Tag Archives: LIBERALS

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.

 

 

 

 

Mark Caserta: It’s time for liberals to put America first

16 Jun

me

Mark Caserta:  Free State Patriot editor

Jun 16, 2017

best flag

 

Liberal Democrats are allowing the sheer hatred of President Trump and his supporters to render them senseless to the needs of our country.

Let’s be clear. It’s not the Russians destroying our Democratic electoral process; it’s liberals.

And this isn’t a war on President Trump; it’s a war on you!

Americans decided overwhelmingly, in the manner governed by our Republic, to elect someone who was the antithesis of his predecessor. Anyone willing to be intellectually honest would admit our nation was in a death spiral both economically and on stage in the global theater. Americans knew we needed a true leader, one who would never place political correctness over the needs of our country.

America needed Donald J. Trump.

Liberals realized immediately after Trump won his party’s nomination that something was wrong. How could this outsider possibly have come this far in the race? Surely, this was a fluke. But nevertheless, something had to be done. So, they began the process of delegitamizing Donald Trump, the man.

Every step Trump took, it would be his last. Every time he tweeted, he’s surely crossed the line. Every time he said something politically incorrect, it was the beginning of the end for Donald Trump.

But it never happened. The more he resisted pressure to align with the Washington norm, the more popular he became.

But the months leading up to the 2016 presidential election set the stage for the ultimate shocker for liberals. Not a single progressive talking head could find a path to victory for Donald Trump.

Democrats and the mainstream media were certain Hillary Clinton would win in a landslide. Her pompous arrogance and assurance of victory prompted a feckless campaign which failed to propose any significant strategy beyond perpetuating the failed policies of Barack Obama.

Even when Hillary’s success within her own party became shaded after the Democrat National Committee website experienced a cyber-attack exposing Democrats attempting to undermine the presidential campaign of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, Hillary’s faithful stood by her.

But in the wee hours of the morning, on Nov. 9, 2016, the walls of the DNC started to crumble. As final election returns were confirmed and reported by the news outlets, it appeared Donald Trump was winning. And not just barely winning. He was winning “big time.”

Liberal Democrats were livid, but not finished. After coming to terms with the results of the election, they had to do something to regain power, despite the unintended consequences. So, the current strategy to undermine the presidency of the United States and our electoral system began.

Even as jobs are returning and the world leaders are once again recognizing the leadership of the United States as legitimate, progressive anger flourishes. We see liberals acting erratically, using foul language and despicable displays of hatred against the president.

Is this the future you want for our country? Hate has never succeeded, and love never fails. It’s time for liberals to put America first.

It’s time to love our country more than you hate the president.

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

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 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.

Mark Caserta: Progressivism isn’t about technology, injustice

5 Jun

me

  • Jun 3, 2016

Sadly, as our nation wars against issues like nuclear proliferation, illegal immigration and rampant Islamic terrorism, we have no choice but to focus our attention on potentially debilitating social onslaughts from progressives.

 

Emboldened by successes achieved under the most liberal president in my lifetime, we’re becoming increasingly impinged upon by members of society disengaged from principles of morality and social conscience.

 

And why not? They’re simply following the lead block of a president whose success at fundamentally transforming America is unprecedented.

What began as a societal “pursuit of acceptance,” the LGBT lifestyle has successfully opened the door to a new world order of “interrelation” and recognition.

 

And knowing liberals will never be satisfied until they’ve removed all barriers of virtue and incorruption, I believe the battle has only begun.

 

I’m amazed how liberals aggrandize the progressive movement in our nation. Their implication that conservatism seeks to oppress civil rights and bolster social injustice is laughable.

 

Progressivism has historically been laden with unintended consequences and is now beginning to impact our nation in ways we never dreamed.

 

As of last week, 12 states, including Kentucky and West Virginia, have joined in a lawsuit against the federal government over its transgender bathroom guidelines for schools, as reported by multiple news organizations, including CNN. The lawsuit seeks to block the federal government from “implementing, applying or enforcing the new rules, regulations and guidance interpretations.”

 

Understand, there’s a pattern progressives follow when establishing a foothold from which they can propagate their agenda, and it’s important to identify the early phases.

