Connect with us

Everything

To those who want to fix the GOP from within…

Published

on

Nobody likes to start from scratch, particularly when there’s been a lot of effort put into something. The two major political parties (or the single super-party, depending on how you look at it) have had decades of effort put in by many current members. Some of us have been lifelong Republicans or Democrats. It’s hard to imagine accepting that both are broken beyond repair.

This has been the biggest roadblock fort he Federalist Party to overcome. There are those feel like the Democratic-Republicans will be hard to fix, but it will still be easier than starting a new party. We could list several reasons why this isn’t the case, but I’ll start with the most important: IF the parties can be fixed, it will be BECAUSE of the rise of the Federalist Party. Please allow me a brief moment to explain.

Being a roadblock to the path of least resistance

Let’s stipulate a point that most with knowledge of the situation can agree upon: the GOP has been lurching to the left for some time. There were moments of clarity thanks to organizations like Heritage and the Tea Party when true small-government Federalists such as Mike Lee and Ted Cruz were able to come into office and make slight shifts, but these individuals have proven to be no match for the Establishment juggernaut that controls the GOP.

With that understood, one might ask why he GOP has done this. The reason is pretty simple. It’s because the Democrats have lurched to the left as well. As they are becoming more like America’s version of the Socialist Party, the GOP is becoming the Democratic Party of the 1990s. They will continue down this path regardless of how upset conservatives get because they know that being the less liberal of the two major parties means they don’t have to cater to a single demand from the right. Instead, they’ll continuously lie to us during campaign season knowing we won’t leave them (until now, that is).

We’re seeing it as this article is being written with the Affordable Care Act’s “repeal and replacement” plan. What the House was able to put forth was horrible. It’s government-controlled health care with a new name. The “repeal and replace” they passed was actually a “tweak and rebrand” of Obamacare. Now, the Senate is giving us something even more ludicrously leftist. It’s a pure indicator of the state of the GOP: only four or five Senators are opposed to the bill because of the big government monstrosity that it is. Ironically, some GOP Senators are opposed to it because they think it’s TOO conservative. That’s your modern day Republican Party, the other party of big government.

The Federalist Party must rise to be the true voice for small-government concepts that the GOP abandoned long ago. Until there’s a challenge from outside, any challenges from within the GOP will be disregarded. Those who oppose the status quo will be ostracized as Cruz learned very quickly. Those who promote small-government principles within the party will be ridiculed as “academics,” as Ben Sasse is learning.

Some very intelligent people are still holding onto hope that the GOP can be fixed from within and we don’t totally disagree. However, we are certain that this fix cannot happen without us. Until the GOP has a true challenger that promotes the philosophies most of them have abandoned, there will be no valid reason for them to be the party of small government. Big government principles win elections (at least that’s the rumor) so they will always be the party of slightly-smaller-government-than-the-Democrats until they are challenged.

Our argument is not that people should join us in order to fix the GOP. We think it’s much more likely we’ll be able to rise before the GOP is willing to change, but we know this for certain: if we do not rise, the GOP will only continue to lurch left.

Parties and caucuses and coalitions, oh my

Here’s the funny part about labels. They mean different things to different people. The Tea Party is a coalition. There are some old as well as emerging coalitions that are actually caucuses. Some caucuses such as the House Freedom Caucus would be better served by acknowledging they are actually part of the Federalist Party rather than being a relatively powerless Republican caucus.

In other words, organizations call themselves what they want to be called.

We are a party. There shouldn’t be any confusion about that, but here’s the thing. Whether we are a party, caucus, or coalition, our short-term goals are the same. We need to grow our ranks, form state organizations, raise funds, and start vetting out potential candidates.

This is important to understand because some of the very intelligent people mentioned above have quietly told us they’d prefer if we were a caucus or a coalition. We’ve explored those possibilities and realized they’re untenable. The Tea Party taught us that even a group unified by the most liberal of politicians to oppose could only muster minor and temporal success. As for caucuses, the most powerful such caucus can barely slow down the Establishment.

