Connect with us

Everything

There’s no doubt both parties are broken, but America isn’t dead yet

Published

on

Could there be a more depressing Independence Day column than one titled “The Problem with Participatory Democracy is the Participants?” That’s like saying, “the problem with my family is my relatives.”

Eitan D. Hersh, associate professor of political science at Tufts University, penned it in The New York Times as a polemic against “cheap participation” in politics and civics in pursuit of “political hobbyism.” What pabulum!

I think there’s too much “cheap political science” actually, and not enough actual teaching students how to think deeply or engage in ideas they don’t personally agree with.

And Bob Burnett lamented that Democrats are “searching for the soul of the Democratic Party,” in the progressive Common Dreams blog. Ironically, he used Bruce Bartlett, a GOP stalwart and historian, as his cudgel.

Over the course of two decades, the Republican Party became the Oligarchy Party. It didn’t abandon ideas but rather turned the conservative intellectual process over to a small number of billionaires. Republican congress members became tools of the oligarchs. Inevitably, this produced the situation where Donald Trump cut his biggest deal; Donald became President of the United States after agreeing to let the oligarchs guide his domestic and foreign policy after accepting millions in financial support.

I’ve always said that Trump was a Democrat right up to the day he announced his run as a Republican. But Trump was the kind of Democrat that no longer exists–the one former Senator Max Cleland was. During the primaries I asked Cleland what he thought of the Democratic Party now. His answer was unprintable.

Where Democrats, political scientists, and Republicans argue over whose money has more influence in politics, both parties go out and raise hundreds of millions of dollars, then pour $50 million into a single House district in Georgia to try and make a point.

The parties are both broken, and Donald Trump is the symptom, not the disease. But he, as abhorrent as he is as a moral role model, may be part of the cure. It’s like when snake venom is used to make antivenin.

Trump’s dismantling of some of the administrative state, while simultaneously debasing the executive office of the President, opens the door to a better cure. Both Democrats and Republicans are looking to states and local control for their own good. And that makes the case for less federal power.

We need a fresh slate of candidates beholden to neither party and their money. Party money has so many strings attached, with donors, PACs, super PACs and committees that it’s all very much broken.

That’s why the Federalist Party‘s arrival is so timely. We don’t need another social media outrage machine. We don’t need another Tea Party. It’s not another reactionary group. It’s a proactive and thoughtful organization beyond shallow “political hobbyism,” dedicated to simple goals, less federal control, and freeing us from the brokenness of tribalism.

It could be a golden opportunity.

In February, 2016, I wrote “I’d rather see the GOP lose and stand for something than win and stand for nothing more than winning. If that makes me a bad Republican, so be it.” Even then, I had a feeling the Trump might win–I even went so far as to (God help me, I repented later) justify Hillary.

With Trump’s election, the GOP may have been set back decades, and may even go the way of the Whigs if his deep unpopularity swings enough seats in 2018. Just think, two seats in Congress have already nearly been lost in almost completely GOP-safe districts.

The Federalist Party has an opportunity to begin building a new conservative banner with candidates who can win against the failed politics of both the Republicans and Democrats. If the GOP won’t carry the banner, why shouldn’t Americans turn elsewhere?

I believe that there’s still hope for America, that we haven’t succumbed to “bread and circuses.” I believe that the Democratic-Republican chokehold on politics can be broken. I still think there’s a chance for the GOP to revive itself out of Trumpism. But that window is closing fast with every repulsive tweet the president sends.

This Independence Day, I celebrate America’s resolve not to remain a self-hating dysfunctional family like Mr. Hersh posits. I think we can choose a better path.

Advertisement

0

Democrats

Dianne Feinstein’s comment on Dayton shooter skipped one important point

Published

on

Dianne Feinsteins comment on Dayton shooter skipped one important point

Gun control is the talk of the town as the week comes to a close. Well, that and Greenland. And Jeffrey Epstein. But the mass shootings two weeks ago has DC buzzing, media furiously reporting, and activists on both sides of the debate furiously Tweeting at each other. Senator Dianne Feinstein weighed in on the discussion by pointing out some important facts about the alleged Dayton shooter, Connor Betts.

Her facts are correct. Her analysis is off because it missed one important point. We’ll get to that in a minute, but let’s declare once and for all (though I’m sure I’ll have to repeat myself later) that the 2nd Amendment IS NOT ABOUT HUNTING OR HOME PROTECTION. Our right to keep and bear firearms was put into the Constitution by our founders because they recognized what could happen if the people had no recourse against an oppressive government. Just as Venezuelans didn’t realize they danger they were putting themselves into when they allowed their guns to be taken away, so too do many Americans put way too much trust in government.

The authoritarian left wants guns because they know they’ll never achieve their endgame as long as the people can defend themselves from tyranny.

Feinstein is correct that the Dayton shooter was able to cause an extreme amount of death and injury in a short period of time. Police were quick to respond, otherwise it could have been much worse. But as our EIC pointed out in a Tweet, Feinstein’s narrative is worthless when you look at it from the opposite perspective.

Gun control is not the solution to our mass shooting problem. If anything, gun control has enabled shooters to enact their crimes without fear of many “good guys with a gun” to stop them. We must never give up our 2nd Amendment rights.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Media

With ‘collusion’ out and ‘racism’ in, legacy media scrambles to write the anti-Trump narrative

Published

on

With collusion out and racism in legacy media scrambles to write the anti-Trump narrative

There are things that are often so obvious to me, I actually ignore them as stories to consider reporting when in reality they’re big news. It’s part of the myopia journalists often get when their days are spent researching and analyzing a topic so much, we assume certain things are common knowledge when they’re not. Case-in-point: The fact that legacy media establishes narrative plans to achieve goals that promote their agenda.

It took my wife’s aghast response to learning the NY Times was setting up a gameplan to attack President Trump from now until the election. I asked her what she thought newsroom’s did. After all, she knows I used to sit in meetings about how to cover particular topics, and affecting the 2020 election is obviously something newsrooms will try to do. But to her (and probably a lot of our readers), it’s assumed journalists aren’t crafting stories based on a playbook but are simply taking each individual piece of news and spinning it as they see fit.

Nope. That’s not how it works. We’ve seen comical examples of media coordination to push very specific narratives that often match the talking points of Democrats. This isn’t new. It’s as old as journalism itself. Propaganda isn’t a rare occurrence. It’s an ongoing battle to appear to be unbiased while conveying bias subtly. But today, there’s no longer subtly involved. Both progressive and conservative news outlets unabashedly spin stories to suit their agendas.

The latest example came from a leak of a NY Times staff meeting transcript that detailed how the Russian collusion narrative was a dud and they needed to go after the new Trump narrative, that he’s a racist. I saw the story yesterday and myopically assumed, “Duh, it’s obvious. This is a nothingburger.” But as my wife pointed out, there are plenty of people who don’t realize this is how newsrooms in every major outlet operate.

Leaked Transcript Of NYT Staff Meeting Reveals Leadership’s Plan For Reporting On Trump For Next Two Years

As revealed in the leaked transcript, Baquet began the meeting by referencing the paper’s “significant missteps” and then explaining how these “missteps” stem from “something larger”: the paper’s approach to reporting on Trump. “This is a really hard story, newsrooms haven’t confronted one like this since the 1960s,” said Baquet. “It got trickier after [inaudible] … [it] went from being a story about whether the Trump campaign had colluded with Russia and obstruction of justice to being a more head-on story about the president’s character.”

Baquet then admits that the Times had “built our newsroom” around covering the ultimately debunked narrative that Trump “colluded” with Russia. “We built our newsroom to cover one story, and we did it truly well,” said Baquet in comments highlighted by the Washington Examiner‘s Byron York. “Now we have to regroup, and shift resources and emphasis to take on a different story.”

As early as it may seem in the election cycle, this is actually crunch-time for journalists with an agenda, which is essentially all of us. The narratives take time to stick, and so if progressive media is going to get enough Americans to believe their racism narrative, they need to be hammering it today and all the way through until the election.

Their plan has three steps:

  1. Paint Trump as a racist
  2. Paint the whole GOP as either racists or enabling racists
  3. Make voters believe that if they vote for Trump and/or Republicans, they’re racists as well

If that sounds familiar, it’s because you’re paying attention as the narrative unfolds before our eyes. They realize the President hasn’t said or done anything that’s racist. They can attach the race card to certain comments he makes, but even then it’s a stretch. But they need to hold this as their message because his policies tell a completely different story. Black and Hispanic-American unemployment numbers are at all-time lows while prosperity is spreading to minorities faster than ever in our history, including (especially) under President Obama.

The left will try to divide us and then claim President Trump is the great divider. They want to draw distinct lines between those who support him and those who may be willing to oppose him. Then, they’ll do everything in their power to pull people on the fence over to their side. What they can’t understand is why things are working, why the economy is humming, and why violence seems to be coming more from the left than the right. That’s not what they expected to happen. Many assumed his presidency would be so bad so quickly, he’d never be allowed to finish his first term. But as it becomes increasingly likely he’ll get a second term, they’re scrambling to derail him.

The progressive narratives in legacy media are 100% intended to subvert the 2020 election and remove President Trump from power. The best thing conservatives can do is continue to point out their complete journalistic hypocrisy.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Everything

‘Sanctuary Sheriff’ Garry McFadden released convicted child molester Oscar Leonardo to protect him from ICE

Published

on

At some point, Democrats have to come to the conclusion that their little experiment with sanctuary cities has failed. It was supposed to encourage cooperation with the Hispanic community so they’d be more willing to report crimes knowing the people they were reporting won’t be deported. But instead, crime has risen in nearly every sanctuary jurisdiction while cooperation between the communities and law enforcement haven’t gotten any better.

But instead of learning lessons, Democrats are doubling down. One such Democrat is Mecklenburg County Sheriff Garry McFadden. Known as the “Sanctuary Sheriff” for lording over his county with anti-ICE policies that went against the will of the people, the buddy of Barack Obama has been at the center of controversy for over a year. Now, he’s being questioned about one illegal alien his policy had released, a previously deported convicted child molester who took two additional months for ICE to capture.

“They know if they’re arrested, they’re not gonna be handed over to ICE,” ICE spokesman Bryan Cox said.

Oscar Leonardo sexually assaulted at least one child in McFadden’s district before being granted release. An ICE detainer was in place, which the sheriff’s office ignored. But McFadden doubled down on his policy by saying ICE should have sent an arrest warrant instead of a detainer. Either McFadden is ignorant of the law he’s supposed to uphold or he’s lying for the sake of misdirection as ICE is incapable of issuing warrants. That’s solely done by the U.S. Attorney’s Office.

Sanctuary jurisdictions choose to ignore detainers, and despite their claims that this makes the community safer, there are numerous instances where they clearly made the community less safe. This instance is one of them, but ICE was able to recapture him after wasting two months and countless man-ours. They could have simply picked him up and deported him had McFadden cooperated with ICE. Instead, he chose to put more children at risk by protecting a child molester.

As long as Democrats like Garry McFadden continue to protect child molesters like Oscar Leonardo instead of the American citizens they’re charged to protect, they should not be given a single vote. If they won’t do their jobs, replace them.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending