“Every child in America entering school at the age of five is mentally ill because he comes to school with certain allegiances to our Founding Fathers, toward our elected officials, toward his parents, toward a belief in a supernatural being, and toward the sovereignty of this nation as a separate entity. It’s up to you as teachers to make all these sick children well—by creating the international child of the future.”1
Chester M. Pierce, Professor of Education and Psychiatry, Harvard University
“There is a threat posed to human freedom by the enormous power of the modern state. History teaches the dangers of government that overreaches—political control taking precedence over free economic growth, secret police, mindless bureaucracy, all combining to stifle individual excellence and personal freedom.”2
Ronald Reagan
As I write these words, premeditated illegal aliens, hoping to become legal aliens under Joebama’s planned amnesty, amass at America’s southern border.3 They are colonists, not immigrants. Visit any number of “Little Italy’s” in America’s cities. You find Italian flags, food, music, and some people still speaking the old tongue, but it will have a distinctly American feel. The ebb and flow of life is pure Americana. Not so with more recent “immigrants”. They colonize areas to which they migrate transforming them into the places from whence they came. Visit California and you will understand. Colonization, not assimilation.
Prior to the “election”, Republicans from Sean Hannity to President Donald Trump warned that Democrats were “radical” and “extreme” socialists different from previous party liberals. They made a mistake in the first case and were wrong in the second. Calling liberal Democrats radical socialists was preaching to the choir. They already knew this. Republicans needed to reach the average American. Those who attended public schools. Teachers often do not explain what socialism is nor its long tragic history. Instead of labels and name calling, Republicans needed to make the case that socialism destroys economies, destroys freedom, renders people subjects not citizens, and why. Are contemporary liberal Democrats more socialistic than party liberals of yore?
Beginning with Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal, liberals transformed America into a “Welfare State”. “The premise of the welfare state is the federal government is basically responsible for the material well-being of the American people”4, which, of course, flies in the face of constitutionally limited government. Programs falling under the welfare-state umbrella include poverty assistance, food stamps, medical insurance, social security, Medicare, Medicaid, unemployment insurance, bank and business bailouts, college tuition subsidies, and so forth. The “federal” government funds these programs by transferring the income from those who produced it to those who did not. However, this is not socialism, right?
As defined by two former adherents, socialism is “The economic system” in which “human” and “material resources” are managed and controlled by a relatively small group of people according to their view of a common good. The difference between socialism and capitalism is, in the former, the few make economic decisions, in the latter, private individuals do.5 Karl Marx, author of the Communist Manifesto wrote, “From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs”.6 When government takes resources, whether corporate or individual, by force, and transfers them to those with lesser resources, they are acting out Marx’s maxim. “Recipients of entitlement spending, whether Social Security benefits, Medicaid, or food stamps, have property rights to income that takes precedence over the property rights of those who produce the income”.7 If a government owns material resources and controls their distribution to effect a desired outcome with respect to the material “well-being” of the people, it is a socialist system. If another government takes by force, through taxation, fees, and import duties, the material resources of corporations and individuals, transferring them to businesses and people to whom they do not belong, in order to effect a desired outcome, this too is a form of socialism. The difference being, in the latter case, private individuals still own the resources. However, since the purpose and outcome for both, determined by the few, is largely the same, the difference is in degree.8
Franklyn Roosevelt’s use of centralized top down economic decision-making to “manage” private resources led to a wholesale takeover by government. This is socialism. At the end of W.W. II, President Truman issued executive orders to seize private businesses “including a coal mine, three oil refineries, an airport, cotton mills, a railroad, the Chicago cab industry, and a rubber plant”. He asserted presidents had constitutional authority to take over private industries during emergencies. Democrats had used W.W. II to force Americans to accept government regimentation of all aspects of their lives. Nevertheless, Truman and New Deal Democrats were wrong on all counts. What they promoted was unconstitutional. After the war, Truman pushed socialized medicine, government control over prices and wages, and even threatened to draft striking coal miners into the U.S. Army if they did not go back to work.9 Lyndon Johnson’s implementation of socialist Great Society Programs would take pages just to list. How are these liberals different from those who Republicans call “radical socialists” in the modern Democrat Party? The difference is in what liberals can get away with now versus then.
