Tag Archives: liberty

Liberty Died in Cleveland: America’s Establishment Coup

Liberty died in Cleveland on Tuesday.[1]

Liberty Died in Cleveland

The coronation of Donald Trump as the GOP nominee in 2016 further consolidated the power of establishment elites in Washington, DC. During this election cycle, establishment elites in both the Republican and Democrat parties have seized greater power while crushing their grassroots rivals.

Sanders supporters seem to grasp that establishment Democrats rigged their nominating process to coalesce behind Hillary Clinton.

Trump supporters, however, are blind to the reality that they are backing a purported anti-establishment nominee who has always been part of the establishment.

To do so, they obstructed the campaign of the only truly anti-establishment candidate in this race:[2] Ted Cruz. Indeed, at the convention, they cheered when the Republican establishment squashed efforts to allow delegates to vote their conscience and they booed when Ted Cruz urged American citizens to vote their conscience.

When did heeding your conscience become a bad thing?

Barack Obama ruthlessly wields his pen and phone to circumvent the Constitution[3] and thwart the will of the People. Hillary Clinton[4] is self-evidently a statist averse to the rule of law and wants to further transform America in even more fundamental ways.[5]

Donald Trump, also a statist, is an authoritarian[6] bully[7] to boot, and he has proven his propensity to use his boots to stamp on human faces forever,[8] as so vividly pictured by George Orwell.

That more people hate their respective party’s candidates than like them shows the extent to which the establishment opposes the will of the People to pursue their own ends. Both Hillary and Trump are anathema to lovers of Liberty and America.[9]

Even though the establishment Left & Right have seized control and consolidated their power, the fight must go on for Liberty.[10] The American spirit can only succeed when it is committed and engaged in the fight.

Let us fight for Liberty!

Endnotes:

[1]               See “The End of the American Experiment?” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-eZ.

[2]               See “BrotherWatch Endorses Ted Cruz” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-dw.

[3]               See “CPAC: Death by a 1,000 Pens” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-eV.

[4]               See “HRC: A Caricature of the Left” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-94.

[5]               See “Flags Depict Obama’s Fundamental Transformation of America and the World” at http://t.co/xjupplSWD1.

[6]               See “Why Brad Thor is #NeverTrump! Litmus test is liberty!” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-fb.

[7]               See “How to Talk to a Bully (if you must)” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-cY.

[8]               See “Will Ann Coulter Apologize to Michelle Fields?” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-di.

[9]               See “Stop Insisting I Vote!” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-f5.

[10]             See “CPAC: Brits Seek Independence (and so should we)” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-eT.

Left Topsy-Turvy on American Revolution and Brexit

As America celebrates another birthday and the British people celebrated their Brexit vote for freedom from tyranny to a supranational bureaucracy, the heart and soul of the American Left again exposed itself as statist and globalist.

American Revolution & Brexit

Exhibit A: Steve Pincus. His recent Washington Post article attempts to paint Brexit supporters and the Republican Party as racist, anti-American xenophobes. In his introductory and subsequent paragraphs, Pincus inextricably links pro-Brexit forces with the agenda and sentiments of American conservatives and Pincus finds them wanting.

His headline asserts, “No, Brexit was not Britain’s ‘Declaration of Independence.’ It was the exact opposite.” Pincus couldn’t be more wrong.

His subheading: “The American founders would revile the pro-‘leave’ camp.” Again, his conclusion is contrary to everything we know about the Founding Fathers.

Nevertheless, Pincus contends, “But they’ve got America’s founding document exactly backward. The original American patriots would be horrified to hear their opus invoked in the service of Brexit.”

Pincus makes two striking, and strikingly wrong, claims.

Open vs. Controlled Borders

Pincus’ first strikingly wrong claim is that our Founders and the Framers of our Constitution, favored open borders. Pincus claims, “The founders called for a government that would allow for free movement of goods and peoples.”

Actually, American colonists sought control over their own borders. They vehemently opposed a power across the Atlantic Ocean determining their fate and enacting laws without their consent and contrary to their wishes.

Pincus cites the Declaration: “He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.”

No “open borders” here. What did the Founders actually seek? How do we interpret that portion of the Declaration? By what the Founders did. As noted by Heritage Foundation (emphasis added):

“Congress passed the first ‘uniform Rule of Naturalization’ under the new Constitution in March 1790. It allowed ‘any alien, being a free white person’ and ‘of good character’ who had resided in the United States for two years to become a ‘citizen of the United States’ by taking an oath in court ‘to support the constitution of the United States.’”

The very first Congress actually limited and circumscribed immigration by a clear set of criteria, looking for emigres from the Northwestern European nations which had settled America.

