Tag Archives: LIBERALISM

Mark Caserta: Readers respond to columnist’s question

5 Aug

me

Mark Caserta:  Free State Patriot editor

Aug 4, 2017

 

capitol

Last week’s column, “Did West Virginians elect Trump out of ignorance?,” was centered on the facetious question as to whether voters in our state are qualified to make an educated choice for president of the United States.

Of course they are.

But some of the cynical responses were very telling. Some even had me questioning the reader’s ability to comprehend the text, as portrayed in this response from one reader.

“Mark. Oh no, buddy. It has finally hit you right between the eyes. YOU are seeing Trump for what he is. You’re asking YOURSELF this question: Did I help elect Trump out of ignorance? Looks like you’ve been mulling that over.”

Other folks, as in this reader, surmised West Virginians simply chose the “lesser of two evils.”

“As West Virginians only had, as a viable alternative vote in 2016 the corporatist, republican-lite option of voting for Hillary Clinton, it is very understandable that most Democratic voters stayed home and some even voted for what was perceived as a wild-card, anti-DC candidate like Trump rather than falling in line behind the empty establishment pants suit.”

Of the responses from individuals typically aligning themselves with progressives, it’s worth noting the lack of regard they apparently have for the intellect of West Virginians.

“They had other options, they can write in any person they want, or not vote at all. Only stupid people believe there is some magical civic- duty to vote. They never/don’t realize the door of obligation swings both ways. Ignorant conservatives, you know I love-em!”

“Well, considering Arch Moore was convicted for corruption and jailed, then RE-ELECTED in West Virginia as governor and THEN his daughter enters politics and SHE gets elected? I don’t know, but? Does that speak to an abundance of smarts in this state?”

“A majority of West Virginians are too busy trying to make a living to give much time to considering political candidates. After all, they’ve sent some real losers (not this one) to the statehouse.”

“Did West Virginians elect Trump out of ignorance? Yes. Like there was any other option. How else could/would clueless conservative hillbillies vote?”

Then there were responses like this one, interjecting reasoned perspective into the discussion.

“This is all pretty funny. And it confirms something I’ve known to be true for a long time. Liberals can’t read. Mark concludes that ‘And just perhaps, it isn’t the 68 percent of West Virginians who elected Donald Trump who are the ignorant ones, after all.’ And liberals read that as Mark concluding that West Virginians who voted for Trump did so out of ignorance. Pretty funny, and shows their total lack of logic and reasoning ability.”

So, according to liberals, ignorance, indeed, played a role in electing Trump in West Virginia. I can only assume they believe similarly for the other 30 states he won.

This progressive rationale prompts me to ask liberals another clarifying question.

Do you accept any of the blame for Donald Trump being elected president, or was it simply the ignorance of others?

Future voters eagerly await your response.

Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger, a Cabell County resident and a regular contributor to The Herald-Dispatch editorial page.

 

 

 

 

Doug Smith: A “Better Deal” with whom?

26 Jul

doug-for-fsp

Doug Smith:  Free State Patriot history and society editor

July 26, 2017

 

 

So, the Democrats, party of the New Deal, The Great Society, All this and World War, too, have decided to solve their problem (nobody votes for them anymore) with a “Better Deal”.

Hmm. Really?

Well, I have not written a book about deals, nor have a stayed in a Holiday Inn Express recently, but I have made and observed a few deals in the past 60 years and offer some observations and lessons learned.

  1. Who you make a deal with matters. I have made business deals with people I had reason to mistrust, but a desire to trust; an alcoholic, a thief, a chronic liar. (not all the same person!) Those deals have, predictably, gone south.
  2. Examine your motivation. I made those bad deals because they promised a lot that I wanted. I wanted those things badly, for reasons of my own, but they were a little too good to be true. In perfect hindsight, I should have passed.
  3. If a deal sounds too good to be true, it most likely is. Trust your gut.
  4. Deals offered by Democrats have a poor track record. (The 7 years of broken promises by my own party, the GOP, is a subject for another time.)Wilson ran on a strong anti-war platform: “Too Proud to Fight. “, “He Kept us out of the War” (WW1, if you were wondering.)  He was inaugurated Jan, 100 years ago, for his second term. And in April, he went to Congress to launch the US into WW1.

