Connect with us

Everything

The case for Roy Moore to be Alabama’s next senator

Published

on

We have all heard the constant drumbeat of the words “drain the swamp” incessantly since November’s presidential election. While many voters thought that this would be an easy task if Donald Trump won the presidency, it turns out that it is much harder than it sounds. Even today, eight months into Trump’s presidency, we still have many Obama-era holdovers in the deep state, many establishment-types in Trump’s cabinet, and we still have the same ineffective congressional leaders in House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.

It’s understandable why many Trump voters are disappointed that the swamp-draining isn’t happening quickly enough, if at all.

However, a great catalyst to this end would be electing Judge Roy Moore of Alabama to the United States Senate, to fill the seat vacated by now-Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

There are many reasons that Moore would be a wonderful way of getting rid of the paradigm of “politics as usual,” which has plagued the Republican Party for decades. But the main one, aside from his actual political beliefs, which are clearly conservative, is that he has proven that he will do whatever it takes to stand up for what is right, no matter the cost to him personally.

Let us begin in 2003. At the time, Moore was the Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, and two years earlier, Moore had placed a monument of the Ten Commandments in front of the court, so that “to restore morality we must first recognize the source from which all morality springs.” Much controversy ensues, and U.S. District Judge Myron Thompson of Montgomery orders the monument removed for violating the constitution’s ban on establishment of religion by the government. Moore refuses, and eventually is suspended from his position.

Fast forward to 2012, when Moore is elected to another six-year term as Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court. Then, in 2015, U.S. District Judge Callie V.S. “Ginny” Granade rules Alabama’s marriage laws outlawing same-sex marriage is unconstitutional. Moore rejects this ruling, stating that “for one district judge to overturn the laws of Alabama — she can’t do that … Federal rules don’t allow her to do that…”

Eventually, after the US Supreme Court ruled in favor of same-sex marriage, Moore refused to allow Alabama to issue these marriage licenses, on the grounds that the Supreme Court was overreaching and that they cannot make law, and that the Alabama Supreme Court is the court that sets the laws for the state.

Moore is again suspended without pay, effectively ending his career. Many prominent conservatives missed this, others, such as Steve Deace and Daniel Horowitz, both of Conservative Review, hail Moore as a hero for standing up for his beliefs and not taking the easy way out.

Which brings us to today. Moore is the prototype for doing what he believes is right, no matter the cost. He will not play second-fiddle to a charlatan to Mitch McConnell, who is doing whatever he can to elect Luther Strange to the Senate seat, an establishment candidate that wi be a reliable McConnell lackey. The fact that a senator from Kentucky (in reality, from K-Street) is putting so much into this race shows how worried he is that the swamp will actually be drained. One can only wonder why Trump has endorsed Strange, but we all know why McConnell did.

In comparison, Moore stands only for principle and doing the right thing. Most Americans have a negative view of politicians because of McConnell and his ilk, and that is why we must rally around anyone the D.C. swamp opposes. Because that is the perfect litmus test for who will fight for all Americans, for liberty, for the Constitution, and not K-Street and D.C. politics.

It is for this reason that I have strongly endorsed Moore for the special election scheduled tomorrow, and urge anyone reading this in Alabama to go out and vote for him.

Follow Jeremy on Twitter and Facebook.

Jeremy Frankel is a Human Resource Coordinator based in New Jersey. An Orthodox Jew, he is also a writer for The Daily Wire and Red Alert Politics. You can follow him on Twitter at @frankeljeremy.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
2 Comments

2 Comments

  1. #ProudConservative (@CruzinAhead)

    August 14, 2017 at 2:24 pm

    Trump endorsed Strange because he’s part of the swamp. He always was. Those of us who actually wanted to drain the swamp supported Ted Cruz and are not in the least surprised that the swamp hasn’t been drained. Look who Trump has surrounded himself with. There is no wonder why the swamp is intact. You don’t vote for a progressive barely Republican and expect him to clear out other progressives. Just look at the Obamacare debate. Who did Trump go after? Was it the liberal parts of the party? Nope. He attacked Conservatives who were trying to actually keep their promise to FULLY repeal Obamacare.

    Having said that Moore would be a breath of fresh air and would be a great addition to the likes of Ted Cruz and Mike Lee.