Heritage continues (emphasis added): “Key criteria for citizenship of the Naturalization Act of 1795 remain part of American law. These include (1) five years of (lawful) residence within the United States; (2) a ‘good moral character, attached to the principles of the Constitution of the United States, and well disposed to the good order and happiness of the United States’; (3) the taking of a formal oath to support the Constitution and to renounce any foreign allegiance; and (4) the renunciation of any hereditary titles.”

In contrast to the Founders’ wishes and the law of the land, today illegal aliens celebrate their Mexican holidays while burning the American flag and promoting the overthrow of the American government. Our Founders would have put a stop to this.

Activist vs. Limited Government

Pincus’ second strikingly wrong claim is that our Founders and the Framers of our Constitution favored an activist government. (Hence the subtitle of his new book.[1])

According to Pincus, “America’s founders celebrated the creative potential of the state to promote the general welfare and happiness of the people; they wanted an activist government – one that would intervene in the economy to promote growth.”

To buttress his claim, Pincus cites the Second Continental Congress: “Government was instituted to promote the welfare of mankind, and ought to be administered for the attainment of that end.”

But what did the crafters of our Republic actually mean by “welfare?” The Founders sought to promote the “general welfare and happiness of the people” by securing liberty! They understood that a free people – being secured in their liberty and able to use their God-given gifts as they deemed best – could, in today’s parlance, “maximize their potential,” strengthen their local communities, and improve the general welfare of the nation.

Our Founding Fathers fought for freedom and limited government to preserve that freedom.

Pincus clearly regards FDR’s “Second Bill of Rights” as superior to, and countermanding, our Founders’ original Bill of Rights. FDR’s progressive economic bill of rights seeks equality of outcome through government force while the Framers of our Constitution, with their political bill of rights, sought to maximize freedom and, thus, equality of opportunity.

Progressives like Pincus agree with President Obama’s assessment that America is fundamentally flawed[2] and, therefore, needs to be fundamentally transformed.[3] The Founders, Framers, and generations of Americans heartily disagree.[4] Middle America seeks to reclaim its heritage,[5] one built upon a Judeo-Christian ethos[6] which cherished liberty.

Similarly, progressives like Pincus, the Obamas, and the Clintons seek to eviscerate nationalism and elevate supranational and global institutions. In doing so, they willfully dismiss, like willing dupes,[7] the nexus between the immigration and terrorism crises.[8]

Progressives follow Hillary Clinton’s It Takes a Village (i.e., big government) when our great nation was founded on the premise that the primary duty of government is the protection of the People at home (law enforcement) and abroad (national defense) – and from government itself (Constitution).

Nationalism vs. Supra-nationalism

At heart, America as a Nation and a People matters little to these progressives who prefer to use American power and ideals against her in pursuit of their own globalist utopian goals.

Pincus equates “English First” pro-Brexit voters with the resurgence of contemporary America Firsters inspired by Donald Trump. To some degree he is correct, yet he regards that as a bad thing.

The heart and core of the Brexit Vote was to liberate the British people from the bureaucratic behemoth of the European Union’s usurpation of national sovereignty[9] and abrogation of the will of the People. Similarly, Middle America seeks its own independence from a draconian federal government[10] which serves its own needs and purposes while thwarting those whom they purportedly serve.

But Pincus again twists the historical record, asserting that late 18th-century Britons wanted the American colonists (legal settlers all) to pay their “fair share,” likening them to illegal aliens in America, today.

In reality, the American colonists – who were all self-supporting and obviously did not rely on a non-existent welfare state for survival – disagreed with the Mother Country and insisted upon, “No taxation without representation.” Our forefathers, like us, preferred a free market system without undue taxation and regulation, the very things Pincus and his lot pursue.

In his tract (and presumably in his forthcoming book as well), Pincus skirts this crucial reality: the majority of the colonists came from Britain and shared legal, linguistic, political, social, cultural, and spiritual similarities with the British realm.

Those brave men and women who gave birth to this great nation were brothers and sisters by blood who forged a new nation by creed. That creed – “all men are created equal” and “endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights” – is central to our identity as Americans.

Individual rights, not collective rights; equality of opportunity, not of outcome; reverence for God, not for the State.

As Americans, we should celebrate the greatness of America as achieved by the Providence of God through the wisdom of the Founders and we should strive to return to our roots, to restore that vision of “government of the People, by the People, and for the People,” eschewing the liberty-denying statism of the Progressive vision.

Let us reinvigorate the American experiment that it may not perish from the earth.

God bless America!