    Reagan made a deal with the Democrats in 1983 for $ 1 of tax increases for every $ 3 in spending reductions. So, the Dems promised, and sent him a budget including the tax increases, which he signed. Reagan noted in his memoirs, and I note now, 34 years later, that we are still waiting for any Democrats, anywhere, at any time, to ever reduce spending on anything.

    Bush 41 made a deal with Ted Kennedy that he, Bush, would break his “Read my Lips, No New Taxes” pledge, in exchange for which Democrats would lower spending a commensurate amount. (Note that at that time, they still had not come through on those promised to Reagan, Bush’s predecessor.)  As noted, we are still waiting on those spending decreases.

    Since I have written at length about it, I won’t belabor the point too much, but Barack Obama s shovel ready jobs, which he laughed off, are still not done or filled, the 2500 a year savings never happened, we cannot keep our Doctors or plans, and whatever else it may have done, the “Affordable Care Act did not make Health Care either more affordable, or more available. Indeed, it had nothing whatsoever to do with “Care” but a great deal to do with “Insurance. “(Also, worth noting that the Insurance companies heartily signed on to a deal with a Dem that promised to assure them that 350 million people, under force of law, would be customers. And how did that work out for them?)

  5. Which brings us to a lesson learned by observations: if you make a deal with someone who does not keep their word with others, don’t expect them to keep their deal with you.
  6. Deals made with other people’s money are easy for the deal maker, (the Dems), enticing for the beneficiaries (their voters), brutal for the people whose money they spend (Me. You, if you pay taxes.) and once again, too good to be true. (See 3, above. See also Detroit, Illinois, black youth unemployment, minimum wage workers in Seattle.
  7. There is no real wealth, other than the fruits of labor. That is what we work and do. We assign an arbitrary value to gold and diamonds, yet if I were to lock you in a room with all the gold and diamonds you wanted, and nothing else, you would starve. You could not build a car with it, except if you used it to build a factory, buy raw materials, and hire workers. The Gross Domestic Product, the yardstick of the wealth of a nation, is not about the number of zeros at the Federal Reserve, (on the ledger, not the people. Yea, I know, cheap shot.) It is about the goods and services we produce, and the value that potential buyers assign to them, and are willing to pay, in their own valuta, time, or work to obtain them.Only in the Garden of Eden was all that a man and woman needed available to reach out and take. Only in the Garden of Eden was sex available, commanded, and totally without consequence, all the time. Only in the Garden of Eden was there no need to work, and produce.

There, and in the yearning for that which was lost, which comes to be expressed in the Utopian fantasies from Plato to Marx to Wilson to Obama.  And time and again, throughout history, there have been those who try to overturn the natural order, and operate on Eden Standard Time, the way we wish things were, instead of the way they are.  Every attempt has been met with failure, and disaster, and misery.

So, the Democrats’ promises are based on the Utopian ideal: we can replant the abundance of Eden and make it grow, we can go back to how it was, and make it happen again, just put us in charge.

And they reject the promises attached to the Eden story, because they contain unpleasant realities they wish to reject: By the sweat of your brow will you eat bread, until you return to the dust, for of dust you were made, and to dust you shall return.

To accept that means to accept that men will not be perfect, that we are subject to a higher power, and that we must obey certain rules.  Progressives, notably Democrats, do not want any rules but their own, and certainly not those rules.

But that pronouncement is not all bad. You Shall eat bread, by the sweat of your brow.  Not such a terrible thing. You no longer get the Eden deal, because you broke that one. But you do get this one: You won’t go hungry, but you must work for it now. But the Democrats keep trying to establish the Eden Deal, and, failing the power to do so, find it to fail over and over.

Tragically, the lesson they learn is not that it won’t work, which is has not for millennia. No, they come away saying, if we do the same thing over and over, we will eventually get a different result.

Einstein called that insanity.  So, it is. And so, is making a deal with the Democrats, whether you are a President or a voter.

 

 

 

Mark Caserta: Liberal hypocrisy over Russia is telling

9 Jun

me

Mark Caserta: Free State Patriot editor

russian-flag

Jun 9, 2017

 

Liberal activism has been taken to an entirely new level in 2017 in terms of what progressives are willing to compromise to protect their movement. And it’s quite disturbing to observe where our nation and its citizens fall on their list of priorities.

Liberal hypocrisy, for example, leaves nothing to the imagination when it comes to U.S. relations with Russia. But for perspective, let’s look at a couple of examples.