Progressives understand they must advance their agenda “progressively.” “Step one” is to challenge traditionally accepted standards. In this case, it’s the conservative interpretation of federal anti-discrimination laws.

 

Achieving protection “under the radar” for even a small group of individuals may be perceived as only one small step for a liberal, but it’s actually one giant leap for progressivism!

 

From that point, progressives tenaciously advance the scale of “acceptance” and “protection” in our society under the guise of human and civil rights.

 

Suppose pedophiles begin leveraging similar tactics seeking protection akin to those waged by the LGBT rights activists, arguing their desire for children is a “sexual orientation” and no different than heterosexual or homosexual desires?

 

Consider NAMBLA, the North American Man/Boy Love Association, whose website states it’s a political, civil rights and educational organization whose goal is to end “the extreme oppression of men and boys in mutually consensual relationships.”

Would it matter to a liberal if this organization sought protection under the same illogical set of values?

 

Folks, we’re in a battle for the very soul of our nation. I expect ambitions of tolerance we never thought possible.

 

Think about it. How many of us, even 10 years ago, would have envisioned the federal government allowing individuals to choose the restroom that aligned with their gender “perception” rather than their physiology?

 

It’s time we set progressivism apart from simply being advances in technology and social injustice.

 

Progressivism seeks to remove the metric of morality and the edict of conscience.

me

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

Doug Smith: Pity the Liberal

14 Sep

doug smith

Doug Smith is an author, historian and regular contributor to Free State Patriot.

9.14.15

Pity the modern liberal. He, no, sorry, she, no wait we can’t use gender centric language. Well, She-it. Ok, She-It has to defend some pretty difficult positions.

To be a Liberal Democrat (henceforth LD), you must argue your Bills carefully. Clinton’s abusive treatment of women is excused, and he is an advocate of women’s rights because he “feels their pain” (and supports abortion.) Cosby’s behaviors toward women are not excused, because his positions are at odds with the Liberal dogma.

bill cosby bill clinton

But pity the poor liberal, who must defend Willy and condemn Cos for the same moral failings. While we are at it, we must accept Hillary as an advocate for women, despite paying women on her staff less than men, and acting as the attack dog on women who were objects of Bill’s predilections. All for the good of the cause. Pepto Bismol, anyone?

The LD must defend Planned Parenthood, because it is the sacrament of the religion of liberalism. Sheit must defend it as a “Women’s Health” organization helping with Breast Cancer, ignoring that is does no such thing, and attacks another organization which does so for withholding money. Extortion, anyone? Vito Corleone would be proud. LD s must defend PP for “keeping women out of back alleys, and in the hands of butchers, while ignoring and defending unsafe clinics and abortionists who do indeed, even in the 21st Century of Roe V Wade, maim and kill women with impunity. No criticism or attack can be tolerated. Hence, the LD has to somehow defend an abortionist cutting through the face of a living baby to remove his brain. He is, apparently, a blob of tissue, until he can be enrolled in a LD approved, state sponsored Head Start program. Wow. Pepto?

planned parenthood 2 planned parenthood

The LD must turn hits (in Appalachia that is proper grammar. For the gender confused LD it is an amalgam of his her its, and one more reason to reach for the Pepto) logic inside out to insist that Obamacare, which is on the approved list, is the “law of the Land” and must be obey, nay, praised, Nay Worshipped!, but yet Barack Obama can unlawfully alter it dozens of times, fail to implement troublesome parts, and that is an acceptable heresy.

The LD must revere, rightly so, the work and dream of Martin Luther King, yet at the same time eschew criticism of Barack Obama’s failings, and his reversals of the gains won by MLK based not on the content of his character, but on the color of his skin. For no criticism of Obama is accepted and debated, rather, the critic is loudly labeled a racist for his disagreements. Pity the LD, and pass hit the Pepto. MLK must come to Sheit in hits dreams and thunder “Were you not listening?”

