Remember Wounded Knee and Little Big Horn

December 18, 2015 Leave a comment

Just a short history lesson…

December 29, 2015 marks the 125th Anniversary of the murder of 297 Sioux Indians at Wounded Knee Creek on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota. These 297 people, in their winter camp, were murdered by federal agents and members of the 7th Cavalry who had come to confiscate their firearms for their own safety and protection.

The slaughter began after the majority of the Sioux had peacefully turned in their firearms. The Calvary began shooting, and managed to wipe out the entire camp. Over 200 of the 297 victims were women and children. About 40 members of the 7th Cavalry were killed, but over half of them were victims of fratricide (“friendly fire”) from the Hotchkiss guns of their overzealous comrades-in-arms.

Twenty members of the 7th Cavalry’s death squad, were deemed National Heroes and were awarded the Medal of Honor for their acts of [cowardice] heroism.

We hear very little of Wounded Knee today. It is usually not mentioned in our history classes or books. What little that does exist about Wounded Knee is normally a sanitized Official Government Explanation. And there are several historically inaccurate depictions of the events leading up to the massacre, which appear in movie scripts and are not the least bit representative of the actual events that took place that day.

Wounded Knee was among the first federally backed gun confiscation attempts in United States history. It ended in the senseless murder of 297 people.

Before you jump on the emotionally charged bandwagon for gun-control, take a moment to reflect on the real purpose of the Second Amendment: the right of the people to take up arms in defense of themselves, their families, and property in the face of invading armies or an oppressive government.

The argument that the Second Amendment only applies to hunting and target shooting is asinine. When the United States Constitution was drafted, hunting was an everyday chore carried out by men and women to put meat on the table each night, and target shooting was an unheard of concept. Musket balls were a precious commodity and were certainly not wasted on target shooting. The Second Amendment was written by people who fled oppressive and tyrannical regimes in Europe, and it refers to the right of American citizens to be armed for defensive purposes, should such tyranny arise in the United States.

As time goes forward, the average citizen in the United States continually lose little chunks of personal freedom or liberty. Far too often, unjust gun control bills were passed and signed into law under the guise of for your safety or for protection. The Patriot Act signed into law by G.W. Bush, was expanded and continues under Barack Obama. It is just one of many examples of American citizens being stripped of their rights and privacy for their personal safety.

Since the recent occurences of mass shootings in Paris, France and San Bernandino, California, the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is on the table again, and will, most likely be attacked to facilitate the path for the removal of our firearms, all in the name of our safety.

No matter how often and how vociferous we may support the 2nd Amendment, you can rest assured that the Left will equally continue their often and vociferous attacks our your God given right to protect yourself, your family and your property.

Before any American citizen blindly accepts whatever new firearms legislation that is about to be doled out, they should stop and think about something for just one minute…

Evil exists in our world.

It always has and it always will.

Throughout history evil people have committed evil acts. In the Bible one of the first stories is that of Cain killing his brother Abel. We can not legislate evil into extinction. Good people will abide by the law, and the criminal element will always find a way around it. No amount of “gun control” laws will thwart the desire of evil people wanting to commit evil deeds. If they don’t do it with a gun, they will find other weapons with which to commit their crimes.

Evil exists all around us, but looking back at the historical record of the past 200 years, across the globe, where is evil and malevolence most often found?

In the hands of those with the most power: governments. Your elected officials. The people YOU and I voted for…

…think about that a few minutes and let it sink in.

That greatest human tragedies on record and the largest loss of innocent human life can be attributed to governments.

Who do the governments always target?

Scapegoats and enemies within their own borders… but only after they have been disarmed to the point where they are no longer a threat and able to defend themselves.

Ask any Native American, and they will tell you it was inferior technology and lack of arms that contributed to their demise. Ask any Armenian why it was so easy for the Turks to exterminate millions of them, and they will answer We were disarmed before it happened.

Ask any Jew what Hitlers first step was, prior to the mass murders of Jews in the Holocaust: confiscation of firearms from the people.

Ask countless other millions who were slaughtered by the Bolsheviks, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, and the plethora of tyrants who wantonly killed their victims, and their voices will hauntingly echo back from the abyss: they disarmed us.

Wounded Knee is the prime example of why the Second Amendment exists, and why we should vehemently resist any attempts to infringe on our Rights to Bear Arms. Without the Second Amendment we will be totally stripped of any ability to defend ourselves and our families.

If it comes down to the 2nd Amendment being taken away from us, rest assured: We The People of These United States will NOT comply. We WILL revolt.

History has a way of repeating itself…

We had a little party in Boston that culminated in the Revolution.

We are making a statement again, in the same vein as our Declaration:

“That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.–Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.”

The infringement of the 2nd Amendment is not a “light and transient” cause. It will be the cause of the next revolution.