In March 2012, when Barack Obama was running for re-election, a live microphone picked up his private conversation with then Russian President Dmitry Medvedev during a gathering in Seoul, South Korea.

President Obama: “On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved but it’s important for him to give me space.”

President Medvedev: “Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you ”

President Obama: “This is my last election. After my election, I have more flexibility.”

President Medvedev: “I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir, and I stand with you.”

Can you imagine how liberals and the major news outlets would have lambasted President Trump if he had been covertly recorded making such a remark? We would likely have millions of liberals marching in Washington calling for the president’s immediate impeachment for obvious and shameless Russian collusion.

In March 2009, during a trip to Geneva, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton presented Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov a small red button meant to represent a “Russian reset” of sorts between the U.S. and the Kremlin. While visiting Moscow in March 2010, Hillary explained the “reset’s” purpose: “Our goal is to help strengthen Russia,” as reported in an April 7 column by Deroy Murdock in National Review.

While the reset was a total failure for the U.S., many believe the ultimate Clinton/Russia relationship became profitable for the Clintons. In a deal known as “Uranium One,” Bill and Hillary may have sown some of their “entrepreneurial” oats for personal gain.

In April 2015, a story by Jo Becker and Mike McIntire in The New York Times detailed tens of millions of dollars in donations made to the Clinton Foundation following the approval by then-Secretary of State Clinton of the Russian acquisition of a company holding 20 percent of America’s uranium.

And Bill Clinton reportedly received a $500,000 speaking fee from a Russian government-connected bank during this time, as written by Jerome Hudson of Breitbart in March 2017.

Can anyone say liberal Russian collusion? Imagine, for a moment, the field day progressives would have if someone had even suggested Donald Trump or any one of his surrogates were involved in such deals!

Yet, progressive “snowflakes,” as they’ve been called, run around crying “election foul” when they don’t have a single shred of evidence, all the while ignoring fact-laden events of potential collusion that don’t support their ideology.

Frankly, this liberal hypocrisy and selective focus is very telling. One could surmise that progressives are only concerned with winning for their cause, regardless of the impact on our country.

Is there anything less patriotic?

Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger, a Cabell County resident and a regular contributor to The Herald-Dispatch editorial page.

Mark Caserta: Liberals attack the core principles of America

19 May

me

Mark Caserta:  Free State Patriot editor

  • May 19, 2017

Unlike progressives who hate Donald Trump, I do not hate liberals. I do, however, loathe liberalism. I truly believe it’s been attacking the core fundamentals of our society for years.

I’m on a mission to expose the progressive movement and educate readers about the liberal desire to “unchain” America from the anchors of morality. You see, progressives don’t advocate the freedom to be Americans, they pursue freedom from our historically steadfast principles.

As a contributor for The Blaze, Dr. Benjamin Wiker wrote a column in 2013, effectively explaining the liberal movement and the progressive mindset.

 “I offer a seemingly liberal explanation – they can’t help it,” Wiker wrote. “Liberals think being educated means becoming liberal, moving from darkness to light, and so whenever they undertake education reform, it means redefining education by the lights of liberalism.”

“Conservative darkness” to “liberal light.” What a masterful interpretation of progressive ideology! It’s designed to be the antithesis of the evangelical movement, and its roots have been premeditatively nurtured in our classrooms for decades.

Abe Lincoln said, “The philosophy of the schoolroom in one generation is the philosophy of government in the next.” Truer words were never spoken. The seed of progressivism was planted years in advance of the current harvest of turbulent tolerance.

One example is The Pro-Choice Public Education Project (PEP). As defined on their website, PEP is a project “dedicated to engaging young women on their terms around the critical issue of reproductive justice, and is under the direction of a Young Women’s Leadership Council along with a team of dedicated staff.”

PEP’s mission statement proclaims they “work to engage and inform organizations, young women, transgender and gender non-conforming young people, ages 16-25.”

What is “reproductive justice” anyway? In this writer’s opinion, it’s an ambiguous term for “abortion on demand.”

Targeting our youth has been integral in the liberal strategic attempt to redefine every preconceived societal attribute of America.

Consider this hypothetical. Suppose a society of beings was placed on a planet and developed void of steadfast, guiding principles or boundaries. What would their societal evolution resemble? Any intellectually honest person would surmise they would exist in total chaos.

Our Christian conservative roots and the Biblical principles established by God’s Word, have anchored our country and allowed us to prosper within the parameters of man’s and God’s Law. We’re a nation, blessed of God, and called upon to be a light unto the world.

