The Conservative’s Welcome to the Liberal Base

The current collision of liberal and conservative ideology has forced much of the liberal base to re-examine long cherished beliefs. The reasons are different for each of the groups which make up the liberal base: for Jewish voters, it is that the left has chosen to embrace Islam and distance itself from Israel; for blacks, they are feeling the brunt of failed socialist economic policies; for women, they must consider the Islamic treatment of women and new revelations of a hostile work environment in the White House; and for young people who have been brainwashed in liberal-dominated universities, the harsh reality of the stifling effect on job prospects has caused them to rethink the utopian myths of liberalism. Homosexuals must consider the elites cuddling with an ideology where they are not treated so well either.

While each of these individuals within these groups must look deep within themselves to answer questions about what the liberal elites are really about, they must also examine, through a different lens, who exactly are these conservatives.

There is a common thread which originally captured the various elements of the liberal base: the idea that a paternal government will protect the underdog and the disenfranchised and that leaving the weak of our society to the wiles of competitive free market capitalism is just too daunting.

The Reagan years, however, made the case that a healthy free market economy is the best answer: jobs became available for even the less competitive of our society. All income brackets were better served by a thriving economy whose engine was unfettered capitalism. A level of safety net could then begin to operate without being a drain on the economy.

This historical fact, however, is a direct threat to socialist elites. They were disappointed that there were less of “the weak” to need them. The irony is that liberal megalomaniacs need people to be weak and needy; they want people to depend on them, for this is the source of their power. So, contrary to being compassionate, the truth is they are motivated by one thing only: power.

While both capitalism and socialism contain destructive narcissists, the former system contains offsets with the rule of law. Under socialism, dependence is institutionalized and the liberties of self-determination are thwarted altogether. Everyone is equally poor, dependent and weak under the elites.

Evidence of narcissism within the left can be found in their embrace of Islam and distancing from both Israel and Christianity.

What do islamofascists, with their insistence on sharia law, have in common with socialists? They both involve centralized control over the masses. The socialists do not care about the effect on women’s rights or the threat to Jews and Christians if they can acquire a tool to help establish more power and control of the populace.

It is time for Jewish citizens to understand that their enemy is not Christianity and Conservatism. The right in this country is not the Nazi right. The Tea Party is now called the extreme right wing even while they stand for nothing but small government, the Constitution and fiscal responsibility!

Blacks no longer need the government to control their lives either. There are laws in place to protect against institutionalized prejudice. The last thing they need is to be enslaved by elites who do not want them to believe that they can make it alone on their merits in a capitalistic economy.

Women also now have protections under the law and need not subscribe to an ideology who flirts with the epitome of prejudice against them: sharia law.

And the same goes for homosexuals: to not be satisfied with some form of civil union instead of trespassing on the age-old institution of marriage is ludicrous when compared to partnering with an ideology that caters to sharia law’s treatment.

It is time for all Americans to come together to reject the tyranny of socialism.

A NOTE TO THE UNEMPLOYED

Just thinking about where we are as a nation. Seems you would have to live under a rock not to notice the level of intensity, the virtual civil war between the left and the right. The left and the right— the words themselves aptly reflect the polarity of two opposing political positions.

Yet even the other classifications of types of people have fallen under the magnetic pull of one or the other, the left or the right. It is as if the people are being separated by an invisible sieve to prepare for the confrontation, the inevitable clash.

The words now ring hollow: have civil discourse; cooperate for a solution to the nation’s problems. The contenders for the championship belt of America’s future have been introduced into the ring, and the gloves have little padding.

In the end, it is a question of whether or not the present mindset, the present culture as a whole, has the courage to be free. And before America’s contemporary mindset can even be tested for its courage, what is at stake needs to be understood: the essence of America and her historical foundations, and the value of freedom itself.

When a convict has been in prison for many years, he settles into a certain steady state, a facet of the human condition. He has learned to rely on those who control him. He doesn’t have to think of many alternatives; he has become accustomed to operating within the bounds of his captors.

When many of these prisoners are freed, they become gripped with fear and uncertainty. Ultimately, many yield to old behaviors, wanting to return to the familiar state of predictable dependence. They forsake freedom for predictable control. The toughness of prison life gives way to cowardice in the face of freedom.

A well-kept secret is this: freedom is not for wimps. Nor is it cheap. It is difficult for a people to achieve and is easy to lose. The alternative is being comfortable letting others control you and make decisions for you. The room with a bed and a toilet becomes your cowardly haven from the responsibility of pursuing life, liberty and happiness.

In President Obama’s recent speech to a joint session of congress, he stated that America was not about “dismantling government and just leaving it to whomever to make the rules.” He does not want you to make your control closer to your community, county or state. He appeals to the jobless in particular, “let me take care of you.”

Don’t sell out your freedom. Take courage. Honor those who sacrificed their lives in battle for your freedoms. You can make it until the economy turns around in the manner of free markets and capitalism that has proven the vibrancy of freedom. You owe it not just to yourself but possibly your descendants for many, many years.

Foxes Guarding the Hen House: Sedition in High Places

Anywhere you find power in our society you will find its abuse. And where power is sufficient, they will inevitably be structured to police themselves so as to further secure their power. Police use their own Internal Affairs departments to “police” themselves; lawyers write ethics rules for themselves; legislators make laws to effectively pay off select constituents who donate enough to help them stay in power…and the list goes on.

Taking this truism into account, the framers of the Constitution of the United States structured the different branches of government and the power of the states to purposefully dilute and frustrate the tendency of power to be abused. The theory is that the less centralized the power, the less chance for abuse.

The goal: freedom. Freedom from the oppression of a select few who have delusions of grandeur and think they are better than the rest. These are the elitists. These are the ones who this government was built to protect against. And these are the ones who have most of the power in America at the time of this writing, 235 years later. Today they are called liberals or socialists.

These elitists, or liberals, understandably do not respect the Constitution or its principles. The Constitution is antithetical to their cause. Socialism and capitalism do not mix; they are like oil and water.

These are not specious accusations of a right wing conspiracy theorist; it is being proven daily in the open and on the record for anyone to see. However disconcerting this may be, it is undeniable: you are living in an historical time where the freedom of the people of the United States are under assault from “enemies within”.

While Treason cases are far and few between due to the competing issues of protection of the U.S. and protection from political repression, it can be argued that the degree of threat to the survival of the U.S. under its Constitution should be a preeminent factor in determining a policy to address the problem.

Citizens should remain protected from scurrilous repression of political free speech by use of Treason law. That is understood. However, when members of the House or Senate, or a President, explicitly espouse and implement a course of policy which is injurious to the existence of the U.S. as it is defined by its Constitution, they should at least be impeached. After all, there is a reason they are all required to take an oath to uphold the Constitution before they are allowed to officially hold their elected position. They are in a position of affecting the substance of the U.S. government and they should therefore be held to a narrower standard than the citizenry with regard to sedition.

A step forward with this policy needs to come from us. See http://cldc1.blogspot.com/2012/04/it-has-become-inherently-clear-that.html for protecting our "hens."