Tag Archives: LIBERALS

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.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

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.

Tags: , , , ,

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.

Tags: , , , ,

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?

Tags: , , , ,

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.

Tags: , , ,

Mark Caserta: Progressive victories are but short term

2 Jul

 mark

Mark Caserta: Free State Patriot Editor

Jul. 02, 2015 @ 12:01 AM

As we look at the world around us, many of us are wondering if things could get much worse. In my lifetime, I can’t recall America ever being in such disarray. Indeed, the progressive movement is having its share of victories.

In such times of distress, it’s often valuable to step back and analyze exactly what’s happening and to what purpose it’s meant to serve. In doing so, those of us who are faith-based in our daily walk are able to see that progressives are desperately seeking to make Christianity irrelevant in their “new world order.”

Bringing God’s Word into question is prerequisite to redirect man’s thinking. Liberals would have you believe that having a steadfast faith in God is for “non-thinkers” and those unwilling to adapt to our changing times. After all, God couldn’t have possibly known how his children could evolve into such “intellectual” beings, able to think and surmise for themselves. He couldn’t possibly have known that we could develop such “god-like” characteristics and be able to live our lives free from the constraints and principles of His Word.

progressives

“For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear” 2 Timothy 4:3.

None of this is a surprise to our Heavenly Father, who knew us “before the foundation of the world.” He sent His only Son to experience the passions and weaknesses of this earth and was in all points tempted as we are. But in His vast love for His children, he provided His Word that we might be able to “overcome the world” through the teachings of Jesus Christ. But even then, God knew few would be willing to accept life on His terms.

“But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it,” Matthew 7:14.

Sadly, some of the valued spokespersons of the progressive movement are those professing Christianity while espousing any and all methods of circumventing God’s statutes. These are modern day “theologians” who essentially seek to redefine Christianity and are, in fact, enablers of a new “progressive” form of narcissistic salvation where man is God and without boundaries in his passions.

“Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them.” Matthew 7:15.

Stone by stone, these individuals are tearing down America’s foundation. Stitch by stitch they’re destroying the very fabric of our society. Redefining the family unit, designed by God, is paramount to their endeavor. It includes removing barriers preventing men and women from pleasuring themselves with any earthly abomination and offering an entrancing, alternative lifestyle – all in the name of love.

These progressive successes are very temporary and offer gratification only for a season. At some point, every individual will reap from the choices they’ve made in life.

And poor choices always have consequences.

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

Tags: , , ,

Doug Smith: Winnie – The Enemy of the Left

10 May

“And once upon a time, the progressive movement began…”

DOUG SMITH

Doug Smith: Author, Historian and regular contributor to Free State Patriot

eeyore1POOH 2

Thank you, Professor of Sociology Adam Swift, University of Warwick, England.

We have met the enemy, and he is Winnie the Pooh. Professor (not so) Swift has shown us the way, the way of the Left. For once it is so clear.

The good Prof thinks that parents who read to their children are unfairly disadvantaging the kids who do not have parents who read to them. “A Bear, however hard he tries, grows tubby without exercise.” Poor Winnie. All these years he has been guilty of disadvantaging the kids who did not hear his stories, and Treasure Island, Narnia, or the journey of a little fellow named Baggins.

Funny. I wish I had the advantage of a Leftist education. I never knew. I thought that reading to your kids was a good thing. That it made them better people, expanded their minds, helped them love to read, and made them feel loved.  Good stuff.

But no. It is not fair to do things to raise them up, because others are left behind by not being read to, and that is not fair. So, we should let all our children settle to the bottom level of the least among us.

Pooh is the enemy of fairness.

POOH 3

Inadvertently, perhaps, Swift has given us a capsule summary of the whole premise of the Left s thought process.  Never seek to raise anyone. Anyone who is raised up, in any way, must be torn down. Except for us. Note the Professor Swift does NOT maintain that it would be fair for him to give up his tenured position at the University, and go to McDonalds and make $ 15 bucks an hour. After all, we need the Prof and his ilk to tell the rest of us how we ought to live.  And no one can do that on minimum wage.

So we see the Left displayed for a moment, naked to the view.  Let us not say to the minimum wage worker, “ Read, stay off the drugs, don’t get your girlfriend pregnant, don’t have sex with your boyfriend and GET pregnant, get more education, show up for work on time, make yourself worth more, so you will get more.”  No, the Left says, enjoy your joint, it is unreasonable to expect you not to have sex, it is your right to have all the babies you want, starting at 16, and it is our ( but by that, they never mean “Their”, always someone else’s work, and money) duty to provide for the children, which we will not discourage.  If you show up and put on that McDonalds uniform (which they gave you) and wonder around behind the counter, we (again, not meaning Professor Swift, but Ray Kroc) ought to give you enough to raise a family.  But at the same time, we are not going to make you feel bad by insisting that you avoid the drugs, stay with one woman and help raise the family you helped create.  After all, if you begat 21 children by 10 women, SOMEBODY has to be responsible for taking care of them.

But not you. And not Professor Swift. And don’t you read to them and encourage them to stay in school. That would not be fair.