But in recent years, we’ve done well to help ourselves. And the further we get from the shores of substratum, the deeper the waters of iniquity become.

I’m reminded of the refrain in the praise hymn “The Anchor Holds,” sung by Ray Boltz:

 

“And it holds, my anchor holds:

Blow your wildest, then, O gale,

On my bark so small and frail;

By His grace I shall not fail,

My anchor holds”.

America’s anchor has been God, not man. Liberals disagree.

But if we forsake that anchor, we will perish, as a nation and a people.

Cling to the anchor.

 

Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger, a Cabell County resident and a regular contributor to The Herald-Dispatch editorial page.

Mark Caserta: Liberals struggling to rekindle progressivism

3 Mar

me

Mark Caserta:  Free State editor

March 3, 2017

rekindle

 

The progressive movement, or liberal ideology as many have come to know it, incurred a serious setback with the election of Donald Trump. And they’re not happy about it.

In fact, it seems they’ve nearly lost all sense of reality.

Last week, multiple news outlets, including Breitbart, reported witches across the country gathered on Friday to “cast a spell” with the hopes of “binding” Trump and ejecting him from office.

Per the spell “Facebook event page,” the purpose was to initiate “a mass binding ritual to be performed at midnight on every waning crescent moon until Donald Trump is removed from office.”

So liberals simply refusing to accept the reality of a Trump presidency can now escape to an “alternate dimension.”

A February column by Peter Hasson in The Daily Caller reported “liberals seeking refuge from reality now have a fake news website where they can pretend to live in a world where Hillary Clinton is president!”

Unidentified site proprietors reportedly manage a satirical, repugnant news site devoted to covering stories from an “alternate universe” where Hillary won the presidential election. The site’s description reads: “Long live the true president, Hillary Rodham Clinton.”

Liberals are scraping the bottom of the barrel searching for methods to perpetuate their progressive movement.

I suppose they should be worried. Politifact confirms Democrats have never experienced the large number of losses in legislatures they’ve incurred in recent years. Voters have not only stripped Congress of nearly 70 Democrats since Barack Obama’s presidency, but more than 900 state legislators!

The American people have had enough of failing progressive ideology.

But let’s be clear, if conservatism is to succeed, the leaders in whom voters have placed their trust had better come through – with absolutely no compromising of principles.

Understand, true conservatism is a steadfast guide of standards and values. It doesn’t subscribe to a sliding scale of morality that resets with mankind’s latest thirst for pleasure and independence.

In fact, when conservatism budges, it morphs into progressivism. Many of us have witnessed the self-destruction of a progressive, unrestrained society over the years.

Twenty years ago, a debate about “which bathroom to use” would have been odd to say the least. But now, it’s integral to the progressive platform.

Organizations like the North American Man/Boy Love Association advocate deviant love relationships between men and boys as an alternative lifestyle.

Websites like “Ashley Madison” offer the indulgence of a “discreet encounter,” or a protected way to cheat on your spouse. The website sports over 50 million members!

Marijuana has now been legalized for recreational use in seven states, as well as the District of Columbia.

The list of progressive insanity goes on. What will our future hold if liberals prevail?

But liberals embrace this “progressive” moniker. They flaunt the Merriam-Webster dictionary definition of “progress” and condemn anyone as intellectually “deplorable” if they don’t subscribe to it.

But this isn’t progress in industry, technology or science – it’s societal euthanasia.

So, what will liberals be willing to do to resume their “paused” movement?

Get ready.

I submit nearly anything.

 

 

Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger, a Cabell County resident and a regular contributor to The Herald-Dispatch editorial page.

 

Mark Caserta: What path will the liberals take in 2017?

30 Dec

me

Mark Caserta:  Free State Patriot editor

12.30.16

As we prepare to move into arguably one of the most important first years of any U.S. presidency, I have but one question for liberal Democrats.

Will you consider the resolution to unify with the Trump administration and the “principled” members of the GOP to make America great again?

Regrettably, rather than learn from the election, liberals have been busy lamenting over their November loss and exhausting every excuse possible for the landslide electoral college defeat of Hillary Clinton.

 It began with the charge that the Russian government hacked into the Democratic National Committee and provided WikiLeaks with thousands of emails designed to boost Trump’s chance of victory over Hillary.

Aside from the fact that no definitive evidence has ever been offered proving this allegation, I simply offer a common-sense rebuttal.

First, Hillary’s unethical standards created her own email nightmare. She alone is to blame.

Second, as reported by multiple news outlets, Julian Assange, founder of WikiLeaks, firmly denies the assertion that Russia provided the emails.

Third, given the fact that Vladimir Putin has, for all intents and purposes, moved at will against Hillary and the Obama administration, with whom do you suppose he would rather confront, Trump or Clinton?

Subsequently, as the hacking allegation began to lose steam, Hillary supporters started blaming “angry white men” for the loss. Her hubby, Bill Clinton, offered his boisterous perspective on Trump’s win at a New York bookstore earlier this month per Politico.

“He doesn’t know much,” Clinton said when asked if Trump was smart. “One thing he does know is how to get angry white men to vote for him.”

Have you looked in the mirror lately, Willy?

Actually, based on Pew Research Center data, Trump won white voters by a margin “almost identical” to that of Mitt Romney, who lost the popular vote to Obama in 2012. Trump also fared better among blacks and Hispanics than Romney did four years ago.

This same report shows Trump carried 42 percent of the female demographic, despite liberals attempting to tarnish Trump’s history with women using dated audio-video clips.

But I believe the “coup de grace” ensuring Trump a victory over Hillary was the evangelical vote.

 Christians came out in droves to support the millionaire businessman, who often honored them and promised to stand with Israel during his campaign.

But progressives sought to play every card in their blame game.

Some were even willing to blame the defining element of our Republic, the Electoral College system, for stacking the odds against the “judicious” election of Hillary to the presidency. In their view, apparently, crippling the Constitution would be a small price to pay for a liberal victory.

But despite the tenacious efforts of the left, Donald J. Trump will be sworn into office as the 45th president of the United States on Jan. 20th, 2017.

So, what path will liberal Democrats take in 2017?

Will they continue to pursue a debilitating progressive agenda? Or will they join the new administration in putting Americans and our country first?

Future voters will be watching very closely.

Mark Caserta is a Cabell County resident and a regular contributor to The Herald-Dispatch editorial page.

Mark Caserta: Liberals use ancient approach to advance ideology

29 Jul

me

Mark Caserta: Free State Patriot Editor

Do liberals believe in morality? If so, what’s the standard?

While this is a very provocative question, it’s a legitimate one nevertheless.

Conservatives have the Bible as our moral compass. We believe it’s the authoritative, Holy Spirit-inspired Word of God and is therefore inerrant in content and direction for how we should live our lives.

But liberals don’t believe God’s Word on its face value. They either question its accuracy or its relevance to our present day. And they use this methodology to separate man from the boundaries and precepts of God’s Word in order to advance their progressive ideology.

And frankly, they didn’t invent this approach.

eve

After God had finished six days of work, creating the heavens and the earth, he rested. He blessed the seventh day and made it a holy example for His people for setting aside time to reverence and worship their Heavenly Father.

The heavens and the earth had been completed in their magnificent array.

But God desired relationship. So from the dust of the ground he formed man and breathed into his nostrils the “breath of life.” Man was transformed into a living being and became a friend to God.

God placed the man into His “Garden of Eden” to enjoy and care for it. What a wonderful place it must have been! Can you imagine God’s vision of “paradise” for his children? The Bible even says God took time to walk through it during “the cool of the day.”

But even in paradise, The Almighty knew there must be principles by which to live, so He instituted the very first “rule of law.”

God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”

In His infinite wisdom, God concluded that man needed a helper, one suitable for sharing earthly life experiences. So he created woman.

Now, God wanted loyalty in relationship, out of choice, just as He does today. So He allowed Satan, who had been cast down from heaven due to his rebellious nature, to approach the woman.

Genesis Chapter 3 shares the encounter.

Satan’s goal was to create doubt in the woman’s mind as to the veracity of God’s command. He knew he must detach her from the edicts of God’s Word if he was to succeed in his earthly kingdom.

The rest is history. From that point, sin began its progressive evolution into the hearts and minds of God’s greatest creation – mankind.

Today, liberals are using the same methodology, originally used by Satan, to question God’s Word and remove His principles from our lives.

Only then, will they be successful.

Let’s choose wisely not to partake of the liberal fruit.

Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger, a Cabell County resident and a regular contributor to The Herald-Dispatch editorial page.

%d bloggers like this: