Skip to content

Central View

Central View published on



“Central View,” by William Hamilton, J.D., Ph.D.

Thought control and the MSM

Ever wonder what some of TV’s on-air personalities talk about among themselves when they think they are not on the air? James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas is in the process of making public over 100 hours of audio “out-takes” from CNN. But you won’t have to listen to all 119 hours of audio to determine if CNN is a fair and balanced news source or not. Hint: Not.

But CNN is not the only member of the myth-stream media (MSM) making news. Recently, MSNBC’s Mika Brezezinski, the co-host of MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” said, “[Trump] is trying to undermine the media and trying to make up his own facts. And it could be that while unemployment and the economy worsens, he could have undermined the messaging so much that he can actually control exactly what people think. And that, that is our job.” [Boldface mine.]

Ms. Brezezinski’s conception of the role of the media brings to mind the “Ministry of Truth,” as conceived by George Orwell in his classic novel “1984.” For those who never read “1984,” or lost their copy of Cliff’s Notes or Spark Notes, the novel’s hero, Winston, labors in the Ministry of Truth re-writing history to make history politically correct. Although published in 1949, “1984” predicted the rise of the Politically Correct (PC) movement in this country in the 1960s.

In “1984,” The Ministry of Truth is busily engaged in creating a language known as “Newspeak.” Certain words deemed politically incorrect are deleted from the “Newspeak” dictionary. The definitions of other words are changed to be more politically correct. For example: “Freedom,” in the sense of freedom-of-thought is banned. But “free,” as in a “free coupon” for groceries, is okay.

But Orwell’s greatest contribution to today’s political situation is “Doublethink,” which means the ability of keeping two totally contradictory thoughts in mind at the same time and being wholly accepting of both of them. For example: Virtually all college faculty and staff say they support “free speech.” But if students invite a conservative speaker on campus, the conservative speaker is either banned from speaking at all or shouted down by liberal faculty, staff, and students. In urban areas, we are seeing riots in opposition to the Trump Administration’s supposed “totalitarianism.” But the rioters are using violence reminiscent of Hitler’s Brown Shirts. Another classic example of “Doublethink.”

The deplorable, dumbed-down state of public education in certain urban areas brings to mind Aldous Huxley’s “Brave New World,” published in 1932. The novel begins at the state-run hatchery where human embryos are injected with chemicals designed to produce humans in five classes in descending order of mental and physical abilities: Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta, and Epsilon. The Alphas are programmed to be leaders. Epsilons are programmed to be morons. None of the classes are capable of forming rebellious thoughts.

If, at this point, your mind reflects back on Ms. Brzezinski’s idea that the role of today’s media is “to tell you exactly what to think”, you might want to revisit “1984,” “Brave New World,” and, while you are at it, Orwell’s “Animal Farm” (1945). Although British, both Huxley and Orwell were amazingly prescient about what is happening in today’s America.

Nationally syndicated columnist, William Hamilton, is a laureate of the Oklahoma Journalism Hall of Fame, the Nebraska Aviation Hall of Fame, the Colorado Aviation Hall of Fame, the Oklahoma University Army ROTC Wall of Fame, and is a recipient of the University of Nebraska 2015 Alumni Achievement Award. He was educated at the University of Oklahoma, the George Washington University, the U.S Naval War College, the University of Nebraska, and Harvard University.


©2017. William Hamilton.




RTPP News: The Trump Revolution Begins. [President Trump + 11 days and counting]

RTPP News: The Trump Revolution Begins. [President Trump + 11 days and counting] published on

RTPP News: The Trump Revolution Begins. [President Trump + 11 days and counting]

In this edition of RTPP news:

  1. Donald J. Trump, the 45th President of the United States, First Inaugural Address and “Oath of Allegiance to All Americans.”
  2. RTPP February 2 meeting: The Trump Revolution Begins.
  3. Calendar of Patriotic and “Deplorable” Events.
  4. Our Active Patriot Activists.
  5. Prayers for our Patriots Facing Personal Challenges.
  6. Take Action.
  7. Truth in Textbooks. Winning the Next Generation.
  8. Citizens for Safety and Emergency Preparedness (CSEP)
  9. Winning the “Culture War” by Using Our “2nd Vote.”
  10. Great Videos, Articles and Memes.
  11. Tea Party Patriots principles.
  12. Redlands Tea Party Patriots online.
  13. Lost and Found.

Click here for the newsletter.

Can California Vote to Leave the Union

Can California Vote to Leave the Union published on

🐺 Can California Vote to Leave the Union   YES  🐒🐒      Can California Leave the Union   NO 🐮


How California Can Legally Secede from the Union

Posted by Louis Marinelli March 03, 2016 4:37 PM

As we travel up and down California into coastal and inland communities alike, people show us tremendous support for the cause of California independence from the United States. Admittedly, there are those who just as passionately reject our vision for California’s future and wish to remain in the Union. One thing both these sides have in common is the notion that a state cannot legally secede from the Union and therefore the campaign is “the ultimate pipe dream” in the eyes of our supporters, and a “waste of time” for our critics. Although the path to seceding from the Union is a long and difficult journey, there are multiple legal paths for this campaign to succeed.

In 1869, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Texas v. White that states cannot unilaterally secede from the Union, not that it could not be done altogether. Indeed, there is no specific ban on state secession in the U.S. Constitution, even though that document does discuss states in Article IV:

“New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.”

Clearly missing from that paragraph is something to the effect of, “nor shall any State be expelled, or be permitted to withdraw from this Union.” What we have instead is the intent of the founders to allow Congress to handle the matters of statehood which explains why in Texas v. White the Supreme Court put the matter of state secession into their hands.

“When Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States.”

Yes California highlights this last part because it is often left out of the discussion. Indeed, California cannot unilaterally declare itself independent of the United States even though the original 13 colonies unilaterally declared their independence from England. Instead, this highlighted clause outlines several paths to legal and peaceful secession but before we get to that, it will be necessary for Californians to weigh in on the matter, which is what Yes California’s 2020 independence referendum is about. If there is no mandate from the people to secede, there is no reason for us to embark on this long and difficult legal journey to achieve that goal. So, an independence referendum on the ballot goes first.

Now let’s say that the independence referendum succeeds and a clear majority of Californians declare their support for establishing the country of California independent of the United States. In that case, the journey begins.

A member of the California federal delegation to Washington would propose an Amendment to the U.S. Constitution allowing the State of California to withdraw from the Union. The Amendment would have to be approved by 2/3 of the House of Representatives and 2/3 of the Senate. If the Amendment passed it would be sent to the fifty state legislatures to be considered (to satisfy the “consent of the states” requirement in Texas v. White). It would need to be accepted by at least 38 of the 50 state legislatures to be adopted.

California could call for a convention of the states (which is currently being organized to tackle other constitutional amendments as we speak) and the Amendment granting California its independence would have to be approved by 2/3 of the delegates to this convention. If it passed, the Amendment would be sent to the fifty state legislatures to be considered and 38 of the 50 states would have to approve the measure in order for it to be adopted.
These are the two possible paths for California’s legal secession from the Union and Yes California is dedicated to pursuing one or both of them in order to achieve the goal of establishing the country of California. Granted, the process of getting a constitutional amendment passed and ratified is a difficult and long one but that is why our campaign has started now. We need to educate Californians and Americans alike on why California independence will not only be for the benefit of the people of California, but just as importantly, that it will be for the benefit of this whole country.