Endnotes:

[1]              Pincus’ historical revisionism is apparent in the title to his forthcoming book, Heart of the Declaration: The Founders’ Case for an Activist Government.

[2]              See “Obama’s America – Fundamentally Flawed” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-1h.

[3]              See “Flags Depict Obama’s Fundamental Transformation of America and the World” at http://t.co/xjupplSWD1.

[4]              See “American Exceptionalism is in the Eye of the Beholder” at http://t.co/UDFIbFm5hr.

[5]              See “Reclaiming America!” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-9V.

[6]              See “CPAC: America’s Christian Heritage Denied” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-8E.

[7]              See “Willful Blindness to Reality” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-c9.

[8]              See “Member of European Parliament Links Terrorism with Immigration Crisis” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-e8.

[9]              See “CPAC: Brits Seek Independence (and so should we)” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-eT.

[10]            See “CPAC: Death by a 1,000 Pens” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-eV.

Find Freedom in Jesus

“Then one was brought to Him who was demon-possessed, blind and mute; and He healed him, so that the blind and mute man both spoke and saw.” – Matthew 12:22

LifeLifter15

Isn’t it remarkable?

Jesus healed a demon-possessed man who was both blind and mute. Jesus freed him from his imprisonment to demons and darkness.

Jesus can free us, too.

In many ways, we all live inside our own prisons. Some prisons may be of our own making, through sin, addictions, and wrong decisions.

Every bad choice we’ve made locks us up in some form of prison. It can be relational, emotional, financial or something else. As a result, we may experience loss of freedom and despair.

The difference between freedom and confinement is found in our answer to the question, “Who is Jesus?”

The Pharisees claimed Jesus was a charlatan or doing the work of the devil. Others realized that He is the Son of God.

Our answer and response to that question – Who is Jesus? – is the most important decision we will ever make.

Jesus came to set us free.

Jesus said, “The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to set the oppressed free” (Luke 4:18).

With his sacrifice, Jesus declared us “Not guilty!” and opened our jail cells.

Will we accept the freedom that Jesus offers and walk through those open doors into his open arms? Or will we remain imprisoned by our sins, our addictions and our wrong behaviors?

God has given us freedom to choose. Let us choose wisely.

[Background photo courtesy Sundown First Baptist Church.]

Why Brad Thor is #NeverTrump! Litmus Test is Liberty!

Author and Constitutional conservative Brad Thor recently posted his reasons for being #NeverTrump.

Brad Thor Never Trump

In his remarkably cogent and convincing Facebook post, Thor explains what each one of us should have instinctively known about The Donald and his penchant for authoritarianism.

We see that autocratic spirit in Trump’s words and behavior, his attitudes and actions.

Thor makes the case for liberty being the foundational spirit of America (the land of liberty whose Declaration of Independence has inspired millions of people worldwide) and documents Trump’s own lifetime jihad against freedom and the Constitution designed for its preservation.

Here are a few highlights from his excellent commentary. Thor writes (emphasis added):

As an American, my greatest allegiance is to liberty. As long as there is liberty, no task is insurmountable, no challenge too overwhelming. As long as there is liberty, anything is possible.

The true north of my compass has been, and always will be, liberty. I owe it to those who have come before me and those who will come after. I will act to safeguard liberty no matter what personal price I may be forced to bear.

Liberty is my litmus test. I weigh all actions of my government and those who seek office, against it. The ledger of freedom is incorruptible; its pages open for anyone to examine, and most importantly – to learn from.

When I apply my litmus test of liberty to Donald Trump, he fails – completely.

From supporting an assault weapons ban, the seizure of private property via eminent domain, the restructuring of libel laws, and socialized medicine (just to name a few) – throughout his entire adult life, Donald Trump has repeatedly championed the power of the state.

With the lessons of history as my guide, I see in Donald Trump the character flaws that are the hallmarks of despotism.

[Trump] threatens to further enlarge the state, the other, potentially (a la Napoleon), to become it.

My greatest concern about Donald Trump, though, isn’t a trait he lacks, but a dangerous one he possesses – in spades. Authoritarianism.

Donald Trump has told us to just wait and see what he does to Jeff Bezos once he gets into the White House. He has told us the American military will do whatever he tells them to do no matter what their reservations. He has promised to prevent American companies from moving outside the United States, regardless of what they believe is best for their businesses.

In other words, Donald Trump has clearly told all of us that he will use the power of the presidency to force people to bend to his will. This is not liberty.

The blueprint for America’s success is the ideas of the Framers – limited, Constitutional governance – an area in which Donald Trump is criminally ignorant.

But between a big government progressive and a potential despot – every American must ask themselves where liberty has the greatest chance to survive over the next four years.