Pity the LD, who, supporting the law, turns on law enforcement; who, supporting black lives, must be blind to hundreds killed the right way; who, ( oh my poor aching belly, ) must condemn every shot fired at a black criminal, and, by silence, condone every killing by a black criminal, whether of a white or ( most frequently,) another black. Sheit must condemn blacks who say “We have got to stop killing each other”, and put the blame on, who? Sheit must check with Josh Earnest to see who is at fault this week for the 2000 shootings and 350 murders so far this year in Chicago. Sheit must suspend common sense, and the evidence of hits eyes. Pepto?

mike brown 2 mike brown

The LD must be ok with the lawlessness of ignoring property rights, and rewarding the UAW over bondholders in GM, by Obama, not by, as 100 years of precedent dictates, by a judge, and publicly deriding investors who protest getting pennies on the dollar as greedy, while rewarding the greed of UAW contracts with a company in default. Sheit must be ok with suspending the law, and committing robbery on private individuals, to reward the friends of a corrupt politician. It’s the pink bottle, right there in the front of the fridge.

false 3 false 2

In short, Sheit must be ok with suspending common sense and the law when it serves “the greater purpose.”

Yet, there is a problem with that suspension of conscience. As Robert Bolt has Sir Thomas More state it in “A Man for All Seasons”,

“And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you—where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws from coast to coast—man’s laws, not God’s—and if you cut them down—and you’re just the man to do it—do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then?    Yes, I give the Devil benefit of law for my own safety’s sake. “

progressives

And there is, perhaps, the crux of the problem. The LD sees the law as a hindrance to do what Sheit wishes, instead of the protection against the worst urges and greed of barbarians, bandits, and tyrants.

And it is not working for her. Him. It.

Well, Sheit! Pepto?

Mark Caserta: Abortion has become big business in the US

30 Jul

Frankenstein ethics?

mark

Mark Caserta: Free State Patriot Editor

Jul. 30, 2015 @ 12:01 AM

In 2011, more than 730,000 legal induced abortions were reported to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention from 49 reporting areas. The actual number is probably more since states aren’t required by law to report these murders as part of the CDC’s Abortion Surveillance Report.

However, using the CDC’s statistics, the ratio of abortions to live births is around 219 per 1,000 births.

Planned Parenthood, an organization partially funded by your tax dollars, is the nation’s largest single provider of abortions in the United States. And it is indeed, fulfilling the vision of its founder, Margaret Sanger. Sanger, while lauded by some as a woman of “valor” (including Hillary Clinton) had some very unsavory opinions about race, birth control and abortion.

As a eugenicist, Sanger encouraged the sterilization of individuals whom she felt had “less desirable qualities.” Her disdain for blacks, minorities, the diseased and the disabled birthed an abortion business that’s afforded our nation a convenient way to “eliminate” an unwanted child.

One of Sanger’s infamous quotes epitomizes her racist’s convictions.

“[We should] apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is tainted, or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring.”

In a column written by Susan A. Cohen for the Guttmacher Institute, the former pro-abortion research division of Planned Parenthood, she shares a disturbing statistic involving the impact of abortion in our inner cities and how it is indeed fulfilling Sanger’s aberrant vision.

In the piece, Cohen reports the abortion rate for black women in the United States is nearly five times that for white women. And despite anti-abortion efforts to wage a campaign against abortion around this fact, aggressive marketing by abortion providers continues in minority communities.

Planned Parenthood clinics are strategically planted in minority communities targeting blacks and impoverished minority groups, and reportedly, is the leading cause of death for the black community.

But it even gets more despicable.

In two recently released stunning undercover videos, a national leader of Planned Parenthood is filmed admitting that the abortion provider uses the illegal partial birth abortion procedure to protect and sell “intact” fetal body parts.

In the videos, produced by the Center for Medical Progress, Dr. Deborah Nucatola, senior director of medical services at Planned Parenthood, admits that in order to ensure the baby’s body parts are in “good condition” and not damaged during the gruesome abortion procedure, some of the abortionists will deliver the baby “breech” or feet first, and then suck out the brains, killing the child.

Planned Parenthood Vice President of Communications Eric Ferrero released a response to the videos calling them “heavily edited” and released by “activists who have been widely discredited.”

If there is anything more reprehensible than profiting from the death of an unborn child, I’m not sure what it is.

Under the guise of civil liberty, liberals have succeeded in desensitizing many Americans to abortion. But Planned Parenthood is helping make it big business.

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

%d bloggers like this: