Author, Speaker, Instructor, Radio Host
I joked the other day about how my services as a constitutionalist are in high demand. "Obama has been good for business." Every time Obama opens his mouth, people want to buy guns, kick the establishment in the groin, and learn more about the U.S. Constitution.
The leftward march of American politics, via the presidency of Barack Obama, the arrogance of people like Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, and the elitism of the Clintons as Hillary embarked upon her own run for the White House, has gotten Americans pretty fed up. What has angered them even further is that to combat the frightening escapades of liberal left socialism in America the voters gave the Republican Party the House of Representatives in a decisive vote in 2010, and the Senate in 2014. . . yet the GOP has done less to defeat the statists of the Democrat Party than expected. We also got rid of John Boehner, but in response, as I write this, The House of Representatives is working on a vote on a gun control package with Speaker Paul D. Ryan giving in once again on provisions we just can't give to the federal government. Sometimes it seems like the Republicans are working with the Democrats in their quest to destroy the American System, and prepare America to join the union of internationalists in a deeper globalist orgy of power than we are already witnessing.
In the 2016 Presidential Campaign the anti-establishment sentiment launched the campaigns of Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump into a trajectory not expected by political experts. The unlikely rise of Trump has gone so far that he is now the presumptive Republican nomination as we approach the GOP Convention in Cleveland. His followers say that Trump's run is more than a campaign. It's a movement.
The movement by people who are fed up with the control by an elite ruling class that believes they are above the law, and above the people, is spreading. . . all the way across the pond.
Brexit (British Exit) from the European Union is just another sign that the movement is spreading. The leftists of the EU have been rejected. The statism of globalism is being rejected. Sovereignty is being embraced. Worldwide, the movement is becoming a revolution. Europe's response? Time to create a more powerful superstate - after all, they don't trust NATO's ability to protect them, anymore. Germany is taking a leadership role in the new European Union, though being careful not to remind people of its Nazi past. Leftist puppet-master and globalist George Soros is calling for a thorough reconstruction of the European Union in order to save it. Meanwhile, Mexico's leaders are calling for a North American integrated superstate.
Thomas Massie, a Republican Congressman out of Kentucky is leading a charge to try and get the United States out of the United Nations. The anti-establishment wave slammed into Iceland where a political novice won their presidency with only 39% of the vote. Trump, being the anti-establishment candidate in the U.S. Election and the guy who threw his support behind Brexit may very well see benefits in his race from the Brexit vote. Trump's arguments, and the arguments by Brexit supporters, are definitely similar. For one thing, from the globalist point of view, the movement is definitely turning the world upside down, as well as a show of how stable Britain may be as compared to the European Union. One writer calls what is going on "Cold Anger" - an anger that perceives deception, and takes action without lashing out violently. Still, the powerful force of cold anger can be comparable to that of a raging hurricane.
We just don't believe their lies, anymore (not that I ever did). The hypocrisy of the liberal left Democrats, and their leftists colleagues around the world, is becoming more and more apparent thanks to the internet (part of the reason they are trying to gain control of it) and the new alternative media that goes with it. The presumptive Democrat Party candidate for President of the United States is Hillary Clinton, a woman known for her elitism and "I'm above the law" attitude, a known liar, and a woman being investigated by the FBI for treasonous activity that stems from Benghazi to her private email server. Even more telling is that the Democrats are doing all they can to protect their golden girl, Hillary Clinton. The State Department has refused to release Clinton Foundation emails during an investigation against Hillary Clinton involving her emails. The Benghazi report also shows how the Democrats have done all they can to not cooperate, and protect Obama and Clinton.
Anti-Gun United States Senator Jamilah Nasheed has just been arrested with a loaded gun and extra clips while drunk in Ferguson. This echoes nicely the hypocrisy of the Democrat's call for gun control when last year California State Senator Leland Yee was busted on arms trafficking and corruption charges in an FBI sweep. Yee had a long legislative record of fighting for stronger gun control laws. Twenty-six of the Democrats who participated in the recent House of Representatives sit-in to support gun control are gun owners.
In New York, pro-abortion activists screamed and yelled their opposition to an organization being given funds by a city to enable a free car seat program for needy babies.
