelligence that proved America was way ahead, he could ward off those who wanted more spending. That's why he approved the U2 flights. The intelligence gleaned from the flights did confirm his hunch that America was way ahead in terms of bombers. The Russians knew that these flights were happening, and knew that the United States had information about their capabilities. But they didn't want to publicize their knowledge of the flights because it would expose a weakness. The inability to prevent Americans from spying right in their airspace. The entire program was a secret to the world. Eisenhower knew that the flights were a huge risk. Sending spy planes over enemy territory was dangerous. They could be shot down. No matter how confident the CIA was. If America was ever caught, it would be an embarrassment since many felt flying over enemy airspace without the consent of that country was unsavory. And if a plane ever got shot down, it would allow the Soviets to claim it could counter American technology. Due to their sensitive nature, Eisenhower personally approved each flight after a thorough review. One of those missions took off on May 1st, 1960. It was flown by pilot Francis Gary powers, but powers never returned from the mission. The Eisenhower administration assumed that the plane had crashed and that powers was dead. To account for the loss, the administration released the cover story that it was a weather plane and that it had oxygen issues. This would lead the public to believe that the pilot had blacked out and accidentally entered Soviet airspace. Unbeknownst to the administration, the Soviets actually had powers alive in custody and had obtained film from the plane, confirming its reconnaissance mission. The plane had been shot down by Soviet defenses. It's possible khrushchev held all this information back so that the United States would release its cover story and then be caught red handed. While he was once afraid to disclose Soviet vulnerability. Now he savored the chance to humiliate the Americans. Shooting down the plane would show off the Soviets defensive capabilities and expose a sensitive American secret. Khrushchev hoped that this would increase his leverage with Eisenhower during the impending summit. While after the weather plane story was released, khrushchev announced on May 5th, 1960 that the U.S. plane had been shot down. The Americans denied it, believing that the plane was destroyed and the pilot was dead. But that was a fatal assumption. Two days later, khrushchev finally announced that the Soviets had the pilot alive and well, and the film from the plane. One can only imagine the look on Eisenhower's face when he found out. Let's just say that the CIA was not in his good side after this. One aid recounted that around this time, the president said, quote, I would like to resign. It was a huge embarrassment. The entire incident had blown the lid off one of the most intensely kept secrets of his administration. It exposed an unseemly side of America's national security policies. Critics argued that America was willfully violating the Soviet Union's sovereignty. Also, the entire incident called into question America's capabilities since one of its planes had been shot down. Khrushchev also demanded for an apology. Eisenhower could no longer deny that it had happened. He wisely decided to level with the American people to come clean and admit that it was indeed a spy plane. He argued that the Cold War and Soviet secrecy made missions like these involving the U2, necessary for the country security. And he said, quote, no one wants another Pearl Harbor. This means that we must have knowledge of military forces and preparations around the world, especially those capable of massive surprise attack. Secrecy and the Soviet Union makes this essential. In the Soviet Union, there's a fetish of secrecy and concealment. Eisenhower also cited the long history of Soviet spying in the United States. The president maintained that he simply would not apologize. Within days, the summit in Paris began. Khrushchev sat across the table from the Americans, British and French. He called again and again for an apology, but Eisenhower refused, again and again. The president could count on strong support from his British and French allies, prime minister Harold macmillan, and Charles De Gaulle. Ultimately, the entire summit collapsed and little was accomplished. Eisenhower left Paris embittered. Knowing that his host for a test ban treaty were dead. He wrote of khrushchev that quote, I leave Paris with, of course, a measure of disappointment, because our hopes for taking even a small step toward peace have been dashed by the intransigence and
Key Battles of American History
"eisenhower" Discussed on Key Battles of American History
"Summit collapsed and little was accomplished. Eisenhower left Paris embittered. Knowing that his host for a test ban treaty were dead. He wrote of khrushchev that quote, I leave Paris with, of course, a measure of disappointment, because our hopes for taking even a small step toward peace have been dashed by the intransigence and arrogance of one individual. While all of this was going on, the 1960 election was in full swing. Richard Nixon had been a loyal vice president throughout the two terms. He easily got the Republican nomination to succeed Eisenhower. By then, Eisenhower was 69 years old. The oldest man to ever be president. And Nixon was just 47. Not to be outdone, the Democrats nominated the 43 year old senator from Massachusetts. John F. Kennedy. I've been talking about the image of Eisenhower as a passive do nothing president. Well, JFK would make that image an issue in the campaign. He accused the Eisenhower administration, and by association, vice president Nixon, of standing still during the 1950s. He cited the Soviets accomplishments in space as a sign that America was lagging behind. He also claimed that there was a missile gap that we were being outmatched in nuclear and conventional capabilities. And he argued that Eisenhower had allowed the communists to get a foothold in Cuba. As you can imagine, Eisenhower took these criticisms to heart. He knew that if there was a missile gap, it was in America's favor since it was far ahead of Soviet military capability, especially with nuclear weapons. From Eisenhower's perspective, Kennedy had either gotten bad information or was lying. In fact, under Eisenhower, America's nuclear arsenal went from about 1000 atomic bombs to about 20,000 total nuclear weapons. And he felt for the new look policy that trying to outmatch the Soviets everywhere was foolish. And he felt that Kennedy was in over his head. That he had some real nerve as an inexperienced junior senator, claiming that he could do Eisenhower's job better than him. Eisenhower said, quote, I'll do anything to avoid turning over my seat and the country to Kennedy. It really irritated Eisenhower when people said that he was passive about national defense. And he said, quote, the idea of them charging me with not being interested in defense. Damn it. I've spent my whole life being concerned with the defense of our country. Unfortunately for the president, JFK's message was resonating, a new decade was coming. The 1960s, an Americans were starting to crave, energetic leadership. And John F. Kennedy exuded energy and youthful vigor. Let me say first that I accept the nomination of the Democratic Party. I accept it without reservation. And with only one obligation, the obligation to devote every effort of my mind and spirit to lead our party back to victory and our nation to greatness. Kennedy's charge that the nation was lying at anchor and drift, was a clear criticism, not just of Nixon, but of Eisenhower. Also, it didn't help that Eisenhower unwittingly damaged his chosen candidates chances. Nixon was largely running on his experience as vice president and his participation in the administration. But when one journalist asked Eisenhower if he had adopted any of Nixon's ideas, he said, quote, if you give me a week, I might think of one. I don't remember. The Kennedy campaign gleefully reminded everyone that Eisenhower seemed to be admitting that Nixon didn't play as big of a role in the administration as he was claiming. That November, JFK defeated Richard Nixon in one of the closest elections in American history. Kennedy would become the 35th president of the United States. Remember when I said second terms are usually rough? Well, it was the same for Eisenhower. Yes, he had had his successes like in Lebanon. Yes, he had gotten out a back down. Once again in the Taiwan strait. But the perception that he had been asleep at the wheel, which allowed the Soviets to take the lead in the space race, persisted. And the entire YouTube episode dashed any hopes for a legacy making peace treaty. And it seemed that with Kennedy's election, the American people were endorsing his view that the country had been standing still. To Eisenhower's critics, his presidency was 8 years of drift. After years of holding down the defense budget, preventing what he felt could be national bankruptcy and getting bogged down in foreign wars, Eisenhower feared that a Kennedy presidency would be a disaster. Kennedy was ambitious, and he opposed massive retaliation in favor of flexible response, which Eisenhower felt might lead to more wars. He lamented, quote, all I've been trying to do for 8 years has gone down the drain. But Eisenhower worried about something else. He still believed very much in his policies, especially new look. He believed that it had kept the peace and allowed for unprecedented prosperity. But he saw that Americans might be abandoning it. He feared that abandoning new look meant America would turn to deficit spending. He still feared that America would bankrupt itself trying to outmatch the Soviets. He saw the outcry and the call for massive spending after the Soviets launched Sputnik. He also feared that relying less on nuclear weapons would make war more, not less likely. He worried that the new and more popular flexible response doctrine would tempt American policymakers to use force. Especially since the new president elect was a supporter of the doctrine. Eisenhower knew that the Cold War meant that things had changed. America couldn't demobilize as it had in years past. But he also worried about what that meant. He worried about the impact government defense spending would have on American society. As he said in his famous speech years earlier, he believed that defense spending had an opportunity cost that it robbed from American productivity and innovation. Eisenhower crafted his federal address with all of this in mind. It ranks among the most famous by a modern president in history. And is perhaps the most famous farewell address after George Washington's. It was delivered on January 17th, 1961. Three days before he stepped down from office. The major theme here is balance. Eisenhower knew that in America in the Cold War, he had to walk a fine line in many ways. He had to maintain fearsome weapons of war in order to preserve the peace. He had been willing to go to the brink of nuclear war. But also was willing to sit down with America's enemies to reduce tensions. The United States had to spend much on weapons, but not too much, or else we would bankrupt ourselves. It had to maintain a healthy concern for Soviet expansion and progress without being alarmist. James here, and now a brief word from our sponsors. Eisenhower addressed this need for balance in his farewell address. Crises, there will continue to be. In meeting them, whether foreign or domestic, great or small, there is a recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties. A huge increase in newer elements of our defenses. Development of unrealistic programs to cure every ill in agriculture. A dramatic expansion in basic and applied research. These and many other possibilities, each possibly promising in itself. May be suggested as the only way to the road we wish to travel. But each proposal must be weighed in the light of a broader consideration. The need to maintain balance in and among national programs. Balance between the private and the public economy. Balance between the cost and hoped for advantages. Balance between the clearly necessary and the comfortably desirable. Balance between our essential requirements as a nation, and the duties imposed by the nation upon the individual. Balance between actions of the moment and the national welfare of the future. Good judgment seeks balance in progress. Lack of it, he eventually finds imbalance and frustration. To Eisenhower, maintaining miss balance would be critical for the viability of our massive defense effort. But there was more at stake. It wasn't just about spending. Costs weren't limited to just dollars and cents. Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of ploughshares could, with time, and as required, make swords as well. But we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense. We have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security alone. More than the net income of all United States corporation corporations. Now, this conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence, economic, political, even spiritual, is felt in every city, every state House, every office of the federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources, and livelihood are all involved. So is the very structure of our society. In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals. So that security and liberty may prosper together. Thank you for listening to today's episode, key battles of American history is a proud member of the Parthenon podcast network, which includes several other podcasts, including history unplugged by Scott rank, beyond the big screen and history of the papacy by Steve Guerra. This American president by Richard Lim, eyewitness history by Josh Cohen, and vlogging through history by Chris mowry. If you haven't already, I strongly encourage you to check out these great podcasts. If you would like to support this podcast and help it to grow, there are four things you can do. First, you could subscribe to the podcast and leave a review on the podcast player of your choice. This helps other people to find the podcast. Ratings and reviews on Apple podcasts are especially helpful. Second, join our Facebook group, American history fanatics, where we discuss the episodes of this podcast, as well as other topics related to American history. Third, tell as many friends as you can about the show. And fourth, you can join the elite unit called early's raiders by going to Patreon dot com and searching for key battles of American history. There are 5 different levels of support to choose from. Each level allows you to have early access to ad free episodes. Higher levels bring additional benefits, including bonus episodes, and even the ability to commission episodes on topics of your choosing. For a close, I would like to give a shout out to the current members of early's raiders. Thanks to colonels Leigh Beaumont, Terry Davis and Josh Simpson, majors Chrissy, Alex calabrese, and a concepcion Castro, Eli Forsyth, bob McCullough, Melissa Mueller, Doug perg and Jay Robinson. Captains Ryan Apache, Alex coombs, Robbie Edwards, Rick Hannah, Jeff Henley, grant holmstrom, hooves woodworking, Stephen James, Mike Leslie, Billy Malone, Jose Martinez, Tim moon, Ryan Ramones, David Santee, Michael severino, Jacob thomason, Jeff van der Mueller, and Gregory works. And lieutenants, Patrick Brennan, Sean Burrell, Matthew Christensen, Ronald Cohen, Craig Didier, Scott Hendricks, who's your daddy, David Luisa, Craig Martin, Eugene Rosso, Jeff sabot, and Larry Elk. I greatly appreciate your support. Thank you for listening to key battles of American history. If you liked this episode, please subscribe to the podcast on your favorite podcast catcher. And please be sure and spread the word about the show. If you can spare a few minutes, rate and review the show at Apple podcasts. This greatly helps us to reach more listeners. And for show notes, maps, and further discussion, visit our website at WW dot key battles of American history, dot com. Thank you, and we look forward to joining you again in the next episode of key battles of American history.
Key Battles of American History
"eisenhower" Discussed on Key Battles of American History
"Hello, everybody. This is James as always, and I've got a special bonus episode for you today. As most, if not all of you know, key battles of American history is part of a network of great podcasts called the Parthenon podcast network. One of the other podcasts in our network is called this American president, hosted by Richard Lim. It's a great podcast. I love it a lot. I listen to it every time it comes out. It's very well researched, Richard is a great storyteller as well. And so I want to try to persuade you to go listen to it. Subscribe, hopefully, help Richard out by subscribing, maybe giving a review if possible. So here is a brief sample from one of his episodes that came out in the recent past on Dwight D. Eisenhower. You know, some remembered Dwight Eisenhower's presidency is a time of peace and prosperity. But in reality, it was an era of constant global crises. In this episode preview from this American president, Richard explorers out Eisenhower skillfully navigated the perils of the Cold War. So check it out and then please go and hopefully subscribe to his podcast and give it a listen. Thank you very much. Now there were several things that happened during Eisenhower's last couple of years in office. Secretary of State dulles health declined. His cancer had spread, and on May 1959 he died. Just a few months later, Ike's old mentor, George Marshall, died as well. In a short period of time, Eisenhower had lost the two men that perhaps did more to shape his military and presidential careers. Also, a communist regime took over in Cuba, led by Fidel Castro. He soon began befriending many of America's communist enemies and imposing a dictatorship on the island. Some of Eisenhower's critics felt that he had allowed the communists to get a foothold on the island, a dangerous situation considering Cuba was so close to American shores. But there was one specific instance that defined those last couple of years. Now, another four power summit was being planned for Paris in May of 1960. As you will recall, a previous one was held in Geneva in 1950 5 where Eisenhower proposed his open skies initiative, which was rejected by the Soviets. Well, Eisenhower decided to give another summit a chance. Again, the British French and Soviets would be attending. Since Eisenhower was near the end of his presidency, he was in legacy mode. He was working with the British to forge a treaty, banning nuclear tests, and helped khrushchev would join in. He had engaged in brinksmanship throughout his presidency, but if he could get a treaty among the world powers, he could add to his legacy of being a peacemaker. But an incident would happen that would destroy those hopes. For years, Eisenhower had approved aerial spy missions over the Soviet Union. U2 spy planes were flying high above the Soviet Union, where the CIA promised they would not be shot down by Russian defenses. These missions gave America intelligence on Russian military capabilities and readiness. This all related back to Eisenhower's fears about the fence spending. Those who advocated for increased spending would claim that the Soviets were way ahead of the United States and military capability, especially in terms of bombers. If Eisenhower could get intelligence that proved America was way ahead, he could ward off those who wanted more spending. That's why he approved the U2 flights. The intelligence gleaned from the flights did confirm his hunch that America was way ahead in terms of bombers. The Russians knew that these flights were happening, and knew that the United States had information about their capabilities. But they didn't want to publicize their knowledge of the flights because it would expose a weakness. The inability to prevent Americans from spying right in their airspace. The entire program was a secret to the world. Eisenhower knew that the flights were a huge risk. Sending spy planes over enemy territory was dangerous. They could be shot down. No matter how confident the CIA was. If America was ever caught, it would be an embarrassment since many felt flying over enemy airspace without the consent of that country was unsavory. And if a plane ever got shot down, it would allow the Soviets to claim it could counter American technology. Due to their sensitive nature, Eisenhower personally approved each flight after a thorough review. One of those missions took off on May 1st, 1960. It was flown by pilot Francis Gary powers, but powers never returned from the mission. The Eisenhower administration assumed that the plane had crashed and that powers was dead. To account for the loss, the administration released the cover story that it was a weather plane and that it had oxygen issues. This would lead the public to believe that the pilot had blacked out and accidentally entered Soviet airspace. Unbeknownst to the administration, the Soviets actually had powers alive in custody and had obtained film from the plane, confirming its reconnaissance mission. The plane had been shot down by Soviet defenses. It's possible khrushchev held all this information back so that the United States would release its cover story and then be caught red handed. While he was once afraid to disclose Soviet vulnerability. Now he savored the chance to humiliate the Americans. Shooting down the plane would show off the Soviets defensive capabilities and expose a sensitive American secret. Khrushchev hoped that this would increase his leverage with Eisenhower during the impending summit. While after the weather plane story was released, khrushchev announced on May 5th, 1960 that the U.S. plane had been shot down. The Americans denied it, believing that the plane was destroyed and the pilot was dead. But that was a fatal assumption. Two days later, khrushchev finally announced that the Soviets had the pilot alive and well, and the film from the plane. One can only imagine the look on Eisenhower's face when he found out. Let's just say that the CIA was not in his good side after this. One aid recounted that around this time, the president said quote, I would like to resign. It was a huge embarrassment. The entire incident had blown the lid off one of the most intensely kept secrets of his administration. It exposed an unseemly side of America's national security policies. Critics argued that America was willfully violating the Soviet Union's sovereignty. Also, the entire incident called into question America's capabilities since one of its planes had been shot down. Khrushchev also demanded for an apology. Eisenhower could no longer deny that it had happened. He wisely decided to level with the American people to come clean and admit that it was indeed a spy plane. He argued that the Cold War and Soviet secrecy made missions like these involving the U2, necessary for the country's security. And he said, quote, no one wants another Pearl Harbor. This means that we must have knowledge of military forces and preparations around the world, especially those capable of massive surprise attack. Secrecy and the Soviet Union makes this essential. In the Soviet Union, there's a fetish of secrecy and concealment.