Update: Politico reports that Trump plans on blacklisting #NeverTrump vendors and organizations. He habitually – instinctively – threatens and punished those who disagree with him.

The End of the American Experiment?

In Indiana, Trump won and America lost.

A Trump or Hillary presidency is almost a fait accompli.

American Experiment

However, the #NeverTrump and #NeverHillary movements remain unalterably opposed to the presumptive nominees of their respective parties (as they should be!).

Both candidates are statists who are averse to constitutional restraints.

Both candidates would wield a pen and a phone as ruthlessly as Barack Obama.

Neither candidate is trusted or trustworthy.

Each feels entitled to be president, as if they had a divine right to the presidency, and either would rule like a philosopher-king, with the governing philosophy being “What do I want to do today?”

In office, either would exercise a will to power and dictatorial designs beyond what the current president has attempted. Moreover, Congress would be impotent before them.

A Trump or Clinton presidency would continue and accelerate Barack Obama’s fundamental transformation of America, perhaps irreversibly.

Choosing the lesser of two evils is still choosing evil.

If America elects either Clinton or Trump, America as we knew it is gone and tyranny will reign.

America has ceased to be great because we have ceased to be good. We have turned our backs on God and He is giving us what we deserve.

Lord, have mercy on us!

The Conservative Declaration

Please join BrotherWatch in support of Heritage Foundation’s “The Conservative Declaration.”

As of this writing, 112,817 have signed “The Conservative Declaration.”

Conservative Declaration

Heritage Foundation urges American citizens to:

Stand with your fellow patriots for freedom, religious liberty, and free enterprise. Stand up for your belief that these unalienable rights serve as the cornerstone of our great nation.

PREAMBLE

More than two centuries ago, one declaration changed the world

  • A group of brave individuals declared that all people are fundamentally equal—equally born with rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
  • They declared that government exists for one reason — to secure these God-given rights, deriving its powers from the consent of the people it governs.

The result? The founding of the United States of America.

But now America is under siege by radicals whose mission is to slowly and deliberately dismantle the principles of that original declaration. With over-reaching regulation, out-of-control spending, high deficits, and a weakened national defense, the government is the master. The consent of the people is ignored. America is looking less and less like the America of our Founding Fathers.

This must be stopped.

Conservatives must come together to stand for the principles on which our nation was founded and proclaim in unison our commitment to the ideals that our Founders proclaimed more than two centuries ago. The time has come for a new declaration to change the world.

THE CONSERVATIVE DECLARATION

We believe in the spirit of our Founding Fathers and come together from across the nation to sign the following Declaration,, reaffirming our belief in the principles on which our nation was founded. We sign as individual citizens, united in our belief that our nation was established as a constitutional republic in which the power of government is limited under the rule of law, securing liberty and justice for all.

1. CERTAIN UNALIENABLE RIGHTS

We believe this nation is uniquely dedicated to the universal principles of human liberty: that all are fundamentally equal and equally endowed with unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Americans are necessarily equal and self-governing citizens, and the U.S. government is established to secure those fundamental rights. With a limited government, we have the liberty and opportunity to live our lives, control our fates, and pursue our own happiness.

2. PRIVATE PROPERTY

We believe in the right to the rewards of our own labor—the promise that we Americans can keep what we earn and that this makes possible a society in which every member can work hard, pursue opportunity, and advance in life based on individual talent and ability. In this America, success comes from hard work and personal merit rather than from entitlement or aristocracy.

3. FREE ENTERPRISE

We believe that the primary duties of the federal government in regard to the economy are to guarantee the equal rights of the individual, destroy barriers to opportunity, and uphold the rule of law. Because economic opportunity will be available to everyone, the people will have great incentive to earn more, save more, and invest in more opportunities for the future. This means more enterprise and more economic activity.

Rather than acting to guarantee economic outcomes, government should provide the sturdy framework for opportunity, economic growth, and human flourishing. It should remove unfair obstacles to economic markets, break down the artificial government structures that prevent competition, and otherwise keep tax rates low, reduce government spending, and prevent the over-regulation of private enterprise.

4. COMMON DEFENSE

We believe it is the constitutional duty of the federal government to secure the country’s international borders, preserve and protect its territorial integrity, and strengthen and preserve its constitutional government. This promotes the long-term prosperity and well-being of the American people. This means that the United States must be able, willing, and prepared at all times to defend itself, its people, and its institutions from conventional and unconventional threats to its vital interests, both at home and abroad.

But liberty does not belong only to this country. The United States must also continue to recognize its special responsibility to support the cause of liberty in the world.