In New Jersey police were called to an elementary school because a third grader had made a comment about the brownies being served to the class during their end of the school year party that another student exclaimed was "racist." The parent of the child said of the episode, "He said they were talking about brownies. . . . Who exactly did he offend?" The student stayed home for his last day of third grade, traumatized by the accusation of racism over his innocent comment.
In New Jersey police were called to an elementary school because a third grader had made a comment about the brownies being served to the class during their end of the school year party that another student exclaimed was "racist." The parent of the child said of the episode, "He said they were talking about brownies. . . . Who exactly did he offend?" The student stayed home for his last day of third grade, traumatized by the accusation of racism over his innocent comment.
Fox News was attacked by the Democrats on the Federal Election Commission who voted in secret to punish Fox News' sponsorship of a Republican presidential debate. The punishment was blocked by all three Republicans on the commission, resulting in a 3-3 tie vote and no action. The accusation was that by hosting a GOP debate, Fox News was guilty of making a contribution to the candidates. It stemmed from one of the candidates that had been left out of a debate filing a complaint to the FEC, charging that Fox was essentially making a contribution to the 17 candidates by letting them have a voice in the debate.
CNN did the same thing, but there is no indication that they faced a complaint.
Thanks to the policies of the Obama administration, an ideology that has declared war on the United States, Islam, has had the freedom to conduct their invasion not only without any obstruction, but actually with assistance by the United States Government. One of the most dangerous bombmakers and recruiters in the terrorist world is out of prison and now living in an southeastern European country that is a hub of Islamic terrorism. But he didn't escape. He was freed from U.S. custody on the orders of Barack Obama. President Barack Obama is planning to increase the number of refugees admitted to his nation, and is calling on countries like Australia to follow suit, despite fears that terrorists will use refugee flows to infiltrate Western nations. Thanks to Obama's policies, Hamtramck, Michigan has been given the nickname “Shariatown” now that the four out of the six City Council positions have been filled by members of the Islamic faith, and policies that mimic Sharia Law are being implemented throughout the city. New York Judge Carolyn Walker-Diallo, a Black Muslim woman took oath as a civil court judge in New York while swearing to abide by the U.S. Constitution placing her hand on the Holy Quran, and while wearing a hijab.
Professors in U.S. universities found to have conservative viewpoints are being investigated for their dissenting opinion. Professors in U.S. universities who make anti-republican statements to their students in class are still teaching, and in fact are being given pay raises. The University of Arizona hopes to kick off the fall 2017 semester by offering a master’s degree in transgender studies. California Democrats are pushing Senate Bill 1146, which would force Christian colleges and universities to no longer be allowed to require students attend chapel services or require them to profess a relationship with Jesus Christ, saying that doing so is discrimination against students based on their gender identity, gender expression or sexual orientation. For merely being a conservative, or Trump supporter, republicans face attacks by protesters at events, and even ridicule by employees of a restaurant where they choose to have a meal. There has also been a very real push by Democrats to put into place punishment for those who refuse to believe in man-made climate change. The message? Don't you dare even breath a word of dissent against the Left or you will be attacked, jailed or fined. . . but attacks against anyone right-of-center is fair game.
We have a generation of people who have bought into the propaganda of the liberal left so much that they crumble if they think the've been offended, and a majority of Democrats that believe Obama has done a fine job and that he should serve an unconstitutional third term as President of the United States. The Obama administration knows they have fooled a majority of people considered to be "minorities" and so they are doing what they can to spread that demographic around the United States, using a kind of modern busing to integrate neighborhoods, and turn "white conservative" neighborhoods into a Democrat Party supporting region.
We have a generation of people who have bought into the propaganda of the liberal left so much that they crumble if they think the've been offended, and a majority of Democrats that believe Obama has done a fine job and that he should serve an unconstitutional third term as President of the United States. The Obama administration knows they have fooled a majority of people considered to be "minorities" and so they are doing what they can to spread that demographic around the United States, using a kind of modern busing to integrate neighborhoods, and turn "white conservative" neighborhoods into a Democrat Party supporting region.
If you dare breath a word against, you will be labeled a racist, and likely be considered such a hateful person that you may wind up on a watch list.