America First with Sebastian Gorka Podcast
Secretary Robert Wilkie Describes How We Can "Clean the Stables"
"Look at what happened in Georgia in Crimea under Obama, what happened in Ukraine under Biden in Afghanistan. And then we have the interstitial of the four years of president Trump, that's because of an election secretary wilkie, and we need that election sooner than we know. Let's talk about your observation about how you clean the statements. It's been done twice dramatically in our history. The first time was in the 1930s with the accession of George Marshall. Yes. And he kept a sheet. And he cleaned out the old tired risk averse generals who had grown up in peace. And he plucked people like Dwight Eisenhower, who was a lieutenant colonel. And made him a Brigadier. He took George Patton from the command at fort Meyer and handed him the second armored division. He was commanding a regiment at fort Meyer. And all of a sudden he's commanding the second armored division. And Bradley, who had been an instructor at fort benning. These people were moved to the top of the food chain. Ronald Reagan sent shockwaves. Through the department, he put in charge Casper weinberger. A veteran of World War II who had seen combat at its rawest. He was given a check, but more importantly he was given the authority to clean house. And the appeasers and the dead Enders were moved out. Programs were put in train. To overwhelm the Soviet Union. So you have a combination of those two. You have the dynamic leadership of someone like a weinberger and then the military foresight of a general Marshall.
Mark Levin
Andrew Breitbart: The Democrat-Media Complex
"An original so many original statements and sayings can be attributed to my dearly departed friend Andrew breitbart who was my mentor and brought me into this crazy world For my second career Andrew breitbart coined the phrase that Democrat media complex It was of course a twist on the phrase military industrial complex where captains of industry and corporations In manufacturing would be in bed with The Pentagon in the military they would spend their money to ensure that politicians were put in place to give big defense contracts and keep a military build up going and then that money would then funnel back to those very same corporations that made the donations for those politicians that they could get rich off of the military build up And of course there's some truth to it It was really coined I think by president Eisenhower If anybody knew anything about the military industrial complex it would have been 5 star general leader of the allied forces in World War II and the president for two terms Dwight Eisenhower And you would hear from the left all the time military industrial complex Oh it's the military and the military industrial complex And so Andrew had such a great way with words and a great way of framing stories for the media and busting narratives in creating his own narratives that he coined the phrase the Democrat media complex And the Democrat media complex basically take the military industrial complex and take it out of the realm of manufacturing and corporate big manufacturing corporations And Republican politicians and The Pentagon and military spending remove that aspect of it but put it instead over into the media information entertainment culture the music industry academia
The Dan Bongino Show
Joe Concha: The Reality of 'Best Books' Lists
"I've written a couple of books myself I Jim have I told you this I'm going to write another one I know I told you I did I not tell you I was never good at I did right I just said that I had an idea and I can't get it out of my head so I'm going to write another one I'll tell you about it But Joe be prepared You are again you're not a died in the wool liberal who genuflects at the altar of Joe Biden and Barack Obama You know your book's gonna be attacked right No matter how good the sales are I could have listeners go out right now and you should buy two and 3000 copies of the book right now on the phone You know The New York Times no matter what happens even if they decide to put you on the list there's gonna be an asterisk next to it and it's gonna say something like bulk sales bulk this is what they do You're anticipating this You understand this right No matter how good it sells they are gonna attack you Oh I embraced The New York Times doing that That's fine guys Go ahead Keep me off your New York Times Best Seller list All I go by is Amazon Because Amazon I used to be a sports columnist It's quite simple When you're doing baseball scores it's who scored more runs That's it So who's selling more books Yeah And if you want to tell me there's some sort of methodology that The New York Times uses No there is no methodology It's who sold the most books and then who should go on this list And if they keep me off of it believe me That's the first column that I'm writing about And I'll run to Fox News and your show tomorrow and we'll talk about hey I don't get it Joe is at number one or number three in terms of most books sold in the week but then The New York Times kept him off for some reason or put an asterisk next to it with no explanation behind it Go ahead guys This is why The New York Times has an endorsed a Republican presidential candidate since 1956 We're talking Ike Dwight D. Eisenhower and The Washington Post has never endorsed a Republican presidential candidate gee I wonder why that is Yet they're seen as the pillars of journalism and objectivity Well you think they would maybe endorse I don't know Reagan over mondale or Georgia Where we are at this point It's not journalism Dan it's activism And we all know it Yeah
AP News Radio
Barack Obama wins Emmy for narrating Netflix national parks series
"Former president Barack Obama has won an Emmy Award With the latest Barack Obama's work on the Netflix documentary series our great national parks has earned him an Emmy for best narrator The creative arts Emmys were handed out Saturday in Los Angeles Obama is the second president to win an Emmy after Dwight Eisenhower was given a special award in 1956 The late Chadwick Boseman also won for outstanding character voice-over for the animated show what if it was one of his last projects before he died in 2020
The Dan Bongino Show
Steve Deace: Things Changed When Corporations Got Woke
"Against it This gun Bill is a perfect example right It's 14 Republicans who just sold this out in the Senate side Yes And that's a red line there I mean that's the one issue over the last 30 years really that the mainstream Republican Party So if you look at if you look at since Eisenhower gave his momentous exit speech his going away speech The Republican Party's nominees have been Richard Nixon two bushes John McCain Mitt Romney and then there is then there's Reagan and Trump two of these things are not like the other And so this is the reality of the fact that you're aligned with this party has hated its base for decades It has as I saw I tweet out today that the difference between the new populist right and the mainstream right is that we don't favor corporations over God and our traditions And the mainstream right has always done that It was always about it was always up to Chevron doctrine more than overturning roe It was always about the two state solution more than let's move the embassy to Jerusalem And it's always been that way which has changed is when the corporations got woke in and they no longer even pretended to fly the flag and even wink at our belief system That mainstream right now they got exposed Now they couldn't triangulate off of that anymore And so I think a lot of people are pardon the pun getting woke politically just not necessarily in the way the other side had
The Dan Bongino Show
Steve Deace: The Populist Right vs. The Mainstream Right
"This gun Bill is a perfect example right It's 14 Republicans who just sold this out in the Senate side Yes And that's a red line there Dan I mean that's the one issue over the last 30 years really that the mainstream Republican Party So if you look at if you look at since Eisenhower gave his momentous exit speech his going away speech The Republican Party's nominees have been Richard Nixon two bushes John McCain Mitt Romney and then there is then there's Reagan and Trump Two of these things are not like the other And so this is the reality of the fact that you know you're aligned with this party has hated its base for decades It has as I saw I tweet out today that the difference between the new populist right and the mainstream right is that we don't favor corporations over God and our traditions And the mainstream right has always done that It was always about you know it was always about the Chevron doctrine more than overturning roe It was always about the two state solution more than let's move the embassy to Jerusalem And it's always been that way What just changed is when the corporations got woken and they no longer even pretended to slide the flag and even wink at our belief system That mainstream right now they got exposed Now they couldn't triangulate off of that anymore And so I think a lot of people are pardon the pun getting woke politically just not necessarily in the way the other side had anticipated
The Doug Collins Podcast
"eisenhower" Discussed on The Doug Collins Podcast
"It. Another area, the military industrial complex, the air force and others influenced by those outside contractors have tried to get rid of the ATM was lovingly known by the infantry is the warthog from the air force's fleet for the last 15 to 20 years. Every time it comes up in Congress, there's move out of the budget to strip it out. It is always put back in, why because the army and the marines in particular love the warthog, they love the abilities it has on the battlefield, and they do not see the planes that are being given or is alternatives to be viable alternatives. You see, Eisenhower saw something in the economy that was growing. He has concerns about the military industrial complex. We're very valid and very real. We're seeing it today, folks. If you don't believe that this influence that he talks about where he talks about the councils of government in the influence of this industry is real, you've never been to Washington, D.C.. You've never been in the armed services community, and you've never lost the appropriation process. It is real. And they are very good at what they do. And I'm not, I'm just putting it out there as fact. These large companies in the military industrial complex, they intentionally have plants in almost every district in the country. They have suppliers and every part of the country. It is something that they know that if they were going to keep this going, they had to have, you know, basically an inroad into D.C.. That's the way it worked. Eisenhower was concerned about this rightfully, so I think it has become concerning as we just talked about about some of these things that you see coming up that we're spending money on. And is it actually a viable weapon system, something that we need? And again, not only are they selling it to us, but they then have contract options to sell it to others at different capabilities, not the capabilities that we have, but they're selling it all around. But there's a next point that I wanted to really hit on because I think it was that also the part of the military industrial complex, not only the hardware part, but the spying and the surveillance state that we've become into. And that takes us into a transition of the intellectual property that all of this goes around and the growing concern that we have about big tech and the media companies and others. You're really going at the heart of what Eisenhower solo is the heart of our economy. And that was our intellectual property capabilities. I think the 5th point that he would bring out is he said, you know, be careful of the government control or government overreach into the ideas of citizenry. He says this. He said, in this revolution, and he was talking about the military industrial complex, researchers become central. It has also become more formalized complex and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted four by an at the direction of the federal government. See, he's already seeing when government puts his hands in there. It's moving out, private impress. Our founders knew and in these presidents, Eisenhower knew as well. Capitalism and free market ideas are what makes this country who it is. And he says today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists and laboratories and testing fields in the same fashion to free university, historically the fountainhead of fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because the huge cost involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. Listen to what he said there. A government contract becomes a virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity for every old blackboard. There are now hundreds of new electronic computers. Again, he's not, I don't think he's actually saying that there's a problem with the intellectual property. But what he's saying is he said, we have to value the individual inventor. And if we ever get to that point of taking content away from the arrangement, whether that be in music art, books, a technology computer, when you're removing the ideas and making those government conformity to a grant, then you're losing the ideas. It's often been said that, you know, and we saw this back in the day of the polio vaccine that if government had been in control of manufacturing the polio vaccine, we'd have the best iron lung in the world, but no polio vaccine. This is the kind of thing we're working on and Eisenhower saw this as the world was developing that we had to protect what I believe and this is and I'll see this in his speeches in this speech, but I see it as something that I've lived in Congress. Intellectual property, that very idea that thought, if we ever lose that, to where it becomes conformity to the bigger idea of government, the bigger idea of the thought at the time, then we lose the free thinkers. We lose it and he talks about the universities here. What I prediction about how universities have become now the centers of thought police and conformity to government renewal of grants and contracts. Again, it is amazing what we see here in Eisenhower's look at the future and we can't deny this in this look in the future that this is something I believe at heart hits at the very heart of who we are as Americans. The next thing he did again, it was another call on debt. Amazingly enough, he said another factor of maintaining balance involves the element of time and he says as we peer into our society society's future, we you and I and our government must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering for our own ease and convenience. The pressures resources of tomorrow, we can not mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without risking the loss of their political and spiritual heritage. You can't, I can't say it enough. I mean, we've talked a lot about Eisenhower speech. That sort of sums it up. We can't live for the moment. Governments have the responsibility to look into the future and can not use resources strictly today. It's just a fact. We see in our personalized while with the government not be any different. I want to leave, I want to stop here because he talks also that peace should be strive for Eisenhower look at what he talking about. He sees what's happening today in 1961. He warns us against it. Don't spend more than you got. Don't let the government be influenced by outside organizations who very much depend. Remember, the military industrial complex depends on government to exist, not the other way around, but they've made it to where it looks like they have to exist so government can exist. And that's a dangerous situation. But he also talks about the fact of, you know, don't destroy the idea. Don't destroy the free thinking and universities in our society with government telling them what they will and will not be a part of. Simply by how money and that's how they do it. But he ends with something that I want to end this broadcast with today. And it's Eisenhower's look back. If you're learning anything from the past, he lives with what basically is in my mind of benediction. And listen to what he says. He said, we pray that peoples of all faiths all race, all nations may have their greatest human need satisfied. There's like now that those now did not opportunities shall come to enjoy it to the full, that those all who yearn for freedom may experience its spiritual blessing, those who have half freedom will understand also its heavy responsibilities that all who are insensitive to the needs of others will learn charity and that the scourges of poverty disease and ignorance will be made to disappear from the earth and that end the goodness of time, all people will come to live together in a peace guaranteed by the bonding force of mutual respect and love. And with that Dwight Eisenhower signed off in his presidency and signed off with his, I think, warning to the world. You'll see Eisenhower in Washington were very similar. They both believed America was a grand idea that it was about the people coming together from all different backgrounds out of many, come one. Washington Eisenhower knew that you couldn't spend yourself into oblivion and not have consequences to play that you couldn't allow outside influence it for Washington. It was the foreign influence for Eisenhower. It was the influence of the military industrial complex and those who depended on government for their very survival. And Eisenhower also saying that don't let our intellectual freedoms and our lead intellectual possibilities be determined by government. So these are all real issues for today. So I hope you've enjoyed this look back in the past. We're going to continue to do these kind of things here on the podcast so that you can take the history of the past from these great men and women of our past and apply them to how they foresaw what we're seeing today so that we can see a better vision for the future. We'll see you next time. Folks, I don't know about you, but I enjoy a good night's sleep. And there's times I don't get it, but typically when I do have that chance, I'm back at home, I'm not traveling. The one thing that I miss when I'm on the road is a good pillow. And I'm going to tell you right now the folks at my pillow are the folks who have designed a pill that actually fits my knees. I love to put a pillow when I want to sleep, get it under my head, get it perfect, and it stays there. And my pillow folks, you can't get it right now. They're offering some of the lowest prices ever. And if you use code word Collins, promo code Collins, COL INS. I mean, we're talking about a regular my pill a 69 98 for only 1998. Queen saw 79 98 for 24 98 or a king size 89 98 for only 29, 98. That's promo code Collins. But that's not just pillows. They've got the Giza dream bed sheets, they got bathrobes. They got the mos slippers. By the way, I'm not sure I can get the my slippers off miss Lisa. The other night we were getting ready to go somewhere, she dressed up, had a beautiful dress on. I looked down, she still had her my slippers on. And then she said, oh, got to go out and change shoes. They're that comfortable folks. You will want to have them. Again, use promo code Collins, COL INS, and you can get their best price on anything that they have. Give them a call, my fellow dot com or call them at one 809 8 6 three 9 9 four, use promo code Collins. That's one 809 8 6 three 9.
The Doug Collins Podcast
Examining Eisenhower's Final Address to the Nation
"And coming from Eisenhower, a man, a general who led the troops, the frame allied commander in Europe, led us to victory over Hitler. Someone who had spent his entire live adult life up until now in the military and dealing with these elements of war, peace and battles came to this conclusion that he said that we needed to be very wary of this new industrial or military establishment. He said in this quote, he said a vital element in keeping peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction. That is strength. That is fighting from strength. This is the Reagan doctrine. It is the Trump doctrine. It's been the doctrine of most every president from, you know, from Johnson, the two Kennedy is to project a position of strength. We've seen that deteriorated here in recent years, we've seen a more isolationist mint, which is why Eisenhower actually ran, by the way, over analyzed statements in one who was moving, they were moving away taft, the Democrat was actually wanting to move to an isolationist advance. And again, in Eisenhower's true form, said there had to be a balance. He saw this coming. But what he said later on, he said, but the military our military organization bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors and peace time or indeed by the fighting men of World War II or Korea. This is what we talk about earlier about how the military has changed to what we see as the more modern military of today from what he knew before World War II where we were not ready for war. We were not ready to engage Japan or Germany. We had to ramp up that system very quickly. And that is exactly what happened during World War
The Doug Collins Podcast
"eisenhower" Discussed on The Doug Collins Podcast
"Let's move on to the second thing that I say, and I'm gonna touch on this briefly simply because it's interesting to me that he and Washington both touched on that. And that is the moral and religious people. He said throughout American adventure and free government are basic purposes, have been to keep the peace. And then he goes on to say, to strive for less would be unworthy of a free and religious people. Any failure, traceable to arrogance or our lack of comprehension or readiness to sacrifice would inflict upon us. Grievous hurt at both home and abroad. And he goes on to say that in the next paragraph of the speech, he talks about that the powers that are the direct attacking, these ideas of freedom, or is he put it atheistic in character, they have a hostile, he said, we face a hostile ideologue, ideology, global in scope, atheistic in character, ruthless and response, and insidious in method. We're seeing that still to this day with socialist and communist, the totalitarian dictatorships in the world. In which divorce from morality, religious principles we see, what Eisenhower's talking about Juan because he saw it up close and personal. This is I think he's coming from his own personal experiences in World War II, seeing Korea and working to get us out of Korea. He saw the pain of war. He saw what these ideologies from moral and religious responsibility can do in a world and he wanted to have a balance again and he wanted that balance to be based on the principles that we have in a moral conviction to do what is right in the world. Number three though is really interesting and I want you to pay attention to what I'm most like here. Because I want you to listen the way he says it, I want you to understand and hear it and then we'll talk about it. He says, crisis, there will continue to be. In meeting them where the foreigner domestic, great or small, there is a recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to current all current difficulties. A huge increase in newer illness artifacts, development of unrealistic programs to cure every eel in agriculture, a dramatic expansion in basic applied and applied research. In many other possibilities, each possibly protecting or promising in itself may be suggesting as the only way the road in which we travel. But each proposal must be weighed in line of broader consideration, the need to maintain balance and the among the national programs, balance between private and public economy, balance between the calls and hope for advantage, balance between the clearly necessarily and the comfortable desire, balance between our essential requirements of the nation and the duties impose by the nation upon the individual. Balance between the action of the moment and national welfare for the future. Good judgment 6 balance and progress, lack of it eventually finds imbalance and frustration. Has there ever been a more potent comment came almost 60 years ago now over 60 years ago now from Eisenhower farewell address in which he addressed this role that you can't look for government all the time to provide the miraculous solutions. Now put this in perspective of where he was. He's coming out of a time of just immense technological change and we're going to talk about that in a minute. He talked about he came from, you know, really which in his lifetime he had come from seeing no one fly to now we had bombers that could literally fly around the world. We have seen transportation system encouraged. We saw television and come in. We saw radio and other things develop and grow in all during his time. He saw this all happening. And, you know, cures in medicine. And others that he would have on the battlefield. And the interesting thing was is he was seeing an American. He was seeing people become dependent on all of a sudden government providing this miraculous solution to the day's problems. Also, we talk about here, the nuclear device. And was used in World War II. I think all of these package together really played into his system, but he also said they were needed to be a balance. And that last line, can you think of a matter interesting a more aligned judgment than over the past two and a half years here with all going on three years now with our COVID issue, in which we all look for the magical cure of the magical solution, everything will be fine. And instead, they look to government we gave a power, we gave it authority to government. We accepted money from the government. There's all these things in the balance has been thrown off and that balance now that we see thrown off in these days. The balance of the last two plus years of imbalance of government overreach government authority whether it be mass, whether it be isolation, whether it be closing down businesses, all of this is a problem when you look in line of what Eisenhower said, Eisenhower said they had to be balanced and he had the balance between cost and bodies between the whole four advantage, the balance between national programs and the balance between private and public economies, these all had to be taken in to account. So what he was saying was there's no miraculous solutions here. He said there are solutions. It can't sleep miraculous, but they have to be put in proper sediment. When you deal with the government, the government will suck every life away from everything else if it is allowed to dominate in a certain discussion. And this is where I think he was going. I think this is what he was.
The Doug Collins Podcast
"eisenhower" Discussed on The Doug Collins Podcast
"Let's move on to the second thing that I say, and I'm gonna touch on this briefly simply because it's interesting to me that he and Washington both touched on that. And that is the moral and religious people. He said throughout American adventure and free government are basic purposes, have been to keep the peace. And then he goes on to say, to strive for less would be unworthy of a free and religious people. Any failure, traceable to arrogance or our lack of comprehension or readiness to sacrifice would inflict upon us. Grievous hurt at both home and abroad. And he goes on to say that in the next paragraph of the speech, he talks about that the powers that are the direct attacking, these ideas of freedom, or is he put it atheistic in character, they have a hostile, he said, we face a hostile ideologue, ideology, global in scope, atheistic in character, ruthless and response, and insidious in method. We're seeing that still to this day with socialist and communist, the totalitarian dictatorships in the world. In which divorce from morality, religious principles we see, what Eisenhower's talking about Juan because he saw it up close and personal. This is I think he's coming from his own personal experiences in World War II, seeing Korea and working to get us out of Korea. He saw the pain of war. He saw what these ideologies from moral and religious responsibility can do in a world and he wanted to have a balance again and he wanted that balance to be based on the principles that we have in a moral conviction to do what is right in the
The Doug Collins Podcast
President Eisenhower on 'The Moral and Religious People'
"Let's move on to the second thing that I say, and I'm gonna touch on this briefly simply because it's interesting to me that he and Washington both touched on that. And that is the moral and religious people. He said throughout American adventure and free government are basic purposes, have been to keep the peace. And then he goes on to say, to strive for less would be unworthy of a free and religious people. Any failure, traceable to arrogance or our lack of comprehension or readiness to sacrifice would inflict upon us. Grievous hurt at both home and abroad. And he goes on to say that in the next paragraph of the speech, he talks about that the powers that are the direct attacking, these ideas of freedom, or is he put it atheistic in character, they have a hostile, he said, we face a hostile ideologue, ideology, global in scope, atheistic in character, ruthless and response, and insidious in method. We're seeing that still to this day with socialist and communist, the totalitarian dictatorships in the world. In which divorce from morality, religious principles we see, what Eisenhower's talking about Juan because he saw it up close and personal. This is I think he's coming from his own personal experiences in World War II, seeing Korea and working to get us out of Korea. He saw the pain of war. He saw what these ideologies from moral and religious responsibility can do in a world and he wanted to have a balance again and he wanted that balance to be based on the principles that we have in a moral conviction to do what is right in the
The Doug Collins Podcast
"eisenhower" Discussed on The Doug Collins Podcast
"Now, it's interesting that that was the very first president he was concerned about where we were in the world. He was concerned about our sort of collective American conscience, if he would. And he was concerned about the workings of government as a force in the lives of everyday folks. I mean, he was a business person. He was a military leader. He was a politician from the fact that he served in these political roles and his president, but he was the end of the day. He was very concerned about how government interacted with the liberties and freedoms of the people in America. This then almost now, to transition from that one, which I think gave, again, the interesting correlation to where we are today into the discussion that we're going to have today on part two of these lessons from the past. And that is the final speech if you would, our final presidential address by Dwight Eisenhower. Eisenhower, of course, was the 34th president of the United States. He served from 53 to 61. Sort of the capstone of his career, you know, most do knowing his president, but most know him again as he is being the supreme ally commander in Europe at the end of World War II and leading the offensive of all of our allies against the axis forces and Hitler and Nazi Germany. These all playing together for this became his final speech and there's a lot written about Eisenhower and I would encourage you just to the wood of Washington. If you want to know more about the man themselves, you want to know about how they grow up how they came about, I would encourage you to read their several books out there to go read about them because they're fascinating in their where they came from and how they got there. In fact, it's a really interesting correlation between sort of three presidents in a row and this is an extra for you podcast listeners today. For listening, you know, if you look at the middle of the century in the United States during the came out of the FDR presidency coming out of the great depression moving into World War II, you had a person who was in essence grown for politics. He was groomed in many ways and his family from his cousin to everybody to be a politician to be a leader of governor or president. That's what FDR Franklin Roosevelt was sort of groomed to be. And then you have the one who became president one of the biographies of his accidental president. Harry Truman was one who was not groomed. He came from very humble backgrounds. He came from a very working class middle of the country background and Missouri to know to the presidency. And took those took that office very seriously because of where he came from and in the desire to serve the country. And then you transition to another midwesterner in Eisenhower. So in the middle of our time frame there in which we went through The Great Depression World War II into what began the use of the atomic bomb, the use of the beginning of the Cold War. And then the space race toward the end of Eisenhower's term that was beginning, again, this buildup of nuclear power, this buildup of military power through Eisenhower's administration and even the beginnings of what we say we see the battle of Korea. And then we see the start of what would be known is from our perspective later in Eisenhower's administration owning the candidates and then Johnson's is the Vietnam War. Interesting that these are the ones that the country had chosen to lead us at this time. So as we look at this, just to think about, you know, you know, where Eisenhower really came from was very a large family mostly. He was Pennsylvania Dutch when he there, they raised and Abilene Kansas. He did go to West Point during World War I. He served he was denied a request to serve in Europe and said he commanded a unit that trained tank battalions, he continued. He was one of the few. Now this is something you might be something you didn't know. Up until World War II. The professional military as we know it was very different than how we see it today in which you have a larger group making careers and our military starting and going through 20, 25, 30 years making military. Their main career and a lot. Very few comparatively in our military did that from World War I to World War II. In fact, even before World War I, a lot of our army was raised at the time. You had certain individuals smaller group of cadre if you would, who raised up and kept the military machinery as it was like going, but as far as a mass infusion of troops, we didn't, that was not something that was there for permanency. In the time you had the National Guard, you had it in other areas, but as far as the military grouping as we know it today, like I serve in today, is not what was prevalent before World War II..