Injustice and violence will continue to rear its ugly head in any society, and each time it does, it needs to be decapitated in short order. Wisdom tells us not to deny or ignore history. Praying about it won’t make it go away. Sticking our heads in the sand will not make it disappear. Only when we rise up and carry the burden of the “heavy lifting” of fighting will we beat back our oppressors.

For those who are want to lick the boots of their oppressors, they must be reminded that their necks will also be held down… by the other boot.

History will repeat itself if we do nothing. If voting the miscreants out of office isn’t the solution, then the only other course of action we have is to follow the recent example of the Egyptians: oust the bastards!

The entitlement “low information” voters will also vote against you…

…you can’t fix stupid. You can only fight against them.

They outnumber you. You can’t out-vote them. When they come for your 2nd Amendment, you can only stand and fight.

No amount of praying will shield you. God told Joshua that he gave them the city of Jericho: it was “in their hands.” All they had to do is do the heavy lifting of fighting the war.

The gun control minions will read this and will post their radical comments only to be moderated into oblivion, because I do not run a democracy on my blog. I do not run for election. I am dictatorial. Get used to it.

(Edited from John Magda

Categories: Uncategorized

20 Questions Conservatives Would Love To See Asked At The Next Democrat Debate

November 7, 2015 Leave a comment

1) Hillary Clinton, your husband has had numerous affairs, has had sex with an intern and he settled a sexual harassment case with Paula Jones. Incidentally, there are far worse accusations than that against him that haven’t been proven. So, isn’t it fair to say that your husband is part of the war on women?

2) Hillary Clinton, in the first debate, you said you were proud to have drug companies and health insurance companies as your enemies. However, your campaign and the Clinton Foundation have received millions of dollars from both industries. Will you be giving that money back?

3) Hillary Clinton, in Bob Woodward’s book, The Choice, he noted that you communed with former First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt and Indian leader Mahatma Gandhi from beyond the grave. Your husband also confirmed in a 2012 speech that you used to commune with Eleanor Roosevelt; so this isn’t something that you can credibly deny. Can you explain why you did that and what you believe you learned from talking with the dead?

4) Hillary Clinton, do you think someone who hasn’t even driven a car since 1996 is in touch enough with the average person to run the country?

5) Hillary Clinton, in the first debate, you were proud to have Republicans as enemies. Since that is your attitude, wouldn’t electing you as President guarantee non-stop partisan warfare?

6) Hillary Clinton, the constant refrain from Republicans has been that you’re not qualified to be President. Can you name your 3 biggest accomplishments that you believe qualify you to be President of the United States? (Hello! We’re still waiting!)

7) Hillary Clinton, the Clinton Foundation took in millions in donations from foreign governments and defense contractors, some of which you helped rather significantly when you were the Secretary of State. Your husband also collected some rather extravagant amounts in speaking fees. According to the International Business Times,

“Under Clinton’s leadership, the State Department approved $165 billion worth of commercial arms sales to 20 nations whose governments have given money to the Clinton Foundation…The Clinton-led State Department also authorized $151 billion of separate Pentagon-brokered deals for 16 of the countries that donated to the Clinton Foundation….American defense contractors also donated to the Clinton Foundation while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state and in some cases made personal payments to Bill Clinton for speaking engagements. Such firms and their subsidiaries were listed as contractors in $163 billion worth of Pentagon-negotiated deals that were authorized by the Clinton State Department…”

This is unethical on its face and it raises serious questions about whether you took bribes from defense contractors and foreign governments as Secretary State. If you had it to do over, would you have done things differently?

8) Hillary Clinton, back in 2002, after reading the same intelligence reports that George Bush did, you took a position to his right on whether Saddam Hussein had WMDs. You said, “It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.” Given that you made the same mistakes that George Bush did when it came to knowing whether Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, do you think it’s unfair for people to accuse him of “lying” about the evidence?

9) Hillary Clinton, you were caught lying to Americans when you claimed a video was behind the Benghazi attack. You were also caught lying when you claimed you came under sniper fire in Bosnia. You’ve also been caught lying about whether you had classified information on your private email server among other things. Why should the American people trust you after you’ve been caught lying so many times?

10) Hillary Clinton, you’re going to be 69 years old next year and you suffered a very serious head injury in 2013 after you fainted. That caused a blood clot in your brain along with a concussion your own husband said it took “six months of very serious work” to get over. Are you healthy enough to handle a job as incredibly demanding as being President of the United States? Additionally, can you assure the American public that there was no brain damage from your injury that might make it difficult for you handle the position?

11) Bernie Sanders, in a 1972 essay, you said, “A woman enjoys intercourse with her man – as she fantasizes being raped by 3 men simultaneously.” Do you believe most women fantasize about being raped by 3 men simultaneously and what were you trying to get across with that comment?

12) Bernie Sanders, you have attacked Uber on multiple occasions. You’ve called it “unregulated,” you say it has “serious problems” and yet your campaign has exclusively used Uber instead of taxis because it’s cheaper. Does that make you a huge hypocrite?

13) Should a woman be able to abort a baby that can survive outside the womb? Should she be able to abort a baby the day before she’s born? At what point, if any, should an abortion become illegal?

14) Do you think men who claim to identify as women should be allowed to use the same bathroom as women? If your answer is “yes,” do you think this is unfair or even potentially dangerous to women?

15) All the candidates on the stage are strong supporters of the Affordable Care Act which was the centerpiece of Barack Obama’s agenda as President. However, the ACA was sold to the American people with a lot of untruths. Barack Obama said that if people like their plan and their doctor, they could keep them. He claimed that the ACA wouldn’t raise the deficit. He said the average family would save $2,500 in premiums per year. None of these promises turned out to be true and yet, none of you have criticized the President for misleading the American people. Since that’s the case, why should anyone believe your promises? (Or, better stated… “Why should ANYONE believe your bullshit now?)

16) There are hundreds of thousands of American citizens who have been victimized by illegal aliens who wouldn’t be here in the first place if our border were secured and our immigration laws were enforced, something nobody on this stage plans to do if elected as President. What do you say to the victims and families of the victims who’ve been raped, (murdered) assaulted, or robbed by illegal aliens? What do you say to an American mother whose child has been molested, murdered or killed by a drunk-driving illegal alien?

17) How much of a problem is white privilege for America and if you do think it’s a problem, what can we do to combat it? Also, what would you say to white people who disagree with the idea that they have white privilege?

18) Do you think an illegal immigrant who takes welfare on behalf of his child should be allowed to become an American citizen? What about an adult illegal immigrant who has never paid income taxes? If the answer is “yes,” how does allowing people to become citizens who will be drains on the taxpayers help America?

19) Please raise your hands: Would anybody on the stage be willing to make the White House a gun-free zone to reduce the chance of gun violence there? If not, then does that policy really make sense for our schools?

20) Since 2008, the Democrat Party has lost 69 House seats, 13 Senate seats, 910 state legislative seats and 12 governorships. Has your party gotten so far out of the mainstream that it will make it difficult for a Democrat to be elected President in 2016?

Categories: Uncategorized

The True Meaning of Separation of Church and State

By Bill Flax ,CONTRIBUTOR to / Opinion

Our nation was predicated on unalienable rights with governance through family, church and community, each rightfully sovereign within its sphere. Human dignity, legal equality and personal freedom reflect biblical values imparted on Western Civilization, which retains these values in secular form while expunging their Author from public discourse.

Americans are frequently reminded of what the revisionists deem our greatest achievement: Separation of Church and State. Crosses are ripped down in parks. Prayer has been banished from schools and the ACLU rampages to remove under God from the Pledge of Allegiance. Moreover, Separation of Church and State is nowhere found in the Constitution or any other founding legislation. Our forefathers would never countenance the restrictions on religion exacted today.

The phrase separation of church and state was initially coined by Baptists striving for religious toleration in Virginia, whose official state religion was then Anglican (Episcopalian). Baptists thought government limitations against religion illegitimate. James Madison and Thomas Jefferson championed their cause.

The preamble in Act Establishing Religious Freedom in Virginia (1786), affirms that the Author of our Religion gave us our free will. And that He chose not to propagate it by coercions. This legislation certainly did not diminish religious influence on government for it also provided stiff penalties for conducting business on the Sabbath.

Nor did the Constitution inhibit public displays of faith. At ratification, a majority of the thirteen several and sovereign states maintained official religions. The early Republic welcomed public worship. Church services were held in the U.S. Capitol and Treasury buildings every Sunday. The imagery in many federal buildings remains unmistakably biblical.

The day after the First Amendments passage, Congress proclaimed a national day of prayer and thanksgiving. The inaugural Congress was largely comprised by those who drafted the Constitution. It reflects incredible arrogance to reconfigure the Bill of Rights into prohibiting religious displays on public grounds. Hanging the Ten Commandments on the wall of a county courthouse no more mandates religion than judges displaying the banner of their favorite sports team somehow equates to Congress establishing that team as preeminent.

Our forefathers never sought to evict the church from society. They recognized that the several states did not share uniform values. We lived and worshipped differently. The framers were a diverse bunch with wildly divergent opinions on many issues, but eliminating the very foundations of Americas heritage would have horrified them. On few issues was there more unanimity.

Where the French Revolution and its official policy of De-Christianization quickly devolved into bloodshed and oppression, here freedom flourished. Our independence was seen as the culmination of a march toward liberty, not a rejection of Americas historical cultural moorings. Our forbears embraced tradition and left local autonomy largely intact.

Schools, courts and the public square were often overtly Christian and had been since their colonial beginnings. Few Americans would have tolerated a coercive central government infringing on their rights to post religious symbols on local schools, courts or anywhere else.

Americans built society from the ground up. Many had fled oppression. The colonies instituted local self-government indigenously to confirm the rights resident in their persons and property. Few would have willingly been dispossessed by Washington of the very freedoms which they had just secured from London.