  2. Grace

    August 16, 2017 at 2:39 pm

    I am a resident of Alabama, a native of the southeast, and all my ancestors are veterans of the Confederacy during the Civil War. My grandmother was born on Robert E. Lee’s birthday and was named “Robert Lee …” So I have a significant connection to the Civil War’s history in the southeast. I find it reprehensible that you, as an Orthodox Jew especially, publicly endorse and support Roy Moore. It is obscene that he uses God to promote himself, and to endorse hateful, discriminatory and divisive agendas. Refer to this and pray about your position: Acts 20:28 “Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers. Be shepherds of the church of God, which he bought with his own blood. 29 I know that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock. 30 Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them.” Or this scripture … Ezekiel 13:9 “My hand will be against the prophets who see false visions and utter lying divinations. They will not belong to the council of my people or be listed in the records of Israel, nor will they enter the land of Israel. Then you will know that I am the Sovereign LORD.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Culture and Religion

Snatching Defeat from the jaws of Victory: ‘Writing out’ Most Guns with the Bump-Stock ban.

Published

on

By

Bump Stock

The latest Liberty grabber wave has crested, but Trump is about to give them a tremendous victory over the 2nd amendment.

Now that the Sturm und Drang of the March for gun confiscation has ‘died down’ it has become evident that, much like previous movements of the past, it came to nought aside from some localised suppressions of Liberty. The problem is there a vestige of this assault of freedom that is still rearing it’s ugly head, that of the infamous ban on so-called “Bump-Stocks”.

Those who are rightly concerned about this assault on Liberty can still inscribe their opposition with the Moonshine, Cigarettes and Fire-sticks bureaucracy [Better known as the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms – BATF]  pushing through a new ‘law’ that all by himself, Trump has taken to “Writing Out”.  The deadline is June 27, 2018 11:59 PM ET for everyone to post their opposition to this ‘Law’.

First they came for the Bump-Stocks.

For those who may not care about someone else’s concerns over freedom, just be mindful of a reprise of Martin Niemöller Poem starting with the line: “First they came for the Bump-Stocks, and I didn’t object – For I didn’t care about Bump-Stocks…. Soon enough, they get around to coming after the firearms everyone else cares about, and eventually that will be hunting rifles or shotguns. If you chose to remain silent those guns will be “written out” as well.

But don’t just take our word for it, listen to what the Liberty grabbers have stated in bragging about the subject:

Delaney Tarr [March for Our Lives]

When they give us that inch, that bump stock ban, we will take a mile.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.):

Upon being asked if the bill was a slippery slope toward further gun restrictions, she said, “So what? … I certainly hope so.”

Apparently we’re not supposed to notice when the Liberty grabber Left broadcasts their intentions to the world. We’re supposed to let them get a foot in the door of a pretext for further bans before objecting.

Giving up the question.

David Deming over on the American thinker, Made the very important point that sacrificing one more time to the Liberty grabbers of what seems to be nothing is in essence:

If we agree to ban bump stocks because they facilitate rapid firing, we have given up the question. We have agreed in principle that any dangerous gun can be banned and confiscated by an arbitrary executive order. All guns are capable of rapid fire, and all guns are inherently dangerous. Pump-action shotguns can be rapidly fired and reloaded. Jerry Miculek can fire five shots from a double-action revolver in 0.57 seconds. High-capacity magazines most certainly facilitate rapid fire, so they also will have to go. A writer who wants to ban all “private individual ownership of firearms” recently argued that “even bolt-action rifles can still fire surprisingly fast in skilled hands.” He’s right. All magazine-fed guns will be outlawed.

Automatic redefinition.

In point of fact, the ATF previously ruled that Bump-Stocks [and presumably other ways of ‘bump-firing a gun – Fast fingers, Rubber bands and Belt-loops] don’t actually convert ordinary semi-automatic firearms to a “Machine gun” because the trigger has to be pulled for every shot. Now with the President’s authorising this linguistic legerdemain, this definition codified in the law has been blurred to the point that any gun that can be ‘Bump-fired’ could also be banned. However, they can’t very well ban fingers, belt-loops or rubber bands, so they will just ban each and every gun that can fire too fast.

Just ‘Write-out’ this legal requirement and Voila! Any gun that can be fired too fast for the sensibilities of the Liberty grabbers can be thought of as a “Machine Gun” and banned instantly – converting most of the 120 Million gun owners into instant felons. With a bit of training,  most guns can be fired faster, so in essence, letting them change this legal definition could have them ban just about every gun in existence.

The Takeaway.

One might not care about the fate of thousands of inert pieces of plastic or what happens to those who have them. One might not care if someone won’t be able to bump-fire a weapon in this particular way. But we on the Pro-Liberty Right will rue the day that we let this go through in exchange for nothing.

If we let the powers that be arbitrarily proclaim that some guns with these pieces of inert plastic are “Machine Guns’, the day will soon dawn when ALL guns are dishonestly ‘written out’ as the same. It will then just be a slippery slope to everyone having to undergo a background check, registration and of course – TAXES – on guns that we already own. Followed by the inevitable confiscation of those guns.

Those who remain silent now will only have themselves to blame when this happens – so now is the time to stop this dead in it’s tracks. The comment window is only open for a few more days [Jun 27, 2018 11:59 PM ET], make the best of it.

 

Continue Reading

Foreign Affairs

Trump’s trade war faces resistance from GOP, but it probably won’t matter

Published

on

While the government-contrived immigration “crisis” at the border involving forced family separations has captured the headlines—effectively giving Trump and the GOP the cover they need to save DACA and create a pathway to citizenship for millions of illegal aliens—Trump’s trade war was the topic of the day during hearings with the Senate Finance Committee yesterday.

Following recent announcements of retaliatory tariffs being leveled against the US by Canada, China, Mexico, and the EU, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross appeared before the committee to defend what the committee referred to as Trump’s “knee-jerk impulses” with his trade policies.

Senators from both parties blasted Ross over Trump’s steel and aluminum tariffs—which Ross once defended as “no big deal” because any impact they might have on consumer prices would be “trivial”—following recent economic data indicating that tariffs were indeed having a negative impact on the US economy.

After pointing out that tariffs were responsible for raising prices by 20 percent or more for certain US manufacturers, Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch questioned the administration’s claim that Trump’s trade war was a matter of national security.

“These tariffs do not support US national security; instead, they harm American manufacturers, damage our economy, hurt American consumers, and disrupt our relationship with our long-term allies, while giving China a free pass.”

As regular readers of the Strident Conservative already know, Trump has been particularly soft on China after receiving favorable treatment for his and Ivanka’s business interests in China from the Chinese government.

Sen. Pat Toomey (R-PA), who attempted to get a law passed that would return the power to levy tariffs back to Congress as the Constitution requires—it was shot down by Mitch McConnell—also pointed out that Trump’s trade war has nothing to do with national security.

“I wish we would stop invoking national security because that’s not what this is about. This is about economic nationalism.”

“We’re picking winners and losers.”

Hmm… picking winners and losers. Isn’t that something Obama did?

Despite Trump’s misguided optimism, it’s important to remember that there are always casualties in war—even in a trade war—and he is personally responsible for them because he will have caused them.

While news that there are Republicans willing to take a stand against Trump’s disastrous trade policies should be something to cheer, the GOP has become the party of Trump where loyalty and undying devotion to the NY liberal has replaced conservative values. It was just yesterday that I wrote about Sen. Dean Heller’s conversion to Trump conservatism and how as a Trump loyalist, he would be giving Trump “a wide berth” concerning tariffs.

With the GOP adopting a Trump loyalty test when it comes to enacting policy and running elections, it’s likely that we’ll see more Republicans giving Trump a wide berth on tariffs and pretty much everything else Trump wants.

Originally posted on The Strident Conservative.

 


David Leach is the owner of The Strident Conservative. His daily radio commentary is distributed by the Salem Radio Network and is heard on stations across America.

Follow the Strident Conservative on Twitter and FacebookSubscribe to receive podcasts of radio commentaries: iTunes | Stitcher | Tune In | RSS

Continue Reading

Opinions

Conservative Picks for the Colorado Primary

Published

on

There isn’t too much action in the Colorado Primary, but the race to watch seems to be out of District 5. Colorado is a state that can embrace the grassroots. Doug Lamborn seems to have lost touch with the grassroots due to his struggle at getting on the ballot. As a result of temporarily not being on the ballot, he finds himself in a contested field and is a more vulnerable incumbent. If Lamborn’s reputation can’t recover, Darryl Glenn is poised to capitalize.

Best Pick: Darryl Glenn
Worst Pick: Doug Lamborn
Best Race: District 4
Worst Race: District 3, District 6

District 1

Casper Stockham is the only Republican in this race.

District 2

Peter Yu is the only Republican in this race.

District 3

Scott Tipton is an incumbent RINO. He is unchallenged.

District 4

Ken Buck is Colorado’s most Conservative Congressman. He is unchallenged.

District 5

The first impression from this race is that incumbent Doug Lamborn badmouthed Trump. But rather, Lamborn is in a fight because he had some ballot issues because he was using nonresident signatures or something like that. He survived that court battle but that is only the first battle for in this swamp creature’s quest to stay on top. Looking at his record, he was more Conservative under Obama.

His most serious challenger is Darryl Glenn. Glenn is a candidate with a strong grasp on federalism and separation of powers. He is also running as a fiscal hawk who seems as though he would align with the Freedom Caucus on spending issues. It’ll be interesting to see if Glenn’s Youtube campaign is matched by his ground game. If so, he just might have this.

Conservative Pick: Darryl Glenn

District 6

Mike Coffman is an unchallenged RINO.

District 7

Mark Barrington is the only Republican in this race.

Continue Reading

NOQ Report Daily

Advertisement

Facebook

Twitter

Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2017 NOQ Report.