The Doug Collins Podcast
A Look Back at the Life of Dwight Eisenhower
"Of course, was the 34th president of the United States. He served from 53 to 61. Sort of the capstone of his career, you know, most do knowing his president, but most know him again as he is being the supreme ally commander in Europe at the end of World War II and leading the offensive of all of our allies against the axis forces and Hitler and Nazi Germany. These all playing together for this became his final speech and there's a lot written about Eisenhower and I would encourage you just to the wood of Washington. If you want to know more about the man themselves, you want to know about how they grow up how they came about, I would encourage you to read their several books out there to go read about them because they're fascinating in their where they came from and how they got there. In fact, it's a really interesting correlation between sort of three presidents in a row and this is an extra for you podcast listeners today. For listening, you know, if you look at the middle of the century in the United States during the came out of the FDR presidency coming out of the great depression moving into World War II, you had a person who was in essence grown for politics. He was groomed in many ways and his family from his cousin to everybody to be a politician to be a leader of governor or president. That's what FDR Franklin Roosevelt was sort of groomed to be. And then you have the one who became president one of the biographies of his accidental president. Harry Truman was one who was not groomed. He came from very humble backgrounds. He came from a very working class middle of the country background and Missouri to know to the presidency. And took those took that office very seriously because of where he came from and in the desire to serve the country. And then you transition to another midwesterner in Eisenhower. So in the middle of our time frame there in which we went through The Great Depression World War II into what began the use of the atomic bomb, the use of the beginning of the Cold War. And then the space race toward the end of Eisenhower's term that was beginning, again, this buildup of nuclear power, this buildup of military power through Eisenhower's administration and even the beginnings of what we say we see the battle of Korea. And then we see the start of what would be known is from our perspective later in Eisenhower's administration owning the candidates and then Johnson's is the Vietnam War.
The Doug Collins Podcast
How George Washington Laid the Moral Foundation of America
"We're back for part two of this lessons from the past and what we're doing is taking two of our presidents and looking at their final speeches. And when I looked at these two speeches, they really, I think applicable in a lot of ways for today. Last podcast we dealt with George Washington, the founder of our country, you know, the one who sort of set the ideal if you would for the presidency. It was his setting of two terms that kept two terms as the president for many, many years. It was his ideal of giving up power and from a military perspective and starting that roll back over to civilians in our Congress and the constitutional conventions and making that all happen. He laid out a lot of things and it was that humility, it was that looking ahead. It was the warnings that he had about again entanglements, a foreign entanglement, but also domestic entanglements and the rise of what he was concerned of a partisanship and a partisan nature of even what he saw in politics in the early days of our country. And he laid out a foundation saying that if number one is, as we said, last time that if he put America first, if we put our put our American ideals together, no matter where we came from or what we were doing, this would provide the foundation for our country going forward and it would be the very foundation of not only our morality and spirituality, which Washington talked about. But also that moral underpinning of a country.
The Doug Collins Podcast
The Most Broken and Least Reported Aspect of Washington, DC
The Doug Collins Podcast
"eisenhower" Discussed on The Doug Collins Podcast
"Very real. The second part of this quote though actually in talking about these two leaders, Washington Eisenhower also is very forthright as well. And he says, principles, though, without pragmatism, are often powerless. Now this is also something I say these days. In fact, I see this one probably is more than I'm seeing on to just get stuff done and this is saying here are my principles and I will never be never compromised never look at ways to work within inside my principles to get anything done. In other words, everything has to be perfect. And we've developed into a society today, and there's many on both sides of the aisle and radio and podcast and TV and in the political role they say, if it's not exactly what I want, then it is wrong, or it is evil, or we attach something to it. That is not what true working as a country together actually is. And it's something that I think we can actually need to discuss when you understand that you have to have principles. You have to have understanding of who you are as a conservative. From our perspective and conservative or liberal would have their understanding of what their principles are so that they come back to those principles, they don't negotiate those principles in the sense, but they find ways that a solution can work within the principles or they can turn it down. Having principles doesn't mean that you don't vote for something, having principles doesn't mean that you can't agree to anything. If it's not a 100% right, but what it does mean is you're not going to give away what is core and inherent belief into yourself. And when you look at presidents such as Eisenhower in Washington, you begin to see this played out in a big way. The problem today, we see, and I think we're going to learn hopefully from these two speeches. Is that there is no longer a willingness to solve big problems. You just don't do it. I mean, we're in Washington. They say, well, I was there. For over 8 years in the state House, you just don't see big problems being solved. You see smaller issues being done, budgets getting done, smaller issues being taken up. But when it comes to big issues of the economy, a budgeting of spending of criminal justice reform of trade. All these things, they get left on the silence. Because there is this problem that I just said of that we have too many who are willing to only have their way and not be willing to find a way to get something done. So I want to start with that sort of introduction and we're going to spend a few minutes here on Washington's farewell address from 1796. And there's several things that I think was we look at this that's just going to come out that goes into this idea that I want to see as America getting back to getting things done. It means not everybody will get everything they want. But you got to be willing to stand in 5 or something to find a medium or a pragmatism if you would, they get something done. The first thing I don't want to look at and this farewell address from Washington is if you read over it and I have a copy of it here and I'm going to be reading something from it is the first thing you stuck out at me was he uses the first part of his institute to basically declare his profound sense of beauty to both a public and a private life. I think this is very important. Today, one of the very issues that I have is that many times government is being run by those who only have a public trough perspective and what I mean by that is the only work for the government. They've never worked outside of government. They probably some and I've had folks in committees and Washington where they are actually overseeing industry such as banking and have never worked in a bank. Washington would have never understood that concept. And I think today there is a change and I'm not going to say that 1796 is exactly the same as 2022, but there are some similar principles. This goes back to the principle based arguments that I do believe still operate. Number one, there should be a broad understanding of those working in government those who are elected in government to have a good public and private partnership in their own mind because they practiced in both. For Washington, he thought of the greatest honor given to be not only leading the troops in the Revolutionary War, but then to be given the honor of being the first president. He took that as a sense of beauty beyond himself. He looked at it for leaving Mount Vernon in his home and his businesses. He looked at it as something that he was out of duty to a country that he believed had given him much he believed that he owed much..
The Doug Collins Podcast
"eisenhower" Discussed on The Doug Collins Podcast
"Forward. And these two presidents that we're going to talk about over the next couple of podcasts are two that exemplify really sort of in many ways this detachment one from government, but this also perspective of coming in our country from a perspective of fighting for our country. And this is, this is something that I really want to delve into. I want you to understand that when you look at Washington and Eisenhower, you look at two similar backgrounds. In the sense of they were both soldiers when they came to the office of the presidency. Of course, George Washington led our country and our fledged and colonies at that point in the Revolutionary War against England. He saw it firsthand even before the Revolutionary War in his military service. We've talked about Washington here on this podcast before about being an entrepreneur. He was a little bit of everything and yet also possessed the leadership skills to take those experiences and lead us in a very, I think probably one of the more difficult eras in our country and that is the very founding in the very first 8 years of the country's existence dealing with the constitution. And dealing with what he had seen us come through as a country. He speaks a lot about the responsibilities of being an American. He speaks a lot about the responsibilities of our country and that we, in fact, if you want to look at it in some ways, his farewell address actually speaks to what is now commonly refined as America first, if you look at it. So it's going to be interesting to see how he breaks that down. But they also Eisenhower coming through a time in which, from very humble beginnings, backgrounds goes to West Point, comes out, most people didn't realize, but when the war actually started, the World War II actually started white Eisenhower was a colonel. And just made from lieutenant Carl colonel. And by the end of the war was a 5 star general in a matter of about 6 years, went from that rank two to 5 star general. Pretty impressive for someone who at the time was surrounded by what we'll call now, especially in the history books very well known general very huge personality generals. When you look at Patton, when you look at Macarthur, when you look at Montgomery, even of the British Army, you look at these players on this field that here was Eisenhower who was behind them and rank actually when this war started, but quickly overtook them and began the leadership of all of the NATO, the American allied forces in Europe during World War II. They both were not flashy. I think that's interesting and important to look at here. Neither one of these men, if you look at the traditional role of a politician or a person coming to power these days, even if they came from a different background such as Donald Trump, Joe Biden, Obama, bush, they all have a little bit bigger personalities. They all have a style that is more out front. So I'm going to just deliver it over longer term of a political career such as Joe Biden for Donald Trump. It was delivered over a career in business and being very much a part of the pop culture saying the new scene in our country for many decades before he ever became president. You saw that in Clinton, you saw it in Obama, you saw it in George W Bush. Going forward, this sort of a driving personality. Not what you see in George Washington or in Dwight Eisenhower. And I think that will come out as we take these speeches, we break them down and understanding. Again, why we do this is to understand our situation today. We, as I started this podcast, all about saying, there's a lot of issues out there. We talk about those on this podcast each and every week. But sometimes it's good to take a step back, look at some of the advice from the past, apply it to the day and say, where do we go forward? The last thing that I want to talk about about the two gentlemen that we have are going to look at on their final speeches are final thoughts to the nation, was that they were both very pragmatic. And I think that's important. There's going to be a term that is not used enough today. In fact, I think it's actually downplayed in our political society and our political discourse pragmatism is not something to be valued. These two who led our country through very troubled times, one started our country, the other one led us through World War II and then became president, ending Korea, getting spending a time in which the Cold War was kicking off. Both understood the troubles of their time, but understood that pragmatism or getting something done is actually a virtue and not something to be dismissed. Too many times today we're seeing in our public discourse and unfortunately we see it on both sides. Washington spoke a great deal about this when he discussed the concern and he had about partisanship and parties developing. But the concern is founded is that you will be more concerned with a belief than in the belief of the country itself. Now let me frame that again. So that if you're listening here, you can understand what I'm saying. Their concern first and foremost was what is best for the country as a whole. What is best for America? In a limited government role in a freedom of people to respond and be active in that government, what is that role and they believed it to be very pragmatic that if you take care of the union, so to speak is Washington calls it or if you take care of the whole, that the individual is taking care of as well. And this is very different than a liberal idea, which government takes care of everything, and probably, in fact, if you look at Washington's concern on public debt, you look at Eisenhower's concern on influence of the induct modern industrial defense industrial complex, you see that their concern was one in which a government in which was self control self contained and the people were allowed to flourish in that. James baker, there's a quote, you know, former Secretary of State, and I'll say this. He said, pragmatism without principles is cynicism. But principles without pragmatism are often powerless. I want you to think about that for just a second. I'm going to read it again if you're listening and whatever you're doing on LG, you'll listen to what he says here. Because it makes a lot of sense for today. Pragmatism without principles is cynicism. But principles without pragmatism is often powerless. This sums up for me this one quote led in my research as I was dealing with these two speeches is I ran across this quote really drove me to the understanding of where we are in our political discourse today in Washington D.C. and in many of the state houses. Look at what he said is a pragmatism without principles is cynicism. In other words, you were just cynical. The pragmatism of getting anything done without principles. You're willing, it takes it away from being able to find any root or grounding in what you're wanting to do. It's not really pragmatism, is forcing an agenda and you're willing to do whatever it takes to get something done. And that's being very cynical. That's saying that the world is could be bald the world could be, you know, manipulated the world could be, you know, the landscape could be turned to whatever you believe. And if your pragmatism doesn't have principles, in other words, you're getting stuff done no matter the cost without being grounded to something that gives you the reason why you do it. I have seen this happen so many times in Washington. I've seen it happen in the state level. We have people who run for office who want to serve. And at the same point, they're not grounded in a set principle. In other words, anything that they come up against, they sort of adapt at the moment. The prima in them says, let's just get something done to make everybody happy without having a set of principles. That is dangerous in our country. It's a dangerous in our world because if you're willing to do anything just to get an answer, then you have nothing that you're going to stand on when it becomes.
The Doug Collins Podcast
"eisenhower" Discussed on The Doug Collins Podcast
"Hey everybody, today I wanted to do a little bit different. We've looked back in the past. One of the things I've always wanted for this podcast is that when we talk about current events and there's plenty to talk about right now, you've got the Ukraine war going on, the Russian value is going to be Ukraine. You've got the economic crisis that is developing even further in the United States within double digit inflation. You have a monetary policy that continually is going to the opposite of what really probably needs to happen and we find that in inflation when you have a government still spending more money borrowed money and putting more money into the system and inflation is going higher. Interest rates from the fed finally started the uptick most economists will tell you that the quarter point is not enough and that there's going to have to be more, which again leads us to a concerning conversational where we headed is a nation economically and basically that is the world. Can you get inflation under control with measured steps for what's called the soft landing or can you are you going to have to take more drastic sales with my push us into a recession that may last a few months or possibly longer? The issue of our border, the issue at our border crosses and the integrity of our country, the integrity of our nation. A nation is only as strong as its borders. It's only as strong as the defense and not only this physical boundaries, but also it's intellectual boundaries what I'll call. It's also it's discussion of what do we believe in commonality as Americans. And for most we believe, you know, they come back and you look at history and if we take the time to look at history, which a lot of times we don't, is that we're a melting pot. We have a lot of varying views, things that came to make our country, but at the same time those melting pots implies just what I'm melting pot does. In other words, it comes from everyone. We make a assimilation into becoming what we know of as Americans. And this is something that I think we're struggling with right now. As we look at this, I wanted to take a time and we're going to be a two part one today and then the next episode as well will come in which we take a look at two of our former presidents. Two of our presidents in our country who led our nations in very different but also very similar times and then their last address if you would to the nation and from which they serve. The two that we're going to look at because I believe they have a lot of similarities and a lot of discussion for where we are today as a country. And that is George Washington, the very first president, and then also Dwight Eisenhower, who came to the presidency in the 50s after leading the United States in World War II. These two gentlemen, it was interestingly when I started enough for me that when I started looking at these two farewell addresses if you weren't. Some similarities started to come out. Not only in the addresses, which we're going to get to and I'm going to break those down because especially George Washington Eisenhower have a lot to say that really I think effect where we're at today. It affects us in the idea of who we are as a country where we're becoming and really gave warnings one at the beginning of our nation. The other one just a little over 70 years ago, 60 years ago in which the country is dealing with issues that they warned about that we're now having to face head on. And I think this is a great time for us. I'm a big believer that history is there for us to learn from. And that you can't overplay history or downplay history without suffering the consequences for it. You can't make it more than it is and you can't diminish it and right now we have a culture that seems to be wanting to hide our history, especially if they don't like to deal with it. Instead of examining it, learning from it and growing from it. The only way you grow forward, and the only way a country grows for us to understand where it came from, how it got there, what it did right, what it did wrong, and then move forward..
Higher Journeys with Alexis Brooks
"eisenhower" Discussed on Higher Journeys with Alexis Brooks
"Like that silly. You profess to be close to nature. What's wrong with you. This is part of the time where y'all if we don't wake up. I like to say y'all y'all we don't wake up to these nuance shore but powerful things. Right in our mets. You're gonna miss the boat the living things they have consciousness. They haven't a they grow they sprout. They develop in their intelligence. They get composted they plant seeds in. I mean if anything has a strong consciousness to communicate with way more than unconscious. Humans is plants and animals animals. They they have a consciousness and just like herbs have different properties flower. Essences have different robert ory frequencies so i remember working plant nurseries. I was totally communicating with the different personalities of these different was just incredible. I work. I've ever done island working with plants and i knew there was a reason why we can see all this is coming out now that you know will again. I became a house plant collector over the summer. I over the winter. Rather because i was so bummed about you know putting the garden outside when dormancy. I'm like what am i going to do. And i went from zero to. I think about seventy five house. Plants like big anyway is such a pure energy to live around and it actually cure anxiety and department. I void drugs. Is i do take herbs and supplements but Yeah when is were here on plans i. I felt so charged all barrett big. It's plant therapy. Yeah okay. it's related and by the way this'll be a good plug. i do. A show called conscious commentary in the garden. It's seasonal series and we're gonna be starting in a couple weeks in my garden. Do you get to see all the new stuff going on. Then we will be talking about these things. These are the areas that we're going to be focusing more on but let's stick with the earth. Let's stick with the elements and let's use this as a segue to talk about the schuman residents. Do you follow this. Very very elusive. But i think revealing sort of that we get to look at to see what she's would mother would guy is doing in terms of frequency lately. It's been wacky still say. Oh sorry go ahead. Oh i wouldn't say like. I'm checking every day. I have enough friends or people that send me stuff right to see it catches my eye and i'm like okay. I mean i feel it just in my own being and no joe. It's got it's spiking times in its time where it also dips and it has to do with the electromagnetic frequencies and we're electromagnetic beings consciousness and the expansion of our conscious. A lot. To of do this ascension window period has lot to do with how the planet is shifting and changing an activating in certain ways. That's why feel an in in my title earned my description of my talk. We can nullify the mark of the beast or whatever this darker darker agenda is because of all these other factors going. On the presence of the ether the corrections with venus transits that has to do with the very same pentagram that in its inversion does represent that mark..
Higher Journeys with Alexis Brooks
"eisenhower" Discussed on Higher Journeys with Alexis Brooks
"All right everyone. We are back. And i'm here with laura eisenhower and i'd just i feel like this is my sister by the way we're just i love when the connections happen. Naturally when they don't you can feel it too. Don't fake it. we're not faking it. We'll just talk would happening girlfriends chat right now right laura. It's really great to talk to you. Oh with you yeah love it. Well we're going to get into more. We've been talking about some heavy stuff but you know there's always room to smile until laugh and i remind myself to remind myself right during these crazy times. You know one day. I may be crying the next i may i remind myself. There's plenty to smile about and laugh and be silly and you can be silly with your chickens. I found out something about laura. She got chickens you now. I'm the chicken lady. I'm in chicken lady. I love that lady me too. I have a white persian. Oh name clover pies. That's digress but this is important right. it's very important there. I will say to segue back to our conversation. I think now more than ever those that get it things as simple as being out in nature and really communing with nature. Not just i don't mean a bunch of bunk. I mean getting out in really really bonding with this force and our animal companions there. Do you know that. I noticed when this whole thing came down with covid back in march animal seem to be a lot more animated. I don't know somebody said oh. It's because everyone's home and they're happy. No something else is going on. What do you think. Well i mean. We are in a ascension window periods stellar activation cycle and with the presence of ether her energies being more available. Which is our ability.
Higher Journeys with Alexis Brooks
"eisenhower" Discussed on Higher Journeys with Alexis Brooks
"Alexis perks here from higher journeys so glad that you decided to join me today for what i am calling a special episode of higher journeys. Laura eisenhower is a name that i'm sure many of you in the audience know. She has been quite outspoken for quite a few years now on a whole host of topics topics that we typically talk about here on higher journeys. This is the first time we've had Laura on this show and it's been kind of a long time in the making. I remember seeing laura out at contact in the desert of several years ago. now and We had tried to come together to do an on camera. Weren't able to do it but some years later here. We are again and guess what she is going to be talking about among other things incredible lecture that is slated for this year's first virtual contact in the desert of which yours truly is also a part of a later this month today. We're going to be touching on some of the themes that she'll be lecturing about that. Include timeline wars soul alchemy and claiming victory over dark horses now. I know that this is a heavy subject as it should be but if anyone can break down how how they see all these things playing out. Including i'm particularly interested in the whole idea of the bifurcation of timelines. It's laura eisenhower. So we're going to get right to it. And i know you're gonna love what we have to talk about. So why don't we get to the show with our special guest. Laura eisenhower enjoyed well. Everyone all i can say it's about time it is about time i've had this lovely woman on my show. Eisenhower and i have brushed elbows. I think a few times at events over the years but she has never been on the show. And i'm just so absolutely thrilled and delighted to have her and as you can imagine prior to hit the record button we were. Yep yep yep and away. And i said you know what laura was his. Keep this conversation going yes. It was pretty deep and it was pretty deep staff going on right right. Laura welcome by the way. Welcome to hire journeys officially thank with you. Well it's like a visit. And the journey is i. Call my my group journey years. I know that they're they're thrilled to have you so we're going to jump right in because there's a lot of territory to cover and you have been digging your heels into so many areas that we call metaphysics that we call fringe all of these areas that have become even more intensified certainly in the last Fourteen fifteen months so I want to start with Some of the things that you're going to be talking about the upcoming first annual not first annual first virtual contact in the desert which i'll be Joining his well one of the lectures. You're going to be doing Is about timeline. Wars and claiming victory over dark agendas and want to just give the punch list here and see if we can start to tackle some of these areas because they're all they all have a lot of moving parts you're going to be addressing soul alchemy the mark of the beast time. What i'm calling timeline splits. What you call the bifurcation time-line wars and the phantom earth and i have a feeling we're all connected so i want to start. I wanna dig our heels immediately and to. I'm so thrilled but fascinated with this idea of timeline. Timelines in general and timelines splits and it seems like they've always been sort of moving ebbing and flowing in but lately it seems like we're being whipped from one or the other. Let's dig into that laura right off the bat..
103.5 KISS FM
"eisenhower" Discussed on 103.5 KISS FM
"Eisenhower of the day and mine also slow into the burn. Actually, Homestore's Lewis prices of the season find sofas, dining sets, mattresses and more. Starting his Lewis 1 99, plus, save up to $1000 off your purchase or get 0% interest for six years at Ashley Home Store. This is home. That's traffic. I'm Bart. Sure, I'm one of +35 kids at them I heart radio music you should know featuring ash with Finn Ius till forever falls apart. Oh, on our own dreaming in a world that we both know is out a lot of control but didn't live hits the fan. We're not along because you've got me and you know That I've got you when I know if the tide takes California. I'm so glad I got to hold you on If sky falls from heaven above last time, fine, leaving living fall line. You mind? I spent last time giving you my hardest father. So forever falls apart. So this is it? That's how we don't know. I guess there's nothing more romantic than die in with your friends and I'm not song me. For myself. I wouldn't want to spend a minute love in anybody else because you've got me, you know. Oh, God, no, no, it's a giant X California. I'm so glad I got hold of this guy. Please. Do you mind if I spent time giving you my heart? And you're positive way kills up to watch strong. Create your own ash Custom station with I heart radio download before Listen.
Anything But Idle
"eisenhower" Discussed on Anything But Idle
"Podcast as well as he joins us each week on productivity casts and so welcome to anything but idle art. Hey guys how're you doing. Good doing really well doing really well. And so today. In honor of president's day i thought we would talk a little bit about eisenhower. That is not just the president but the matrix Well known in the personal productivity space as the eisenhower matrix. And so i thought we would have a little discussion in terms of what you know about the eisenhower matrix and what we can do. Utilizing the eisenhower matrix in our own productive lives. Who wants to walk us through the eisenhower matrix art. Go for thank. You gustav you. I thought you were ready to decide. It was urgent but not important for you to do it. So i can. Okay is in harare. Matrix is actually very straightforward. it's literally a quadrant. If you happen to be watching this online you'll see the image. If not you can just google it because it lays its four cubes quadrant and it goes important not important top and bottom urgent. Not urgent left to right and really. It's a matter of how it breaks out as to helping you determine when to act on things and what to do with them. Some people take it and apply extra to that but the the representation that we've got up here right now is if it's urgent and important you do it now. Which kind of makes sense if it's not urgent but it is important. You need to pick a time that you're going to do it. That means that you're committing to actually doing it if it is urgent but not important and this is where i struggle with a little bit. You delegate it who can do it for you. If you have that as an option you can do that. And if it's not urgent and not important you should delete it or eliminated. Wow i don't know if you're necessarily able to do that no cases as well..