Meanwhile, Seventh Circuit Judge Richard Posner sees “absolutely no value” in studying the U.S. Constitution because “eighteenth-century guys” couldn’t have possibly foreseen the culture and technology of today. In a recent op-ed for Slate, Judge Posner, a senior lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School, argued that the original Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the post–Civil War amendments “do not speak to today.”
“I see absolutely no value to a judge of spending decades, years, months, weeks, day, hours, minutes, or seconds studying the Constitution, the history of its enactment, its amendments, and its implementation (across the centuries — well, just a little more than two centuries, and of course less for many of the amendments),” he wrote.
Meanwhile, Seventh Circuit Judge Richard Posner sees “absolutely no value” in studying the U.S. Constitution because “eighteenth-century guys” couldn’t have possibly foreseen the culture and technology of today. In a recent op-ed for Slate, Judge Posner, a senior lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School, argued that the original Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the post–Civil War amendments “do not speak to today.”
“I see absolutely no value to a judge of spending decades, years, months, weeks, day, hours, minutes, or seconds studying the Constitution, the history of its enactment, its amendments, and its implementation (across the centuries — well, just a little more than two centuries, and of course less for many of the amendments),” he wrote.
Solutions?
We need to learn how to fight the war the way patriots would fight the war, not the way tyrants fight it. Their tactics work well for the liberal left because statism is a collectivist game, and it comes naturally to them. We are not collectivists, so their strategies and tactics are not fully compatible with what we stand for. Some facets of their attack may be something we can integrate into our battle plan, but overall, their ideology is completely foreign to the concepts of liberty, and constitutionalism, therefore their blueprint for war is not for us - so for those of you saying we need to learn from the left to know how to fight them. . . not necessarily.
Our plan of attack will seem, sometimes, to implement elements of the opposition’s game plan, but ours must follow more closely what we have been provided through the rule of law by the Founding Fathers and divine Providence. Ours must take into account how we got here. Education is a key aspect of a successful military operation, and if you don’t know your enemy, your efforts are destined for defeat.
James Madison told us that “A well-instructed people alone can be permanently a free people.” Education must be the bedrock of our efforts. Understanding how our system is supposed to properly function, and understanding how the statists brought us to this moment in history, is paramount. Fighting the good fight is a noble thing, but if you don’t understand the enemy, nor understand the weapons you have available to you, the fight will become nothing more than an exercise in futility.
Beyond two centuries the United States has been the land of liberty. Forces exist that are determined to fundamentally change our system of freedom into a system of bondage. Every culture harbors those who believe themselves to be a ruling elite, smarter than the average person, and entitled to control through the hell-bound concept of government mandated good intentions and the common good. Thomas Jefferson called a system under the control of the ruling elite "a tyranny." Many of the framers of the Constitution called it "utopianism." Today, we call this kind of tyranny statism, socialism, communism, totalitarianism, oligarchy, and fascism. Jean Jacques Rousseau called it the "General Will."
The philosophies of Rousseau were among the catalysts that brought about the French Revolution that emerged shortly after the Americans fought their own Revolutionary War. As a supporter of big government, Rousseau championed the concept of The General Will, an idea designed by statism to "ensure the public good." Nationalists of the time believed that the lowly, uninformed people were unable to properly maintain society. As instructed by the writings of Plato, the liberal left believes central government power is absolutely required. According to their belief system a ruling elite is needed to ensure society operates smoothly, and operated in the best interest of the people in the way they define it.
Big Government statists believe in the existence of the public interest in terms of collectivism, placing the "good of the community" over the rights of the individual. These policies tend to benefit small, but powerful, special interests at the expense of the rest of the society, but are put into place by the ruling elite because in their opinion the public doesn't understand any better, and must be forced to understand, and comply.
One may argue that all of those mandates were indeed for our own good. The good mayor banning large sodas, or the governor banning trans-fats were only looking out for the interests of the people. He wanted to protect people’s “freedom from” the consequences of their actions. But, at what point does government making law to protect you from yourself become tyranny? At what point does “freedom from” interfere with a person’s “freedom to?”