5. RELIGIOUS FREEDOM

We understand and support the unique and important role of religious freedom as the cornerstone of our constitutional freedoms. The ability to freely worship and to act in accordance with a particular faith without fear of government reprisal is essential to civil society. Religious freedom protects our ability to live according to our deepest beliefs. It means we don’t have to hide who we are and what we stand for. It’s a freedom recognized as essential by the Founding Fathers and defended by policymakers, citizens, and religious leaders alike.

However, over-reaching government and a growing disregard for the role of faith in public life have led to increasing erosions of religious liberty. Together we stand in defiance of any edict that compels our institutions to participate in any act that impedes our ability to freely worship or to act in accordance with a particular faith without fear of government reprisal.

6. LIMITED GOVERNMENT

We emphatically reject today’s welfare and regulatory state. “We the people” demand less of our federal government rather than more. We commit ourselves as a nation to the principles and policies of a limited federal government and to the recovery of our Founders’ vision of a government that secures our rights. We insist that for government to play its proper role, it must be properly limited in its role.

Government must perform its proper responsibilities effectively through the three distinct branches of federal government, through all 50 states and through thousands of counties and local municipalities. We demand that the government recognize the clear constitutional limits to its powers.

[Signatories agree with the preceding.]

As individuals, we sign our names in full support of the above principles.

Together, we represent a unified front to support America’s foundational ideals. We reject the progressive efforts to dismantle our nation’s foundations and will work tirelessly for the restoration of our constitutional republic.

BrotherWatch Endorses Ted Cruz

BrotherWatch is delighted to endorse Sen. Ted Cruz for President of the United States!

BW Endorses Ted Cruz

Sen. Cruz has proven his love for God and country.

His lifelong love of, and fidelity to, the Constitution puts most of Congress to shame. The humble senator from Texas has courageously fought the good fight against the establishment from within the halls of Congress.

Sen. Cruz is a warrior for the Constitution and Liberty, the perfect antidote to a lawless regime which wields a pen and a phone to circumvent both the Constitution and the will of the People.

Sen. Cruz, a faithful Christian, is also a friend and vocal supporter of Israel.

Sen. Cruz is Reaganesque in principles and perspective, prompting Rush Limbaugh to call him “the closest in our lifetimes we have ever been to Ronald Reagan!”

If we want a bright Morning in America again, elect Ted Cruz!

Left Fixated on Mythical, White, Right-Wing Extremists!

The Left has gone bonkers again, this time over the Oregon rancher standoff.

Mythical

As reported by Infowars (emphasis added):

“Numerous voices are calling for a literal bloodbath in Oregon – and the exercise of unilateral government power to kill the individuals involved, including supporters. It is an armed and highly-charged, but so far peaceful situation that is, nonetheless, rooted firmly in civil disobedience and principle. But that hasn’t stopped opponents from calling for them to be treated like domestic terrorists.”

The Left is incoherently outraged, making spurious racial charges and demonizing whites, conservatives, law enforcement, and the media over alleged racial and political bias in favor of whites and conservatives. (What world do they live in?)

In the Age of Islamic Terrorists, the Left continues to be obsessed with alleged white, right-wing extremists! Why this obsession? Two reasons. One – they are white.[1] Two – they are conservative. But are they extremists? In the mind of the Left, yes. To more rational human beings, no.

Salon Leads the Charge!

Headline: “No happy ending in Oregon: We can’t reward white, right-wing extremists every time they pull a gun and threaten violence”

How is not wantonly killing protesters engaged in legitimate, peaceful, civil disobedience rewarding them? They have a right to protest! (First Amendment: “the right to peaceably assemble.”)

How often do “white, right-wing extremists” “pull a gun and threaten violence?”

The writers at Salon apparently think it is very often.

But, are these justice-seeking ranchers really extremists? And, are they threatening violence? No and no. They are engaged in a peaceful protest, an act of civil disobedience which, if conducted by liberals, would be treated as a noble act of social justice.

Salon’s lead paragraph claimed that the ranchers “are protesting perceived overreach from the federal government.”

Except, of course, the federal overreach is far more than perceived. It is very, very real. The convicted ranchers have already served time for trumped-up charges.

Salon graciously declined to call them “terrorists,” preferring the term “separatists,” because of “the group’s refusal to acknowledge the federal government”

Except, of course, the so-called “separatists” want neither separation nor an emasculated federal government. They want a federal government which operates within the framework of the Constitution.

Salon then compared these white “separatists” “with black protesters and Occupy Wall Street.” Salon claimed that the encampments of “peaceful, unarmed [Occupy Wall Street] protesters” “were brutally dismantled by law enforcement. Police didn’t hesitate to use tear gas, rubber bullets and batons to clear them out.”