Instead of fighting Democrat socialists tooth and nail for the past decades, Republicans waxed sanguine over compromise with their “friends across the aisle”. How is someone determined to destroy the religious and cultural way of life of others, their friend? How does one compromise with those whose lifegoal is to destroy the Constitution and Bill of Rights? They are not your friends. They are at war with you. Through use of language, liberals spill the beans.
First, as a policeman in California’s radical Bay Area, and later as a public high school teacher in a socialIST studies department, I was the target of numerous unprovoked and unsolicited debates with liberals. They typically took the form of hit-and-run verbal attacks. From these experiences, I reached two conclusions. First, liberals tend to use “Republican” and “conservative” interchangeably as if synonymous. Second conservatives and especially Republicans do not appear to grasp they are in a war with liberals for the fate of liberty. Their attitude toward political defeat is similar to losing a baseball game; “We lost today but we’ll get them the next time”. Could such naïve attitudes explain Republican’s lack of support for President Trump in the face of the nation’s first coup? The struggle to preserve and regain lost freedom is not a sporting event. There will be no rematch, no comeback, and no tomorrow.
The term “conservative” represents an ideology based on a shared set of cohesive and interrelated economic, philosophical, political, and social norms grounded in Judeo-Christian principles.10 Republican on the other hand refers to a political party. Parties are “a group of citizens organized to win elections, control government, and set public policy”.11 The latter lacks the ideological underpinnings of the former. In general, conservatives believe rights are inviolate bestowed on people by G-d as stated in the Declaration of Independence.12 Conservatives embrace the Founder’s cornerstones of American democracy: individual liberty, limited government, representative democracy, and rule of law.13 Liberal’s misuse of terminology and assumption that conservative and Republican are synonymous is autobiographical. It reveals that, for them, ideology and political party are inseparable. They assume Republicans are doctrinaire conservatives because so many Democrats are doctrinaire liberals. They hate Republicans not because they are rivals for political power but because they are engaged in an ideological war and assume Republicans are as well. However, this is not the case.
For example, George Bush 41 let Americans down as much as Bill Clinton did with respect to onerous gun-control laws. Bush 43 stated he would sign a so-called “assault weapons” ban if it reached his desk.14 Former Massachusetts Republican Governor Mitt Romney supported abortion, homosexual “marriage” (sic), gun control, and state mandated health insurance, positions no conservative could ever embrace. Since the 1960s, liberals have worked to wed leftist ideology to the Democrat Party until they are one and the same. Historian John Dziak notes that the conjoining of a political party with the state (government) led to the creation of a security state in the former Soviet Union. It was obsessed with protecting its power and rule through the identification of enemies, “real or notional, and then destroying them.” It created a security service that “penetrated and permeated all societal institutions” including education, mass media, and the military. From the Cheka to the KGB, it was ruthless and driven to find and destroy all “enemies”.15 Liberals used to make thinly veiled suggestions that conservatives were crypto-Nazis. Now, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Sandy Cortez, Kali Harris, CNN, the New York Times, and many others are out of the closet asserting conservatives are Klansmen, Nazis, and vile racists, enemies America must destroy. Thin veils are gone.
David Horowitz contends that, until the ascendancy of George McGovern in the Democrat Party (1972), American political contests between Democrats and Republicans were non-ideological family feuds. This changed in the late 1960s when the counterculture Left took control of and reshaped the Democrat Party in its own image. He argues the Democrat Party is now almost indistinguishable from the traditional left-wing parties of Europe that made up the “Second Socialist International”. American liberals in general view rights as creations of government a view shared by European socialists. They reject the principle of limited government as well as the contractual nature of the Constitution. What the liberal media refers to as a “culture war” represents a conservative reaction to the Left’s assault against the Republic’s founding principles. Nevertheless, conservatives, especially those calling themselves Republicans, do not realize they are in a war according to Horowitz.16 Country club blue-blood Republicans from Theodore Roosevelt, Nelson Rockefeller, both President Bush’s, and Mitt Romney appear to view the Republican Party simply as a vehicle through which they can express their sense of noblesse oblige (nobility obligates). It is their duty to govern by virtue of their aristocratic birth. Ideology plays no role in their motivation to seek office. To win elections they are forced to associate with undesirables in the Republican Party; farmers, blue-collar workers, Christians, pro-lifers, 2nd Amendment advocates, supporters of traditional marriage, NASCAR-types, and the sort who shop at Bass Pro. Once elected, the blue bloods are free to disassociate from the rabble until the next election cycle. Laura Ingraham writes that many Republicans look down “on socially conservative, middle-class Americans as being too radical and hard-edged”. She calls them elitists and notes they “pride themselves on their ‘moderation’ ‘pragmatism’ and ability to forge ‘bipartisan agreements with their ‘good friends’ the Democrats.” She names Senators Lincoln Chafee, Olympia Snowe, and Susan Collins as examples of liberal Republicans who demonstrate their sophistication and fair-mindedness by agreeing with the liberal Democrat agenda.17 I could add to this list many other names. How are Republicans, doormats for Democrats, a viable alternative?
When Democrats control both chambers of Congress and the White House, they will be free to implement their three-pronged strategy to remake America in their socialist image and leave Republicans a permanent minority party. They will continue to neutralize conservatives through smear and slander campaigns rendering traditional Judeo-Christian moral values socially unacceptable. Liberals will denature the Republican Party by convincing them election of another Reagan is impossible. Instead, they must nominate “moderate” Republicans (liberals on the installment plan) to have any chance of winning the White House. This will kill support among real Americans for the Republican Party. Democrats will pass far-reaching socialistic legislation to further American dependency on the government guaranteeing Democrat rule in perpetuity. People will vote Democrat or risk losing goodies such as “free” healthcare. In addition, their assault on conservative radio and social media will escalate. Their listeners represent what former Maryland Governor Spiro T. Agnew called the “silent majority”.18 If liberals can discredit these spokesmen for conservatism, their voice and influence will disappear.
Former Connecticut Republican Congressman Chris Shays built a long career of bipartisanship by aping his liberal Democrat colleagues. Earning a lifetime score of only 44% from the American Conservative Union before he was retired, Shays told MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell that the Republican Party should broaden its base to include so-called moderates and liberals. Is he an Episcopalian? He added that former Vice President Dick Cheney and Rush Limbaugh should not be deciding who is or is not a good Republican and that Colin Powell was indeed “a good Republican for a long time”.19 After “good Republican”, Colin Powell turned on John McCain and endorsed Democrat Barack Obama he hit the speaking circuit with further denunciations of conservatives. He warned Republicans must broaden their party’s philosophical message meaning, become liberals. When asked by Bob Schieffer to respond to Limbaugh’s claim he was really a Democrat, Powell stated, “Republicans would be better off if they didn’t have Rush Limbaugh out speaking for them”.20 Regrettably, President Reagan appointed classroom Lt. General Colin Powell to deputy national security adviser in 1987.21 George W. Bush later appointed Powell to be Secretary of State. David Frum, liberal’s favorite “conservative Republican”, (who came out in support of homosexual marriage and voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016), jumped on the bandwagon with Powell and Shays. He agreed with Obama Chief of Staff and former Clinton hatchet man Rahm Emmanuel that Limbaugh is aggressive, bombastic, has a history of bad marriages, is a fat drug addict, and now is the head of the Republican Party. He accused Rush of wanting the party to lose because this will somehow increase his control over them. He advised Republicans to “modulate” their “social conservatism” meaning silencing the voices of Christians, pro-lifers, and those who support Biblical “marriage”.22 In short, faux conservatives like Shays, Powell, and Frum pushed to transform the Republican into the Democrat-Party Lite. Democrats fight for what they believe in and Republicans help them. Perhaps Republicans forget Reagan won two terms as Governor of a liberal state. When he ran for president, Reagan refused to modulate his conservative message that government was the problem not the solution and won two-landslide elections in the process.
I have no doubt Democrats rigged the 2020 presidential election and, through massive fraud and ballot stuffing, stole it from Donald Trump. It represents the first Lain American style coup in U.S. history. Americans are witnessing a political party, in cahoots with an entrenched bureaucracy, State media, and Big Tech, successfully depose an elected president. If Americans do not take a stand, if they do nothing, it is over. My respect for this country, its institutions, and neighbors will be gone. It will be time to furl the flag. If I am correct about them, Republicans will cast about for a Mitt Romney, Nikki Haley type “me-too” Republican for 2024. They will work behind the scenes to silence Trump supporters and his influence from the party…forever.
1 Great Quotes from the War Over Education, Education Watch at http://www.edwatch.org.
10 Clarence B. Carson, Basic American Government (Wadley, Alabama, American Textbook Committee, 1996), 502.
11 Richard J. Hardy, Government In America (Boston, Massachusetts, Houghton Mifflin Company, 1992), 268.
12 Barry Goldwater, The Conscience of a Conservative (New York, N.Y., Manor Books, Inc., 1960/1975), 9-14. See also; Clarence Carson’s Government, 61-66, Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy In America (Washington D.C., Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2002), -7, 10-12, 310, 396, 397-400, 406-13., Thomas E. Woods Jr., The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History, (Washington, D.C., Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2004), 2-6, 17, 20-22., Kiron K. Skinner, Annelise Anderson, Martin Anderson, editors, Reagan In His Own Hand (New York, N.Y. The Free Press, 2001), 174-78, 359-360, Gregory L. Schneider, editor, Conservatism In America Since 1930, (New York, N.Y. University Press, 2003), and George H. Nash, The Conservative Intellectual Movement In America Since 1945 (Wilmington, Delaware, Intercollegiate Studies Institute,1996.
13 Hardy, 31.
14 Eric Lichtblau, “Irking N.R.A., Bush Supports Ban On Assault Weapons”, May 8 2003, The New York Times, at https://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/08/irking-nra-bush-supports-the-ban-on-assault-weapons.html
15 John J. Dziak, Chekisty: A History of the KGB (Lexington, Massachusetts, Lexington Books, 1988), 1-18.
16 David Horowitz, The Art of Political War (Dallas, Texas, Spence Publishing Company, 2000), ix-xii.
17 Laura Ingraham, Shut Up And Sing: How Elites From Hollywood, Politics, And The U.N. Are Subverting America (Washington, D.C., Regnery Publishing Inc., 2003), 11-12.
18 Francis X. Clines, “Spiro T. Agnew, Point Man for Nixon Who Resigned Vice Presidency, Dies at 77” New York Times, (Thursday September 19, 1996), at http://www.nytimes.com/1996/09/19/us/spirot-t-agnew-point-man-for-nixon-who-resigned-vice-presidenc…
19 Scott Whitlock, “Andrea Mitchell Features Good Republican Chris Shays to Critique Steele,” News Busters at http://www.newsbusters.org (Scott Whitlock is a news analyst for the Media Research Center).
20 Colin Powell on Rush Limbaugh at http://rightwingnews.com
21 Ronald Reagan, An American Life: The Autobiography (New York, N.Y., Simon and Schuster, 1990), 535.
22 David Frum, “Why Rush Is Wrong” Newsweek (March 16, 2009), 25-32.
2 Ronald Reagan, Speaking My Mind (New York, N.Y., Simon and Schuster, 1989), 111. An address to the members of the British Parliament, Palace of Westminster, June 8, 1982.
3 Editors, “Immigration Officials Anticipate Flood of Illegal Immigrants Under Biden Administration”, Headline News USA, December 16 2020 at https://headlineusa.com/flood-illegal-immigrants.biden.
4 Clarence B. Carson, A Basic History of the United State, Volume 5: The Welfare State 1929-1985 (Wadley, Alabama, American Textbook Committee, 1987), 1.
5 Brian Crozier and Arthur Seldon, Socialism The Grand Delusion (New York, N.Y., Universe Books, 1986), 15.
6 Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Selected Works In Two Volumes, Volume II (London, England, Lawrence And Wishart, LTD., 1950), 13-15. See also, https://www.britanica.com/biography/Karl-Marx/quotes. From Karl Marx, “Critique of the Gotha Programme”, Foreign Language Press, Peking, 1972, David J. Romagnolo, editor, page 10 at http://ptb.lashout.net/marx2mao/M&E/cgp77.html.
7 Paul Craig Roberts, “GOP’s Deficit Phobia Ignores Larger Entitlement Problem” Human Events (March 3, 1995), 20.
8 Brian Crozier and Arthur Seldon, Socialism: The Grand Delusion (New York N.Y., Universe Books, 1986), 15-17.
9 Brion McClanahan, 9 Presidents Who Screwed Up America and four who tried to save her (Washington, D.C., Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2016), 102-118.