Whether one believes the parties can be fixed or not, the next step is the same. We must make the Federalist Party rise. Those who believe in reining in DC, defending freedoms, and protecting life can unite with us whether they want to fix the two-party system or not.

Christian, husband, father. EIC, NOQ Report. Co-Founder, the Federalist Party. Just a normal guy who will no longer sit around while the country heads in the wrong direction.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Opinions

It isn’t Never-Trump or Always-Trump destroying conservatism, it’s Sometimes-Trump

Published

on

One of the craziest—or should I say laziest—accusations leveled against me by Trump’s die-hard loyalists whenever I dare to call him out for breaking a campaign promise, getting caught in a lie, or promoting unconstitutional non-conservative ideas, is that I’m a liberal. Sometimes, they go so far as to accuse me of working for George Soros.

As I’ve said many times in response, I don’t work for Mr. Soros, but since money’s been a little tight at the Strident Conservative lately, if anyone has his number, I’d appreciate it if you’d send it my way.

It’s a sad reality that these pathetic taunts are what passes for political discourse in the Age of Trump. Gone are the days when differences could be civilly discussed based on facts instead of emotion.

Another sad reality of this behavior is that it’s a sign that the end of conservatism is near, as Trump’s small army of loyal followers attempt to rebrand conservatism by spreading the lie that he is a conservative and, using binary logic, accusing anyone who opposes him of being a liberal.

This rebranding effort has had an impact. Last week, RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel warned Republican hopefuls that anyone who opposed Trump’s agenda would be “making a mistake.”

McDaniel’s threat was issued following the GOP primary defeat in South Carolina by conservative Mark Sanford after he was personally targeted by Trump himself. Sanford’s crime? Disloyalty to the NY Liberal.

Another source of damage to conservatism has come from evangelicals and the so-called conservative media. In the name of self-preservation, they choose to surrender their principles by promoting the lie that Trump is a conservative. Some of these voices have taken to labelling conservatives who oppose Trump as Never-Trump conservatives, or worse, branding them as liberals and/or Democrats, as was recently written in a piece at TheFederalist.com:

“Trump may be an unattractive and deeply flawed messenger for contemporary conservatism. But loathe though they might be to admit it, what’s left of the Never-Trump movement needs to come to grips with the fact that the only words that currently describe them are liberals and Democrats.”

Then there are those who have adopted a Sometimes-Trump attitude about the president, where everything Trump does is measured using a good Trump/bad Trump barometer. While it has become fashionable for Sometimes-Trump conservatives to stand on their soap boxes condemning both Never-Trump conservatives and Always-Trump faux conservatives, I believe that this politically bipolar approach to Trump is the greatest threat of all to Constitutional conservatism in America.

Sometimes-Trump conservatives have accepted the lie that it’s okay to do a little evil in exchange for a greater good. Though they may fly a conservative banner, their lukewarm attitude about Trump is much like the attitude we see in the Laodicean church mentioned in the Book of Revelations (3:15-16).

“I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! So, because you are lukewarm—neither hot nor cold—I am about to spit you out of my mouth.”

Trump is a double-minded man unstable in all his ways (James 1:8). When lukewarm Sometimes-Trump conservatives choose to overlook this reality, they end up watering-down conservatism to the point that it has no value or power to change America’s course.

As lukewarm Sometimes-Trump conservatives point to the Always-Trump and Never-Trump factions as the reason for today’s conservative divide, remember that it’s the unenthusiastic, noncommittal, indifferent, half-hearted, apathetic, uninterested, unconcerned, lackadaisical, passionless, laid back, couldn’t-care-less conservative imposters in the middle who are really responsible.

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

Culture and Religion

Video Double play: Busting the gun grabber’s musket myth.

Published

on

By

Gun confiscation bingo

Two videos that eviscerate the Liberty Grabbers ‘One shot’ musket myth.

It is a bedrock principle (if they have any) of the Liberty grabber Left that back during the ratification of the US Constitution the only weapons in existence were flintlock musket that took 5 minute to reload. Thus there wasn’t any school violence because it would have taken too long for the perpetrator to kill anyone.

As it typical of the lore of the national socialist Left, this is a lie of the first order. A previous video celebrated the “Assault Weapon” tricentennial, which was bit of the tongue in cheek variety since there were other repeating “Military Style” weapons in existence before this time period. These will be detailed in future articles. Meanwhile we present two videos that also bust the ‘Musket Myth’, one a short presentation from the Royal Armouries on the Jover and Belton “Flintlock breech-loading superimposed military musket”

Royal Armouries
Published on Aug 30, 2017
Curator of Firearms, Jonathan Ferguson, gives us a peek at the Flintlock breech-loading superimposed military musket, by Jover and Belton (1786)

This is a very relevant piece since the inventor Joseph Belton corresponded with the Continental Congress in 1777:

May it Please your Honours,
I would just informe this Honourable Assembly, that I have discover’d an improvement, in the use of Small Armes, wherein a common small arm, may be maid to discharge eight balls one after another, in eight, five or three seconds of time, & each one to do execution five & twenty, or thirty yards, and after so discharg’d, to be loaded and fire’d with cartridge as usual.

“It was demonstrated before noted scientists and military officers (including well known scientist David Rittenhouse and General Horatio Gates)”

This destroys the mythology that the founders had no knowledge of this type of repeating firearm technology that existed already.

The second is a humours dissertation on the subject from video raconteur Steven Crowder https://www.louderwithcrowder.com/

from a few years ago that also eviscerates this bit of Leftist mythology.

Published on Feb 10, 2015
People have been telling us for years that the 2nd amendment was written in a time of Muskets, and that it doesn’t apply to the evolved weapons of today. Is it true?

So why is this important?

Two primary reasons. One that these factual examples demonstrate that the founding fathers knew of these technological advances. Therefore, they destroy any Leftist pretences that the 2nd amendment be confined to muskets. Second that, school violence is something other than an issue of guns.

Continue Reading

Immigration

House proposal makes DACA permanent and grants citizenship to illegals

Published

on

When Donald Trump issued an executive order in Sept. 2017 rescinding the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) order issued by Barack Obama, he was cheered by his adoring fans for appearing to keep one of his campaign promises regarding the illegal immigration problem. However, as the old saying goes, appearances can be deceiving.

The reason I call it deceiving is because Trump’s order was merely a technicality—sort of a Rescind-In-Name-Only moment—used to buy the time necessary to make DACA permanent, which has been his “big heart” goal from the beginning.

Of course, any permanent legislation needs to come from Congress, which should have been problematic for Republicans who campaigned for years against Obama’s handling of illegal immigration. But in today’s Republican party—owned and operated by Trump—such commitments have become secondary to the requirement to please Dear Leader.

For example, just days after Trump’s deceptive order, Mitch McConnell went on record in support of negotiation with Democrats and the president—but I repeat myself—to save DACA and create an amnesty plan and eventual citizenship for approximately 1.8 million DREAMers.

Though past attempts have failed, election-season fever is sweeping Washington, so Trump and Republican party loyalists are making another push to get the job done.

After conducting several days of Nancy Pelosi-style meetings behind closed doors, Paul Ryan released an immigration plan yesterday that will legally protect DREAMers while also providing over $23 billion for another Trump promise—a border wall.

Wait a minute! I though Trump promised us that Mexico was going to pay for the wall. I suppose that’s just another in-name-only moment for the New York liberal.

Back to the House proposal. DREAMers can apply for “nonimmigrant status” which is essentially a newfangled way to say visa. The extra visas necessary to handle these requests will be available due to new restrictions that will lower the number of legal immigrant applications, which means legal immigrants will be effectively moved to the back of the line.

But that’s not the worst part.

Once obtained, these visas become the first step on a pathway to citizenship, which means that years down the road, 1.8 million illegals—probably more—will have jumped the line to US citizenship ahead of legal immigrants, despite the rhetoric from Trump and the GOP claiming otherwise.

Though this proposal may or may not pass, making DACA permanent and creating a pathway to citizenship are broken promises. But as I wrote a few days ago, breaking promises has become a job requirement in the age of Trump and today’s GOP.

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

NOQ Report Daily

Advertisement

Facebook

Twitter

Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2017 NOQ Report.