Here men could and did rise as their efforts merited. Commoners were unshackled from feudal paralysis and freed to find God individually. Both the economy and church thrived. Alexis de Tocqueville observed that Americans intertwined individual liberty with vibrant faith. It is impossible to make them conceive the one without the other.

Even non-Christian founders thought religion essential. None would have wished to upend the very basis for education, law or culture. The Northwest Ordinance of 1787 states: Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged.

Americans understood freedom without morality quickly devolves into debauchery. Whether from sincere faith, or, prudence instilling an honest, law-abiding, responsible and hardworking populace, all esteemed biblical morality as the bedrock of self government. George Washington believed, Religion and morality are indispensible supports for it is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible.

The phrase separation between church and state was reintroduced by former Klansman Hugo Black, historically one of our most liberal Supreme Court judges. In the 1947 Everson v. Board of Education, Justice Black invoked Thomas Jefferson stating, The First Amendment has erected a wall of separation between church and state. . . . that wall must be kept high and impregnable.

Thomas Jefferson thought differently. The Danbury Baptists wrote to him congratulating his election and objecting to the First Amendment. They thought it implied government dispensed what was not governments to give. Jefferson agreed.

His reply clearly applied Separation of Church and State to the establishment and not to the free exercise of religion. As he expressed, what communities did and how they worshipped were not federal affairs. Jefferson later said the central government was interdicted from intermeddling with religious institutions. Such were state matters.

Freedom of religion was partly moral protecting our most cherished liberty and partly pragmatic. Religious animosity tears society asunder, particularly when church is affixed to government. With freedom of conscience assured, conflict becomes less likely. The First Amendment was an insightful compromise between church and state, federal and local authorities. The framers desired to avoid the controversies which engulfed Europe.

As James Madison warned in Federalist 10, The latent causes of faction are thus sown in the nature of man; . . . A zeal for different opinions concerning religion, concerning government, and many other points, . . . ambitiously contending for pre-eminence and power . . . divided mankind into parties, inflamed them with mutual animosity, and rendered them much more disposed to vex and oppress each other than to cooperate for their common good.

Thus the Constitution decreed that Washington had no occasion or authority to interject itself into matters as obviously local as doctrines of faith. Congress was not empowered to establish a church because the framers feared that concentrated power, whether favored religions, standing armies, banking monopolies, or an overarching federal government, invited tyranny.

Church and state were distinct in that the Federal Government could not elevate one denomination over others. Nor could government and its flawed inhabitants usurp divine authority by harnessing politics to the church. Faith is no civil contract, but a personal matter not to be profaned by politics.

State controlled churches frequently exploited this latent power for evil. The Spanish Inquisition didnt originate in the Vatican, but the Castilian court. It was not of the church, but the king. By Philip II, Spain had the makings of the first police state infused with the ill-gotten moral authority of a tyrannical clergy.

Much of our Bill of Rights was meant to prevent dictatorships such as Cromwells, which married church and state in such manner as to mar many of the freedoms our forefathers sought to enshrine.

The framers witnessed the incessant wars of the mother continent and understood official churches and centralized power fomented abuses. Having two or three competing factions spurred struggles between the parties to secure power, but divesting authority to innumerable smaller jurisdictions without the prospect of any gaining control promoted peaceful freedom.

Episcopalians in Virginia would live amicably next to Catholics in Maryland, Quakers in Pennsylvania or Baptists in their midst. None saw cause for contention because there was no threat that others would gain dominion over them or any prospect that they might gain such dominion themselves. Rivalry was unnecessary because Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.

Establishment has been redefined. Limitations on government have been altered into restrictions on religious expression, which clearly violates the amendments next clause: prohibiting the free exercise thereof and third clause abridging the freedom of speech. Meanwhile, Washington publicly imposes politically correct secular religions like worshiping diversity or the environment.

Are our rights inalienable or contrivances from courts? Is government still limited or its power undefined? Is the state answerable to the people or are we but subjects? Do our rights descend from God or derive from man?

America must decide.

Categories: Uncategorized

If WalMart Jobs Are So Terrible, Then Why Do So Many People Want One?

If WalMart Jobs Are So Terrible, Then Why Do So Many People Want One?.


If WalMart Jobs Are So Terrible, Then Why Do So Many People Want One?

Mark Perry has a nice little point here. If we listen to some of the activists on the WalMart issue then we’re told that the jobs at the store are just terrible. The pay, the conditions are appalling, which leaves us with the mysterious question of why do so many people seem to want a job at WalMart:

There’s a lot of rhetoric, especially from the left, that is very dismissive of working at Walmart. Go the Wikipedia entry for “Criticism of Walmart” and you’ll find references to the following criticisms of being a Walmart employee: low wages, poor working conditions, being forced to work off the clock, being denied overtime pay, not being allowed to take breaks, violations of child labor laws, instances of minors working too late, during school hours, or for too many hours in a day, labor racketeering crimes, sexual discrimination, limiting or eliminating health care benefits, poorly-run and understaffed stores, etc. You get the idea – it must be a pretty terrible place to work, right? But then why do so many people actually want to work for the retail giant, based on the huge number of applications that Walmart receives every time it opens a new store?

Perry then goes on to point out that the new Washington D.C. stores received 23,000 applications for only 600 positions. That’s a multiple of the number of applications there are for each and every place at Harvard. So, if the jobs are so terrible then why is it that so many people want to have one of these terrible jobs?

The answer is of course that the WalMart jobs are better than the alternatives. Those alternatives could be not having a job at all, working in fast food, say, or at Target TGT +0.19% or wherever. The one thing we do know is that those WalMart jobs are better than one or all of those alternatives. This is revealed preferences in action: that people apply for the jobs means that they want them.

Given this it’s now obvious what should or could be done to make those jobs at WalMart better. Which is not to go shouting at that company at all. Rather, it is to encourage more people to set up more businesses offering other jobs. As those alternatives proliferate then those offering the best opportunities and working conditions will get the workers and those offering bad conditions and/or pay will find that they have to improve them in order to retain their workforce.

Now, as to what is the current constraint on people setting up in business? I’m sure we all have our own pet theories. Mine is that the bureaucratic nonsense that surrounds gaining all of the necessary permits and licenses discourages many would-be entrepreneurs from even starting. Reduce that regulatory burden and we’ll see more new businesses starting and thus, through the above process, conditions will get better for all workers. Note though that this is a pet theory (one that certainly has some truth to it, but probably not the entire truth) driven by a certain amount of personal experience.

Categories: Wal Mart, Walmart Tags: ,

Wal-Mart’s top e-commerce manager earns 29% less

Editor’s Note: So… am I supposed to feel sorry for this guy?

Wal-Mart’s top e-commerce manager earns 29% less

Based on a lower stock award, Wal-Mart CEO of global e-commerce Neil Ashe earned over $9 million in fiscal 2015, down from more than $13 million in the prior year.

Neil Ashe, an executive vice president with Wal-Mart Stores Inc. and the retailer’s global e-commerce chief, took a cut in pay and didn’t make as much as some of his contemporaries in the past year.

But Ashe, who heads up all top global web and e-commerce operations for, No. 3 in the  Internet Retailer 2015 Top 500 Guide did earn total compensation last year of more than $9 million in Wal-Mart’s 2015 fiscal year, which ended Jan. 31.

Ashe, who was named Wal-Mart’s top online retailing executive in January 2012, earned total compensation of $9.43 million according to Wal-Mart’s annual proxy document filed last week with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

Ashe earned a base salary of $953,303, stock awards of $6.64 million, $1.61 million in non-equity incentive plan compensation and miscellaneous compensation of $232,199. Non-equity incentive plan compensation is a cash award that is intended to serve as an incentive to achieve targeted performance over a specified period, according to

In comparison to fiscal 2014, Ashe’s total compensation dropped by 29% mainly because of smaller payout in stock awards. In fiscal 2014, Ashe earned total compensation of $13.17 million, including a base salary of $843,544, stock awards of $11.25 million, non-equity incentive plan compensation of $1.03 million and miscellaneous compensation of $51,169.

Of Wal-Mart’s cadre of executive vice presidents, Ashe was paid more than one of his peers but less than two others. Executive vice president and chief financial officer Charles Holley earned total compensation of $7.43 million, while executive vice presidents Gregory S. Foran, David Cheesewright, and Rosalind G. Brewer earned annual compensation packages of $19.53 million, $10.67 million and $9.56 million, respectively.

Foran is CEO, Walmart U.S.; Cheesewright is CEO, Walmart International; and Brewer is CEO of Sam’s Club. Wal-Mart CEO C. Douglas McMillon earned total compensation of $19.39 million in fiscal 2015.

For fiscal 2015 ended or the year ended Jan. 31, Wal-Mart reported:

  • Global e-commerce sales increased 21.6% to $12.20 billion from $10.03 billion for fiscal 2014. Wal-Mart didn’t break out regional metrics.
  • Total net sales increased 1.9% to $482.22 billion from $473.07 billion.
  • The web accounted for 2.5% of sales compared with 2.1% in fiscal 2014.
  • U.S. comparable-store sales, which include Wal-Mart stores and Sam’s Club warehouse locations, increased 0.5%. Wal-Mart didn’t provide an international breakout.
  • Net income was $16.36 billion, up 2.1% compared with net income of $16.02 billion in the prior year.

5 Reasons Why You Should Use An Ad Submission Plan to Submit Your Ads

If youre submitting all of your classified ads by hand, youre wasting a lot of energy and money. You’re limited in how many ads you can place each day, and you don’t know if the sites you’re submitting to are high traffic or not.

Instead, you ought to look at employing an automated ad submission plan to submit your ads. This offers advantages, from streamlining the procedure to a greater possibility of ad approval.

Here, well look at the top 5 main reasons why you should utilize a classified ad submission service.

5 Main reasons why You should utilize A Free ad Submission Plan to Submit Your AdsUsing A Classified Ad Submission Service Saves You Time!

Classified ads are one of the most effective ways to get traffic to your web site and generate sales. Instead of traditional ads, visitors who read through classified ads are already within the buying mentality, meaning they may be more likely to purchase something than people just surfing for information.

If You Use A Free Classified Submission Service Your Ads Are Going To Be Automatically Re-Submitted After They Rotate From the Bulltin Boards

There are several pitfalls people face when submitting classifieds manually, such as the run-length. With respect to the service, most ads expire after a 30, 60 or 90-day period. Once that period ends, you must manually renew or produce a new ad.

For many online marketers this a big issue, however when youre made to manually renew a huge selection of ads from time to time, it becomes a serious time-consuming issue. A paid classified submission service will handle all the renewals automatically, freeing up more time for you to run your business and make money.

If you wish to pause or discontinue an ad, all you have to do in many cases is just log into your account and select which one you would like to do.

An ad submission service can also assist you in creating valuable backlinks to achieve top search engine rank. Good ranking backlinks are probably the most significant factors to getting more exposure for your ad.

Its been proven that both quantity of backlinks as well as the quality of sites they come from are two factors which greatly affect your authority and rankings online. Paid ad submission services can help you achieve this by generating plenty of backlinks on high-traffic classified ad websites.

These backlinks don’t just generate traffic from shoppers clicking the web link, they also help you achieve greater rankings in the search engines, enabling you to see a boost in overall traffic.

Accumulate a couple hundred clicks using Pay Per Click and that’s one pricey advertising bill. A classified ad submission service such as Classified Submissions for $39.95 per month is not only cost effective (and cheap) but it’s also smart. They can insert your ad into over 800,000 high traffic, high ranking classified ad sites per month… which is something that is impossible for you to do manually.

If youre currently spending hundreds of hours per month posting ads on classifiedds and in Facebook groups, maybe you’ll consider consider the money youll save by switching to paid automated classified advertisements.

Download this article in PDF at the link below.

ARTICLE 01 – 5 Reasons Why You Should Use An Ad Submission Plan to Submit Your Ads.pdf

Categories: Uncategorized

Why I Gave Up Looking For Work

I gave up looking for a “J.O.B” job a little over 7 years ago. This doesn’t mean I’m sitting on my ass playing games, because I hate games anyway… especially those nonsensical time-wasters on Facebook Games.

I’m usually busy working as a freelancer in a variety of industries, and have been for a decade or more. During that period of time, I have had a few job interviews – because you never know what’s out there – but they’ve never “panned” out for a variety of reasons.

One of the reasons is that I’m usually older (much older) than the person interviewing me. Another reason is they feel threatened by my being “over-qualified”… whatever that means. Most of the time, those saps who say that haven’t even taken the time to read my resume. And while my CV is impressive on its own, I don’t consider much of the 9 pages relevant to today’s markets.

In 2002, shortly after 9/11, I had to retool myself: re-invent myself, so to speak. I took on the task of learning everything I could about Internet Marketing and how to use the medium as a means of communication. This blog post is just one of those examples of how the medium of the Internet can be used to communicate your ideas, your strengths and your weaknesses.

On that note, there’s a comical story about an older “worker” (I hate communist narratives for employees… but that’s another rant…) being interviewed by a much younger HR type.

At the job interview, the Human Resources Manager asks the Old Man, “What is your biggest weakness?”

Old Man replies, “Honesty.”

Human Resources Manager comes back with “I don’t think honesty is a weakness. I think it’s positive trait to have.”

Old Man replies, “I don’t give a shit what you think.”

End of interview.

This is why old men, and older workers probably don’t get hired, and why many of them have quit looking for work. They don’t know how to interact and interface with Millenials and Thirty Somethings… but, that’s another article.

Now, I realize that all that being said, there’s still hope for the older worker and the younger generation working together. There are potential rewards of returning to full-time salaried employment if you can find it. In this economy, it’s doubtful.

So, instead of putting out the effort of finding another J.O.B. that will only keep me “just over broke”, I have come to the conclusion that the negative results are outweighed by the effort of finding a job. It’s far better if you can find something you’re good at, and that you enjoy doing, then do it with 10 times the effort to go beyond your limitations.

Here are seven reasons why I quit looking for a traditional job and went full-scale into my own business:

Reason # 1. Most, if not all, companies just don’t respond. Period.

You would think, that, in the Internet age, when sending a sentence needs no paper, stamp, or trip to the postbox, it would be easier to get responses out of people. Not so. Personal responses to job applications just don’t happen these days; and if they do, they’re awfully rare. At best, you can expect an acknowledgement to your application with “If you haven’t heard from us in 30 days…” which is just a less than polite way of brushing you off… because it’s an automated message anyway.

I have a lot of sympathy for young people starting out in the work force, and for older job hunters: the young experience rejection because they’re “too young” and don’t have… well, experience. The older worker experiences age descrimination (whether you believe it true or not, it’s true… employers can “date” you by looking at your resume or application).

Without feedback, young people looking for their first job can’t get an idea of what the market wants. And older people faced with layoffs (“old” here in some cases meaning 45) have a hell of a time even securing an interview.

I’m someone whose marketing campaigns get less than 1% response to cold lists, yet know I’m kidding myself if I think any non-form-filled application even gets read by a human. I wonder how many great candidates these companies are missing out on?

They’re probably missing out on a LOT of talent, if you ask me.

That’s the first reason I gave up looking for work.

Reason # 2. Recruiters suck.

They do. I’m not going to apologize for saying that. Over 99% of the recruiters I’ve dealt with over the last 30 years are the least professional, worst trained, laziest sons of bitches, most “inside-the-box” people anywhere in business. I’ve never met one that could find a job outside of the recruiting industry. No industry fails more consistently to provide quality output than the recruiting industry.

How many times have you received a “Hi! I saw your resume… blah, blah, blah” email that’s quite obviously a hundred thousand deep email blast to any resume they managed to scrape off the web? And – my personal pet hate, which prompted this post – the phone call from someone you’ve never heard of who dives into a job description without even checking basic questions, like whether you’re looking for work?

I have recruiters calling me from an old resume that they found on the internet somewhere that’s over 10 years old. Hell, the resume isn’t even current anymore! Don’t they even take time to look at the dates on the job descriptions?


I know few recruiters personally, and don’t want to know any more. They’re intrusive, presumptive, and ignorant. And the tiny percentage that isn’t… isn’t statistically significant. The one recruiter who I did work with about 20 years ago, who actually produced a quality “match” between me and an employer is out of the business… and I can’t even remember his name anymore.

In short: recruiters suck. They’re another reason I gave up looking for work.

Reason # 3. I’m a working stiff. I’m NOT a “thought leader”. Get over it.

I had a high-paying job back in the corporate world, and naturally wanted the same level of income when I went freelance. So I did all the things freelancers do. Proper office, used “We” and “Our” on my website a lot, gave myself important-sounding titles like “blah, blah, blah”… (fill in the blank with your own ideas for a fancy title). I tried to look big.

It worked, sort of…

But a few years in, I realized the truth… and so did prospects.

I wasn’t a high-falutin’ consultant or fast-talking sales expert. Freelancers are blue-collar working stiffs. You set up as a lone wolf, and your customers expect a hard day’s work for a fair day’s pay like anyone else. There’s nothing wrong with that.

Think about it: How many “thought leaders” does your company hand that title out to? How many people are really “ninjas” or “gurus” or “spearheading paradigm-shifting breakthroughs” in your cube farms – and how many need to be?

Just as a unit of Navy SEALS need to remain functional as a team, most companies don’t have teams that can operate the same, much less do a few tasks competently. And most HR Directors would grumble even those people are hard enough to find.

(This is why I would hire a former Navy SEAL over anyone else. They’re competent… and competitive.)

Once I realized I wasn’t a “thought leader” I started to celebrate it. Today, I market myself, and I brand myself for what I am: one guy, no employees, some unusual skills and proven experience, who will get the job done for you, and produce some exceptional results at the same time. And customers bite a lot faster.

Reason # 4. Interviews are a drag… and they suck, too.

If I show up for a job interview with your company, I’m only interested in what the work is and how I can get it done and help you look good. I don’t give a shit about my weaknesses and strengths, or “Where I see myself in five years” or “Listing five situations where I showed leadership”, and you shouldn’t, either. You should get off your pontifical high horse and hire me so I can get to work. This dilly-dallying around for 6 weeks in the interview process is costing your company a lot of money.

In today’s organization – and this goes for large and small companies – they have some of the most arbitrary and nonsensical interview policies around: it forces me to show up looking like a banker plumber’s overalls.

Nothing wrong with plumbers, mind you. Great job and great skill. I would rather call a plumber to come fix my clog than do it myself… and I’ll pay them, too.

But, most formal interviews in today’s Corporate America is about the worst hiring idea I’ve ever seen.

Think about it: you’re sitting in front of an H/R person who doesn’t have a grasp on the needs at the departmental level and you’re asking them questions about the job.


Get the hell out of the H/R interview and go talk to someone who knows WTF they need in the department!

It’s personal qualities that get you through life, not qualifications. And there are far better ways to gauge personal qualities than across an interview desk… especially with someone who you’re not going to be working with anyway.

Dealing with pin-head H/R types is another reason I quit looking for work. And if anyone besides the hiring manager from the department I’m going to be working in calls… I don’t waste my time on them. They need me. I don’t need them. No matter how long I’ve been out of a job.

Reason # 5. Normal jobs need normal people. Super jobs need super people. I’m not “normal”…

Outside of a few creative sectors like marketing, advertising, and sales, few companies want employees outside societal norms. They’re just too scary. Take people like Mark Cuban, Donald Trump, Joe Vitale, Grant Cardone, Warren Buffett, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, even Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg: you wouldn’t have hired these people. And neither would I.

They’re mavericks. They’re professionals. They’re lone wolves. They’re eagles: they don’t peck the ground with turkeys like most job seekers.

H/R professionals know how hard it is to promote a “renegade” through the hiring process… which is why most H/R managers can’t get me through the process. I’m a threat to the department manager. They are DEATHLY afraid that I’m going to take their job. If I wanted to, yes, I could, in most cases. But, I’m not really interested in fitting nicely into a box that’s been defined by someone else. I’m not interested in checking off items on a “To Do List” that has been written by someone else…

People with an unusual background – like me – don’t fit into boxes… we think “outside the box” and we have no boundaries or limits.

That’s another reason I stopped looking for work. I just got tired of dealing with H/R types and department managers who had their heads up their proverbial ass so far that their brains couldn’t be found on a CAT-SCAN.

Reason # 6. High paying jobs mean high hassle.

Reason number 6 is a market reality rather than a human bias. Many high-paid jobs only pay well because the job involves… managing people.


The higher your pay grade, the more of your salary represents your employer’s investment in your ability to get the most out of other human beings.

“Managing” other people is the stuff of stress, divorce, heart attacks and high blood pressure. (Just ask my brother.) And those are just the easy options. People who can manage other people (efficiently) are the rarest and smartest people you’ll ever employ. Hiring people, managing them, allocating reward fairly… these are the hardest things in the world. Perhaps one in a thousand people has the necessary skillset to do them competently. And that’s being optimistic.

The problem with most companies that hire “people managers” is that they don’t pay them enough. They expect million dollar results from their managers when they pay them a paltry 5 figures a year, with little to no benefits.

So even if someone’s “hard skills” are a million miles from your market but their “soft skills” are in the top 1%, you should hire them immediately. They’ll make your company sing.

The trouble is, once you’ve tasted high-level freelancing – $1,000 a day and up, choose who you work with, set your own schedules – why would you want the hassles that go with a “proper” job in the upper percentiles of pay?

I don’t. I’d rather do what I’m actually good at, for the same money.

And that’s another reason I’ve given up looking for a job.

Reason # 7. Because I’m no good at it!

I’m really not good at “looking for work” or looking for a J-O-B “just over broke” job. I just can’t get excited over a $50,000 a year job that has no future, no benefits and no challenges.

I’m not being self-deprecating: I’m being brutally honest. I’ve been in too many interviews where I’ve totally “blown it” so bad that, not only did I not get the job, but the recruiter who sent me on the job interview lost his job because of the way I “handled myself” in the interview.

I had a smart-ass interviewer in Tulsa, Oklahoma at Budget Car Rental crowing about how many programming lanuguages he was fluent in. I was not impressed. And neither was the recruiter who came with me to the interview. (He had already heard about my interview style and came to see if he could keep me in restraints. He didn’t… and he got fired, too.)

Needless to say, what I told him (the interviewer) in fluent Italian made him look like an ass, he even looked sillier when I had to translate it for him.

Needless to say, I didn’t get the job, and the recruiter learned a very powerful lesson that day: do NOT accompany one of your referrals to a job interview. It just might get you fired.

But, there’s one note of consolation in this: recruiting jobs are a “dime a dozen” and he didn’t have to look long before he was back to work in… another recruiting position.

I never heard from him again.

Let’s face it: some people (like me) are just not cut out to be employees. They will never fit into the communist “worker bee” box, because they’re independent and free. We have never been “figured out” by the H/R types. They just can’t seem to get their heads around it. They can’t codify the secret codes and behaviors of the ideal, hireable individual.

Some of my clients have been with me for years and I remain on excellent terms with those who’ve moved on – but the daily commute of the 9-to-5, even without a suit and tie, just doesn’t feel natural. Until my 30’s I solved it by working all over the United States and overseas, and on several well paying contracts. But after 15 years of working on the W-4 I decided that I needed to get back to doing what I was good at: freelancing.

That’s the last reason I stopped looking for a job. And of the seven, it’s probably the one that matters most. I do NOT apologize to Corporate America, but for an increasing number of experienced workers – now in the millions – working for you just isn’t an attractive option. You might want us. You might need us. But we’re not looking. We don’t want you. We don’t need you. You need us… you really do.

While I’m not looking for a job, my one-man creative outfit is in the market for interesting clients and projects across the United States, and beyond. I am my own brand. Ernest O’Dell is my name. That’s all you need to know.

If this article resonates with you, you’ve probably got freelance inclinations yourself – in which case you should probably subscribe to this blog and get in touch with me.

And if you’re a company looking to make your next ten million dollars and you’re wanting to quibble over $1,000 in the quotation, don’t call. If you’re looking to “up your game” and 10X your company’s revenues in the next 12 months, give me a call. You know where to find me.

Categories: Uncategorized