Connect with us

Everything

America’s march toward socialism most underplayed story of the decade

Published

on

The three ring circus of the 2016 election cycle was certainly full of dark and depressing performances. In the middle of all this, however, another phenomenon occurred. What should have been the biggest story of the 21st century went largely unnoticed.

There was a time in America when socialism was recognized as the evil it is, even by the most common man. It did not take a college degree for someone to instantly have a negative reaction to this oppressive, country-killing form of government. Nevertheless, in 2016, for the first time in American history, we had an unapologetic socialist–Bernie Sanders–run in a major party’s primary in an attempt to become the president of the United States.

Where was the media coverage, other than what would normally be given to any primary candidate? Where was the shock? Where were the news stories about a socialist daring to attempt to become U.S. president? Yes, socialists have held office in different states at different levels and even Congress has been stained with this disease, but no presidential primary candidate has ever proudly run under this banner. The reaction should have been dramatic and heated. The reaction should have been utter outrage. Instead, there was hardly any reaction at all.

The Camel’s Head is Firmly in the Tent

Certainly the balance of power would have come into play and stifled most of what Sanders would have likely tried to do if nominated and elected, but that is not the point. The point is the hideous apathy of the American public, who by and large were unmoved about the fact that socialism clearly has a hold in this country. Many were willing to support a socialist without feeling a twinge. What this means, folks, is that the camel has his head in the tent. You’ve all heard that one. Once his head is in, the rest of him is coming.

Unrecognized Threat

A mere 20 years ago, no primary candidate would have dared to run as a socialist, even if that was technically his or her agenda. We must wonder what has happened to this country that so few understand the threat of this horribly oppressive form of government and even find it perfectly acceptable.

Many are now willing to trade the best system in the world–no, not a perfect system–for a government system that has failed 100% of the time throughout history. They are willing to trade what we have now for the poverty and misery that is the eventual fate of all socialist countries.

Have people become so indoctrinated through the liberal education system that they are raised to hate capitalism and believe everything must be “fair,” and therefore socialism must be good? We can only shake our heads in disbelief.

Dismal Statistics of a Real Life Experiment

It is the opinion of some that citizens go down this dangerous road because America does not know who she is anymore. On a small scale, I have found truth in this theory: after randomly stopping 51 people on the street at a shopping center, I found only two who could name the three branches of government.  Ten of the 51 could name only one U.S. Senator or Representative in their district. The other 40 were unable to name any, and some even seemed surprised to know they “had one.”  No one in the group could name even one representative or senator at the state level.

None were able to name a single duty of the federal government, although the guesses were mind-blowing. The Fifth Amendment was the only amendment that a substantial number of people recognized–likely from so many characters on television “pleading the fifth.” However, they had no idea what was contained in the 10th Amendment, and only a tiny handful could state even one of the five Rights found in the First Amendment. When asked to describe the difference between a capitalist system and socialism, 51 out of 51 failed.

When asked about healthcare, 50 out of 51 said “the government should pay for it,” or something similar. When asked if the government is supposed to tell us what to do, I got every answer except the one I was looking for: the government is not supposed to tell us what to do, we are supposed to tell THEM what to do. Concerning the latter, one person even asked me “well, how would we do that?” On certain days, it is difficult for a politically savvy person to know whether to laugh or cry.

It is a shock and a disgrace to find so many individuals utterly unaware of what has made America great, and what will almost certainly destroy her if no one cares enough to save her life. If we do not know who America is, we cannot properly evaluate if she has taken a turn for the worse.

The Forgotten Warning Sign

The biggest story of the 21st century should have been that a socialist was welcomed with opened arms to run in a major party’s presidential primary. Yet the media merely glanced at it and passed by, proving once again that we are not defending our country from the things that could lead to its demise.

There are plenty of socialist countries in the world. If that is the type of government a person enjoys, he or she is free to relocate at any time. Might I suggest Venezuela?

People today are offended at inconsequential nonsense, yet no one seems offended at the attempt by some to change our system of government and implement socialist tenets into American law, even though such action defies our Constitution.

This is a shining example of the apathy, incompetence, and inability to think and reason that will lead to disaster unless we challenge the threats that are all around us each day. No one can save us if we do not save ourselves. America’s biggest enemies and most dangerous threats are found within, but this we consistently fail to recognize.

Jesse Broadt has been a full-time writer in the travel industry since 2007 and regularly contributes to news and political websites.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
6 Comments

6 Comments

  1. Eric Dixon

    August 5, 2017 at 11:47 am

    The march is not only continuing; it is accelerating.

  2. Sharon

    August 5, 2017 at 8:13 pm

    I found this article to be insightful and nicely written, tackling a subject matter that not many would take on. I believe there is a great deal of truth to what Broadt is saying. I also believe the 51 people in his small study is indeed an indictment of the American educational system as well as political illiteracy. I applaud the backbone behind this piece.

    • Jesse Broadt

      August 7, 2017 at 2:37 pm

      Thank you, Sharon. Glad it spoke to you.

  3. Raz Schultz

    August 6, 2017 at 3:20 pm

    Finally someone had the courage to write about this subject. It was appalling to watch a socialist run for president and actually have supporters. So many young people were among them, that it was indeed a testimony of how liberals were allowed to hijack our educational system.
    This article is excellent, and covers every aspect of this socialism horror that is growing up before our eyes with little resistance or protest. The reference to the camel is profound.

    I hope to hear a lot more from this writer and I pray our citizens will begin to take heed. Thank you, Jesse Broadt!

    • Jesse Broadt

      August 7, 2017 at 2:38 pm

      “Hijacked” is the word! Thank you, Raz

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.