Except, of course, Occupy Wall Street activists were far from peaceful and it often took weeks for the government to respond. Indeed, OWS encampments occupied entire parks in the nation’s capital, and other U.S. cities, for months!

Salon also claimed, “Nor was there any hesitation to call in the National Guard on Black Lives Matter protesters in Baltimore. So far, the Malheur occupiers are meeting no such resistance.”

Except, of course, the Baltimore “protesters” were violent rioters and looters committing mayhem while Baltimore authorities actually dillydallied in seeking assistance, choosing instead to give them “space to destroy.” The rioters wanted to purge the city.[2] In contrast, the so-called “separatists” have harmed and threatened no one.

Having made a false equivalence while distorting the facts, Salon then pitched its message:

“This discrepancy is important. Peaceful, left-wing protesters are fair game for state violence. But when armed anti-government zealots seize federal property and promise to defend themselves, law enforcement takes time for tact, maybe even negotiation.”

Salon fabricated so-called “state violence” against allegedly “Peaceful, left-wing protesters.” The actual violence of Occupy Wall Street and Black Lives Matter is uncontestable. Moreover, their violent rhetoric encourages more violence as they call for the assassination of their foes and the burning of cities. Their nihilistic sense of “justice” is the killing of those they hate.

In contrast, the “separatists,” as Salon calls them, are defending themselves from government overreach.

Salon concluded, “more important, we cannot reward white, right-wing extremists every time they pull a gun and threaten violence. And if there is bloodshed, there is real danger it will spread like the Hammonds’ own fire.”

If only Salon had the courage to challenge left-wing movements which really are violent! And what do we make of Leftists who want these “separatists” to be killed? Are Leftists really peaceful and supportive of the rule of law? Or are they selective in the law’s application?

Protester, Separatist, or Terrorist?

At least Salon did not call the ranchers “terrorists!” Others on the Left were not so sanguine.

As pointed out by Tammy Bruce, “No one’s at risk. There’s no one in the vicinity. They happen to have their firearms. That’s their lifestyle.” In contrast, “the 2011 takeover of Wisconsin’s capitol building by union activists resulted in millions of dollars in damages, yet no one considered referring to them as terrorists.” (Did you see the video at the time? Anarchy and wanton destruction!)

Alan Colmes, on the other hand, focused on race and ethnicity, claiming, “If you had Muslims here it would be called domestic terrorism,” apparently believing the white “separatists” should be called “terrorists.” In fact, Islamic terrorism is the terrorism threat endangering Americans today.[3]

The Left continues to be obsessed with the race of individuals,[4] rather than the nature of their actions. If whites or conservatives do it, it must be bad; if minorities or liberals do it, it must be good.

Justified Civil Disobedience

David French made some salient observations. Having analyzed the original court case, French observed, “What emerges is a picture of a federal agency that will use any means necessary, including abusing federal anti-terrorism statutes, to increase government landholdings.” It’s all about a land-grab by the government.

According to the ranchers, in the 1990s, “the government then began a campaign of harassment designed to force the family to sell its land, beginning with barricaded roads and arbitrarily revoked grazing permits and culminating in an absurd anti-terrorism prosecution based largely on two ‘arsons’ that began on private land but spread to the Refuge.”

French added, “There’s a clear argument that the government engaged in an overzealous, vindictive prosecution here. … To the outside observer, it appears the government has attempted to crush private homeowners and destroy their livelihood in a quest for even more land.”

Unlike Leftist protests this decade (think Black Lives Matter, Occupy Wall Street, various college campus protests), these ranchers are occupying “a vacant federal building in the middle of nowhere, and there is no reported threat to innocent bystanders.”

Yet, some on the Left want the federal government to crack down on the ranchers with “shoot to kill” orders because they are white conservatives who do not fit the liberal narrative for social justice activists.

French concluded: “Yet now they’re off to prison once again – not because they had to go or because they harmed any other person but because the federal government has pursued them like a pack of wolves. They are victims of an all-too-common injustice. Ranchers and other landowners across the country find themselves chafing under the thumb of an indifferent and even oppressive federal government. Now is the time for peaceful protest. If it gets the public to pay attention, it won’t have been in vain.”

Are these ranchers “right-wing extremists” and “terrorists” as the Left would have you believe? Or are they simply American citizens seeking justice from a tyrannical government through peaceful civil disobedience?

Endnotes:

[1]               See “Guilty of Being White” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-17.

[2]               See “Baltimore ‘Purged’” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-8S.

[3]               See “Willful Blindness to Reality” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-c9.

[4]               See “Identity Politics Is the Problem” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-1l.

In search of Big Brother – Part 1

In search of Big Brother (to restore sanity to an insane world)

Part 1 – Trends to Tyranny

In October 1996, I wrote, “The world is going crazy, and we can’t stop it or get off. Instead, many seek a Superman to set it right. But will our Clark Kent save us, or enslave us?”

Since then, things have gotten far, far worse.

BB01

Nearly two decades ago, I wrote, “We are living in the midst of an age of transformation unlike that of any other, an age of incredible opportunities and growth coupled with unimaginable horror. Global changes are occurring before our very eyes, life-transforming changes which impact everyone who reads this. What does the future hold in store for us? There are many visions of the future. Not being a prognosticator, I cannot tell you what will happen. But I can point out some ominous trends.”

9/11 changed the world as we knew it and the Obama presidency has fundamentally transformed America. Orwellian trends which began more than 50 years ago have reached critical mass and We, the People, seem helpless to stop it.

We are at a pivotal point in history where civilization itself seems in jeopardy and what each one of us does (or does not do) will determine the outcome.

As the year 1984 approached, Orwell’s 1984 became in vogue. Interest in Orwellian themes reemerged during the Clinton administration. At that time, I wrote a series of essays which are even more relevant today, given the massive expansion of the federal government and the powers of the Executive Branch under the Obama administration. (One reader recently called them prescient.)

Four Trends to Tyranny

I addressed four cultural and political trends, each of which has been magnified with 1) the advent of astonishing technological advances which have revolutionized life around the globe, 2) the reemergence of belligerent tyrannical and terrorist regimes in hot spots around the globe, and 3) the unbridled assault of political correctness advancing a socialist agenda in America.

Whether we are dealing with the massive growth of terrorism and government, mass immigration and refugee crises, or the war on climate change and on the free market, those trends inevitably lead to tyranny. (If we let them!)

Those four trends are balkanization, globalization, technophilia (progress) and technophobia (regress or primitivism). These trends have been visible for more than half-a-century and they are accelerating at a tremendous pace. Singly, they pose perplexing problems, but combined, they may prove themselves beyond our ability to deal with.

Back in the mid-1990s, Samuel Huntington envisioned a clash between Eight Civilizations; Joel Garreau dissected North America into Nine “Nations.” U.S. News & World Report described Seven Tribes in the United States and also pictured the Two Nations of America. Matthew Connelly and Paul Kennedy prophetically predicted an invasion of the West by the Rest, while Peter Brimelow documented that invasion in Alien Nation. Clearly peace on earth has not become reality.

The world is falling apart, nations are disintegrating, cultures are fragmenting, peoples are torn asunder, and many question whether Humpty Dumpty can ever get a face lift let alone be repaired. The centrifugal forces in society are creating sub-groups within sub-groups, cults within cults, enclaves within enclaves, in a relentless process of fragmentation – all culminating in a drive for a strong hand (e.g., strong centralized government) to bring it all back together again.

American Identity

Over the past three decades, American identity, American values, and American purpose have all undergone enormous transformation. The nature and value of citizenship itself is in peril. Who we are as a People is under attack by usurpers who would redefine our very being. The forces arrayed against Americans are unyielding.

We, like Winston Churchill, must never surrender!

President Obama contends that America is fundamentally flawed[1] and that, under his leadership, she has never been stronger.[2] His evidence refutes his contention.[3]

Fortunately, most Americans still cherish American exceptionalism[4] and reject the values foisted upon our nation and her people.[5]

Now, as we are encircled by a multitude of genuine crises (and distracted by a host of hysterical hoaxes), we must combat the agenda of Obama and the far Left and renew the vision and pursue the dream bequeathed to us by the Founders. Let us reclaim the America that became great because she was good.[6]

Our vision must be clear and our purpose focused. We must not be distracted or confused by Orwellian rhetoric from the Left.[7] To that end this essay series is dedicated.

Please join me in this journey of introspection as this series of essays explores the depths of the dangers facing us in the world, in our nation, and in our local communities. Let us, together, discern what went wrong, identify the enemy forces confronting us, and take action to restore the American Dream.

Endnotes:

[1]               See “Obama’s America – Fundamentally Flawed” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-1h.

[2]               See “Obama: America is Stronger Than Ever” at http://t.co/3dxkSeF8fj.

[3]               See “Flags Depict Obama’s Fundamental Transformation of America and the World” at http://t.co/xjupplSWD1.

[4]               See “American Exceptionalism is in the Eye of the Beholder” at http://t.co/UDFIbFm5hr.

[5]               See “America – Lost in a Fog of Immorality and Tyranny” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-aL.

[6]               See “Reclaiming America!” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-9V.

[7]               See “’Hope & Change,’ and Other Orwellian Clichés” at http://t.co/v6fgItffhm.

America – Lost in a Fog of Immorality and Tyranny

For centuries, our American forefathers fought for individual liberty, traditional morality, and a just government. Now, we are losing all three.

The Federalist No. 51 adroitly addresses the paradox of human liberty: “If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary.”

AmericaLost

Therein lies the rub. Human beings – being human beings – desire liberty for themselves but succumb to the temptations of ruling tyrannically over others. Hence, our Founding Fathers deliberate framing of a government divided among three branches (executive, legislative, judicial), geographically (federal, state, local), and otherwise.

Now, we live in the worst of both worlds.

The human temptation to exceed boundaries has proceeded apace for generations and has finally succeeded in tearing down those limitations on government, empowering the government to place unlimited limitations upon the People.

This political role reversal has been accompanied by a similar reversal morally and spiritually.

Alexis de Tocqueville observed: “America is great because she is good. If America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.” Rather than be good, Americans have chosen – or had foisted upon them – a government which enjoins non-traditional immorality and proclaims itself the arbiter of the People’s will, irrespective of the People’s actual interests.

Regarding the exaltation of gay marriage, David French observes, “This is the era of sexual liberty – the marriage of hedonism to meaning – and the establishment of a new civic religion. The black-robed priesthood has spoken. Will the church bow before their new masters?”

We now have a culture without restraints and a government without restraints!

The remainder of this column addresses the impact of recent Supreme Court decisions which, perhaps inalterably, will transform the lives of every American. Here are some highlights for your consideration:

Andrew C. McCarthy

“Roberts’s denial that the Court legislates is astonishing in its cynicism: In saving SCOTUScare, the chief justice not only usurped Congress’s law-writing role with gusto; he claimed the powers, first, to divine legislative purpose from its contradictory expression in legislative language, and, then, to manufacture legislative ambiguity as the pretext for twisting the language to serve the contrived purpose.”

“Already, an ocean of ink has been spilled analyzing, lauding, and bemoaning the Supreme Court’s work this week: a second life line tossed to SCOTUScare in just three years; the location of a heretofore unknown constitutional right to same-sex marriage almost a century-and-a-half after the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment; and the refashioning of Congress’s Fair Housing Act to embrace legal academe’s loopy ‘disparate impact’ theory of inducing discrimination.”

“And it is not so much that they [the liberal justices] move in lockstep. It is that no one expects them to do anything but move in lockstep – not their fellow justices, not the political branches, and certainly not the commentariat, right or left.”

Kevin D. Williamson

“In the matter of the so-called Affordable Care Act, the Supreme Court ruled that the law must not say what it in fact does say because it would be better if it were not to say what it says and were to say something else instead. In the matter of same-sex marriage, the Supreme Court rules that the law must say what it does not say because it would be better if it were to say what it does not say instead of what it says. Which is to say, the Supreme Court has firmly established that it does not matter what the law says or does not say – what matters is what they want.”

Ben Shapiro

“The day after declaring Obamacare magically rewritten and that the lawsuits against discrimination in housing require no proof of actual discrimination, the Supreme Court found a unicorn in the 14th Amendment.”

“In the end, Kennedy’s case is simply that to be against same-sex marriage is bigotry: “It demeans gays and lesbians for the State to lock them out of a central institution of the Nation’s society.” With breathtaking arrogance, Kennedy concludes:”

“The limitation of marriage to opposite-sex couples may long have seemed natural and just, but its inconsistency with the central meaning of the fundamental right to marry is now manifest.”

[Shapiro continues:] “For thousands of years, everybody got it wrong. For hundreds of years, every American state got it wrong. Today, the vast majority of the planet’s population gets it wrong, and so do hundreds of millions of Americans. But their wrongness is ‘manifest.’ Why? Because Kennedy says so.”

“But in the idolatry of the left, we do not have the freedom to govern ourselves, nor even to rely the old God for our values and truths. Our betters will lead us. And they will grant any right they see fit, and reject any liberty they see fit, and redefine any term they see fit. Democracy in America did not die with jackboots; it died with the boredom and stupidity of an American people complicit in its demise, celebrating the circuses and the games provided by its new rulers, fat and happy in their submission. Let the parades be held; let the call go forth. By the power vested in them by, well, them, the Supreme Court and the left declare Americans husbands and husbands, wives and wives – and all of them slaves.”

[John S. Roberts provides salient quotes from our Founders on liberty and tyranny.]