We (ready for that pay cut yet, Prof?) will take care of everything.  “We” will support your right to live a life of poverty, with a few frills, and extort your sustenance from others, as long as you support us staying in power.  Meanwhile. I’ll tell others what to do, make them feel guilty for what they have, and what they do, and breathing, and eating.  And I’ll continue to envision a Leftist Utopia, where everyone is equal, and on the bottom, and miserable, but grateful.

Except We, and this time I DO mean we, have to live better, eat better, because we are better, and think better, and know better, how to provide all this for you, who are forever incapable. No, no thanks necessary. My reward is knowing you are in paradise. And a quarter mill a year salary as Dean for Cultural Equality.

And it all starts with Winnie the Pooh. Sorry, silly old Bear.

POOH 4

Tags: , , ,

Mark Caserta: Common Core is nationalized education and frustrating our children.

16 Apr

Heart-wrenching Viral Photo Of Frustrated Little Girl Shows What Common Core Does To Children

common core acommon core 2

It’s time for this failed liberal experiment to END!

https://commoncore.act.freedomworks.org/?source=02171514day#primary_form

me

Free State Patriot Editor, Mark Caserta

Apr. 16, 2015 @ 12:01 AM

Abe Lincoln once said, “The philosophy of the school room in one generation will be the philosophy of government in the next.”

Truer words were never spoken. For years progressives have sought ways to infiltrate the classroom at an early age to begin the indoctrination of liberalism. Their methodology has been to sow seeds of discontent with current standards while proposing a “progressive” alternative. Typically, this liberal solution involves more government control and fewer individual rights.

For those less informed, the Common Core State Standards Initiative appears to be the result of years of exhaustive and collaborative effort aimed at raising the achievement levels of students across the country.

common core 2

But for those focused on reality, Common Core is a premeditated, liberal attack on states’ and parents’ rights to control local education. All across America, concerned parents and students are refusing to participate in new tests aligned with the Common Core state standards.

“The explosive growth of the opt-out movement has been one extremely encouraging development in a sea of bad news when it comes to government education in the United States,” said Alex Newman, international journalist and educator, in a World Net Daily interview. “As more and more parents and teachers realize what is going on with Common Core, I expect this movement to continue growing by leaps and bounds.”

Newman, who co-authored the book, “Crimes of the Educators: How Utopians are Using Government Schools to Destroy America’s Children,” views Common Core as profound government overreach into our lives.

“There is no doubt that this Obama scheme to nationalize education is designed not to educate children properly, but to shape their minds with propaganda and reduce their critical thinking abilities for nefarious purposes,” Newman said.

And indeed, this apple doesn’t fall far from the tree.

Common Core standards stem from a 2008 task force created by then Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano (Barack Obama’s Secretary of Homeland Security from 2009-2013) as a result of her apparent dissatisfaction with the U.S. school system’s ability to “adequately prepare” students for entering the workforce. Napolitano’s group of governors and recognized “experts” in higher education prepared a report that would eventually serve as the building blocks for Common Core.

Now the curricula issues and potential unintended consequences tied to Common Core are so vast, it would be impossible to adequately address them in this venue. But this attempted liberal coup on public education is apparent.

Common Core, as defined on its website, is a “set of high-quality academic standards in mathematics and English language arts/literacy which defines what students should know and be able to do each grade.” The entire Common Core conception narrows the purpose of public education to “college and career readiness” and excludes the foundational principles our state constitutions give for establishing an educational system led by parents and local educators.

Clearly, this proposed set of standards is an attempt by progressives to control states’ and parents’ rights where educating our children is concerned. Liberals simply want a greater presence in the classroom.

Common Core grants them that presence.

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

Tags: , , , ,

Kendall Rice: Don’t doubt sinister motivation behind progressivism

13 Aug

superclass

This theme is well-documented but people just don’t read anymore. Here is a book about it this…

Superclass: The Global Power Elite and the World They Are Making

http://goo.gl/Zqsg2s

The author can be found on YouTube making speeches/lectures about his book. It’s a disturbing theme which was born a century ago.

We can thank the Progressives for building big government that is now run by big business interests posing as “national security interests”. The radical Left’s beloved regulation means big business gets to write the rules for small business to prevent them from offering any meaningful competition in the marketplace. This hurts consumers too.

The most egregious examples of this I have seen are the stories about small family farmers, including the Amish, who run co-ops to share food, raw milk and cheese with others when suddenly their farms are raided in SWAT style to prevent this movement from growing and offering competition for the industrial dairy farms. Their food inventories are destroyed and they face fines and penalties, etc. SWAT raids over raw milk! How dare anyone date to compete with established industry powers!

The great myth Americans have bought is that the people are easy prey for entrepreneurs to exploit so Uncle Sam must intervene and ‘level the playing field’. So power was given to the feds by Progressive founders and launched into orbit by the radical FDR New Dealers in response to the Great Depression brought about by the beloved Progressive creation the Federal Reserve…

Ever since Ross Perot ran for Prez both parties have placed huge obstacles in the way of anyone wanting to start another party, whether it’s Independent, Libertarian, Green, or the Constitutional party. This makes for a system easier to manipulate and screen candidates. Nobody runs for Prez anymore that isn’t first approved by the CFR, which is a group created once again by the Progressives after WW1.

Today most policies are all about keeping the status quo to secure special interests already deeply entrenched into the system. Therefore, groups like the AARP can endorse OmamaCare along with the AMA, Big Pharma, and the health insurers who all hate competition. The ACA is giving us much less competition. Just go to any of their exchanges and see how many insurers are not there. Typically the HD editor penned a piece moaning over this situation but his faith in the ACA remained.

If anyone doubts the sinister motives of the founding of the Progressive Era then just read their philosophy of the public school system:

“In our dreams, we have limitless resources and the people yield themselves with perfect docility to our molding hands. The present education conventions fade from their minds, and unhampered by tradition, we work our own good will upon a grateful and responsive rural folk. We shall not try to make these people or any of their children into philosophers or men of learning, or men of science. We have not to rise up from among them authors, editors, poets or men of letters. We shall not search for embryo great artists, painters, musicians nor lawyers, doctors, preachers, politicians, statesmen, of whom we have an ample supply…The task we set before ourselves is very simple as well as a very beautiful one, to train these people as we find them to a perfectly ideal life just where they are. So we will organize our children and teach them to do in a perfect way the things their fathers and mothers are doing in an imperfect way, in the homes, in the shops and on the farm.” – General Education Board, Occasional Papers, No. 1 (General Education Board, New York, 1913) p. 6. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Education_Board

progressive theme

Such philosophy is what logically results from evolutionary zealots. The assault on Christian culture was about to hit high gear! The mantra also spread to liberal college professors who sought to make their students as unlike their parents as possible. How much more evidence do we need to prove how radical these people are? Their heirs today reside in the federal Department of Education.

During the 1980’s the emerging home school movement became a target as state boards sued families and tried to outlaw all homeschooling. Thou shall not escape our liberal, progressive public school indoctrination! In the mid-West a pastor defended his private school next to his church against the public school board and ended up in jail for contempt of court. His name escapes me at the moment but it did become national news.

By the grace of God an orthodox theologian, Rousas Rushdoony, used his expertise to offer testimony in defense of dozens of families under assault for daring to exercise religious freedom. It was in Texas where one family was awarded a huge judgment against the county school system and afterwards no other county school system dared to sue again. Now that was deliverance not unlike Moses commanding Pharaoh: Let my people go!

Only true limited government as outlined by the Framers will restore prosperity for everyone again. Most of all End the Fed and return to an honest money system as written in the Constitution.

Tags: , ,

Mark Caserta: Progressives need liberal Supreme Court

24 Jul

supreme court

Jul. 24, 2014 @ 12:00 AM

The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest court in the nation. Its decisions set precedents which all other courts must follow and can never be superseded. Not even Congress or the president can change, reject or ignore a Supreme Court decision.

In the third of my series of columns exposing the progressive movement in the United States, we’ll examine how I believe liberals will be intensifying their efforts to change the political face of the Supreme Court, determined to preserve and expand their ideology for future generations.

Understand, under the Constitution, justices on the Supreme Court receive lifetime appointments. While the process of appointing justices has undergone changes over the years, the sharing of power between the president and the Senate remains unchanged.

To receive appointment to the court, a candidate must first be nominated by the president and then confirmed by the Senate. Presidents have the power to make “recess appointments” when the Senate isn’t in session, but such appointments expire at the end of the Senate’s next session.

The framers of the Constitution designed the U.S. government with a system of “checks and balances” to ensure no one branch would have absolute authority. But make no mistake about it, the Supreme Court has formidable power and has become a prized asset in our nation’s political theater. While the court’s sole purpose is to interpret the Constitution, rulings increasingly tend to reflect a justice’s political persuasion.

Currently, the Supreme Court leans slightly conservative. Justices John Roberts Jr., Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas are considered mostly conservative. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor are seen as liberal, while Justices Stephen G. Breyer and Anthony Kennedy are considered moderate to moderate conservative, respectively. With four of these Justices over the age of 70, court openings are a real possibility over the next few years.

In June, the Obama administration was levied with two major Supreme Court decisions adversely impacting progressive advancement.

Unable to get several controversial nominees confirmed to the National Labor Relations Board, the Supreme Court unanimously held that President Obama violated the Constitution by appointing officials during a Senate three-day break. I submit the president strategically “tested” the recess appointment law just as he’s testing his executive authority in the face of congressional resistance, but failed.

In Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Inc. the Court ruled 5-4 that for-profit corporations with sincerely held religious beliefs are not required to provide a full range of free contraceptives to employees pursuant to Obamacare. Once again, this progressive challenge to our religious freedoms failed.

Don’t expect progressives to acquiesce in the face of these failures. They plan to do everything possible to elect a liberal president and retain the Senate in the upcoming elections.

If liberals are successful at “tilting” the balance of the Supreme Court to the left, our children and grandchildren will likely see an intensification of progressivism in their lives.

A misplaced vote could have impact beyond the term of any candidate. It could have impact for years to come.

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

Tags: , ,

← Older Entries
Newer Entries →