Leftists are collectivists, and collectivists hate individualism; be it the individualism of people, or of the States These people wish to dissolve the American people (and ultimately the people of the world) into a homogeneous mass, and eliminate their voluntary choices for the perceived good of the community.
Any system is generally defined as a group of independent, but interrelated elements, that make up the whole. By definition, if the components of a system are divided, or working against one another, they are really not a part of a functioning system, after all. The order of things consist of meaning and purpose, and all of us have profound connections to the systems we are a part of. When you have order the harmony of the related systems is a beautiful thing. When systems have order we live happily, with the Blessings of Liberty. Statists, however, do not believe that such order is achievable by individual participation, but that participation must be carefully measured and controlled by a ruling elite. Without that elite in control, inserting its definitions of what a good society is, they believe that such a system can only whittle away into chaos.
Benjamin Franklin recognized that systems must achieve order, but rejected the rule of man through concepts like collectivism. Order must be something achieved not because a people are forced to be, but because they desire to be as a result of their morality. He said, "Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom."
John Adams recognized the same, indicating that "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
Among the ingredients the Founding Fathers recognized as being necessary for an ordered society to be successful, without a ruling elite dictating to the people how to live their lives, resides a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence. A moral society is a system established under the rule of law, and because of the society being virtuous, it is capable of remaining under the rule of law. Historically, the rule of law attained the most success when it has been based on biblical principles. The law of the land was written in the form of a constitution, and the maintenance of the system was achieved through a government strong enough to protect, preserve and promote liberty, while limited through a system of checks and balances, and a representative government.
Those who support the idea of a ruling elite consider such systems of liberty to be dangerous, and view the concept of individualism as a danger to the proper functioning of any system. In the opinion of the statist, the American System has achieved success as a society despite "psychotic individualism." True "equity" and "fairness," it is believed by these people, cannot be achieved unless the ruling elite is given full control of the entire functioning of the system.
To achieve that kind of control, however, the statists must destroy the existing system, and erase the memory of liberty from the minds of the inhabitants. They must convince the citizenry that liberty is slavery, and turn them against the system created by the Founding Fathers so that the people will embrace bondage, and gladly raise the red flag of statism themselves.
In short, we must achieve a foundation of being a virtuous people, individuals, enjoy a free market, and be well informed. Without those ingredients in place, our system is doomed to fail, be it at the hands of tyrants, or the destructive power of disorder.
This is why the forces of tyranny target morality, and individualism. The leaders of the new tyranny are the old vanguards of revolutionary change. They seek a destruction of god, and individualism of all kinds. They push for pure democracy, where the rule of law is no longer a concern, because the rule of man is in charge.
Beyond two centuries the United States has been the land of liberty. Forces exist that are determined to fundamentally change our system of freedom into a system of bondage. Every culture harbors those who believe themselves to be a ruling elite, smarter than the average person, and entitled to control through the hell-bound concept of government mandated good intentions and the common good. Thomas Jefferson called a system under the control of the ruling elite "a tyranny." Many of the framers of the Constitution called it "utopianism." Today, we call this kind of tyranny statism, socialism, communism, totalitarianism, oligarchy, and fascism. Jean Jacques Rousseau called it the "General Will."
The philosophies of Rousseau were among the catalysts that brought about the French Revolution that emerged shortly after the Americans fought their own Revolutionary War. As a supporter of big government, Rousseau championed the concept of The General Will, an idea designed by statism to "ensure the public good." Nationalists of the time believed that the lowly, uninformed people were unable to properly maintain society. As instructed by the writings of Plato, the liberal left believes central government power is absolutely required. According to their belief system a ruling elite is needed to ensure society operates smoothly, and operated in the best interest of the people in the way they define it.
Big Government statists believe in the existence of the public interest in terms of collectivism, placing the "good of the community" over the rights of the individual. These policies tend to benefit small, but powerful, special interests at the expense of the rest of the society, but are put into place by the ruling elite because in their opinion the public doesn't understand any better, and must be forced to understand, and comply.
One may argue that all of those mandates were indeed for our own good. The good mayor banning large sodas, or the governor banning trans-fats were only looking out for the interests of the people. He wanted to protect people’s “freedom from” the consequences of their actions. But, at what point does government making law to protect you from yourself become tyranny? At what point does “freedom from” interfere with a person’s “freedom to?”
Leftists are collectivists, and collectivists hate individualism; be it the individualism of people, or of the States These people wish to dissolve the American people (and ultimately the people of the world) into a homogeneous mass, and eliminate their voluntary choices for the perceived good of the community.
Any system is generally defined as a group of independent, but interrelated elements, that make up the whole. By definition, if the components of a system are divided, or working against one another, they are really not a part of a functioning system, after all. The order of things consist of meaning and purpose, and all of us have profound connections to the systems we are a part of. When you have order the harmony of the related systems is a beautiful thing. When systems have order we live happily, with the Blessings of Liberty. Statists, however, do not believe that such order is achievable by individual participation, but that participation must be carefully measured and controlled by a ruling elite. Without that elite in control, inserting its definitions of what a good society is, they believe that such a system can only whittle away into chaos.
Benjamin Franklin recognized that systems must achieve order, but rejected the rule of man through concepts like collectivism. Order must be something achieved not because a people are forced to be, but because they desire to be as a result of their morality. He said, "Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom."
John Adams recognized the same, indicating that "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
Among the ingredients the Founding Fathers recognized as being necessary for an ordered society to be successful, without a ruling elite dictating to the people how to live their lives, resides a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence. A moral society is a system established under the rule of law, and because of the society being virtuous, it is capable of remaining under the rule of law. Historically, the rule of law attained the most success when it has been based on biblical principles. The law of the land was written in the form of a constitution, and the maintenance of the system was achieved through a government strong enough to protect, preserve and promote liberty, while limited through a system of checks and balances, and a representative government.
Those who support the idea of a ruling elite consider such systems of liberty to be dangerous, and view the concept of individualism as a danger to the proper functioning of any system. In the opinion of the statist, the American System has achieved success as a society despite "psychotic individualism." True "equity" and "fairness," it is believed by these people, cannot be achieved unless the ruling elite is given full control of the entire functioning of the system.
To achieve that kind of control, however, the statists must destroy the existing system, and erase the memory of liberty from the minds of the inhabitants. They must convince the citizenry that liberty is slavery, and turn them against the system created by the Founding Fathers so that the people will embrace bondage, and gladly raise the red flag of statism themselves.
In short, we must achieve a foundation of being a virtuous people, individuals, enjoy a free market, and be well informed. Without those ingredients in place, our system is doomed to fail, be it at the hands of tyrants, or the destructive power of disorder.
This is why the forces of tyranny target morality, and individualism. The leaders of the new tyranny are the old vanguards of revolutionary change. They seek a destruction of god, and individualism of all kinds. They push for pure democracy, where the rule of law is no longer a concern, because the rule of man is in charge.
The revolution has begun, but we did not start it. The coup has already taken place in Washington, and the enemy has gained control of the heart of the republic. They have manipulated and gained full control of the networking lines of communication and halls of education. They have erected an iron curtain, and they have disguised it as the common good. They are darker than the shadows, and crueler than the dungeon keepers. It is these dark followers of people like Saul Alinsky that we battle against, and it is the same purveyors of false utopia that brought down Greece and Rome, and the same enemy that the Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution to protect us against. They recognized the enemy, and warned us that if we did not remain informed and vigilant, that it would take a bloody revolution to restore the republic.
We face an enemy as old as humanity, and as dark as Lucifer himself. Now is no time to be timid. Now is the time for action, so that we may send a message to our grandchildren's grandchildren that when their future was on the line, we took action, we were willing to fight the good fight, and we were willing to preserve liberty with our lives, fortunes, and sacred honor on the line.
It all begins with education, and constitutional actions required to keep the republic.
We face an enemy as old as humanity, and as dark as Lucifer himself. Now is no time to be timid. Now is the time for action, so that we may send a message to our grandchildren's grandchildren that when their future was on the line, we took action, we were willing to fight the good fight, and we were willing to preserve liberty with our lives, fortunes, and sacred honor on the line.
It all begins with education, and constitutional actions required to keep the republic.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
No comments:
Post a Comment