Connect with us

Everything

Lies, damn lies, and political cults

Published

on

Cults of personality never cease to amaze me. People latch on to a politician as if he or she is their savior, and they change their worldview to fit whatever mold that person espouses at any given moment.

I, and people like me, aren’t afflicted with this condition. You might ask what makes us so special. It’s simple really.

You have to know WHAT you believe in before you can decide WHO to believe in.

The most recent example of this, obviously, is the Cult of Trump. Those who ardently support Trump decry this label, but they never once stop to consider whether or not it might be true.

I’ve seen people who support Trump scream and cry over Obama’s excessive golf outings, but somehow Trump’s are different. Why? Because you like Trump? If Obama’s golf outings and expensive vacations were a problem, Trump’s should be too.

According to The Hill, the DOJ is reportedly asking formore than a million IP addresses related to a Trump “resistance” site. How is his any different than Obama using the DOJ to wiretap reporters who he didn’t like? I’m sure the Trump clan will SAY it’s different, but I’m not seeing it. For the record, I roll my eyes every time I see “The Resistance” in someone”/ Twitter bio. I think these are stupid people throwing a tantrum. However, collecting data on them by the government is against the Constitution and should be condemned by all Americans.

I’m sure the anti-Trump “Resistance” agrees with me. However, I have to wonder how many of THEM spoke up in concern when the IRS was targeting conservative groups. My guess is few, if any.

For all the noise everyone makes about “freedoms of speech” and “not wanting to live in a police state,” people sure are fine with totalitarianism as long as it’s going against the other side. Nobody should be ok with this under any circumstances.

I’ve been mostly quiet on the violence and racial tension that has taken place in the last week or so, speaking of it to nonone but a couple of close friends. There’s a reason for this. Most everyone will hate what I have to say. That’s ok. It’s a free country and I respect that you have the right to disagree with me.

Everyone there except the cops and National Guardsmen who HAD to be there, are a bunch of idiots. Everyone there had a right to be there. Everyone there had a right to speak, whether I liked it or not (I didn’t). ALL of these groups, neo-Nazis, KKK, BLM, Antifa, are a bunch of racist fascists. Yes, I said ALL of them, and yes, I count them all the same. Don’t like it? Too bad. Freedom of speech.

It’s amazing to me though that people can’t sit back and let any one group have their say, as long as they are doing it PEACEFULLY. Peacefully does not mean you can block traffic, by the way, any more than it means you can’t throw rocks at police, or break windows or set fires. (Have an angry mob block the street in front of my truck and see what happens.) No, they have to make themselves feel better by “counter-protesting.”

Ben Shapiro has been kept from speaking on college campuses because Leftists don’t like what he has to say. Those on the Right scream “free speech.” Then when it’s Linda Sarsour, the tables are flipped and those wanting to stop Shapiro from speaking are screaming “free speech” for Sarsour’s hate speech, while those who defended Shapiro want her to be stopped.

Boycotts are another example. I’ve seen people boycott for supporting or not supporting a certain someone or something, and those same people bemoan a boycott on a company they like. Pick one. You can’t have it both ways.

Back to the politics of specific policies, if Obama did it and you were mad, you should be mad when Trump does it. By the same token, if you are mad because Trump is doing something, you should have been mad when Obama did it. If not, you’re a hypocrite, and you’re part of a cult, whether you acknowledge it or not.

You can keep defending or criticizing Trump and Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama etc, and keep switching positions based on who is doing it. That’s your right. But I’m going to call you out on it every time. This isn’t “whataboutism.” Whataboutism excuses one side for the other, something Trumpers and Obamabots do as nauseum. I don’t excuse one for the other, I just point out hypocrisy for someone to be for it when one does it and against it when the other does it.

Harry Reid (D-NV) railed against illegal aliens entering the country for years. Now the Democrats have learned how to weaponize illegal immigration through voter fraud and a move toward Cloward-Piven economic policies. Now suddenly, conservative Americans are somehow racist for wanting to know who is entering our country? Hypocrisy.

Obama had socialist policies of wanting to take hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars for “infrastructure” spending. Conservatives were rightly outraged. But now Trump wants to do the same thing and “infrastructure spending” is now sound public policy? Hypocrisy.

The last two Presidents whined incessantly about various things, but if you ask either side, only the opposing President did that. (I’m rolling my eyes so far I can see inside my skull here.) Trump’s whining just seems worse because he does it so inarticulately, and does it every day on Twitter.

The bottom line is this: principles DO matter, despite what we were told by the legions of “Apprentice” fans last year. If you are consistent with your principles, it shouldn’t ever feel uncomfortable to call out a politician you mostly agree on when he or she is being inconsistent. If you have to change your opinions to fit their actions, then you’re doing it wrong, and yes, you’re in a cult.

And not for nothing, but this cultish behavior wasn’t confined to Bernie and Trump supporters like many believe. I saw it among Cruz and Rubio supporters, and don’t even get me STARTED on Ron and Rand Paulbots. The “Never Trump” crowd of supposed conservatives have become a cult of anti-personality. ThePresident could say “rain is wet” and some of them would say “See? He’s a racist authoritarian.” Just give it a rest. Criticize the bad, complement the good. It’s not all or nothing.

Just believe what you believe. Stop trying to be part of the “in” crowd by agreeing OR disagreeing with everything a polician says or does, just because he or she is the one to do it. Nothing is going to truly get better until you do that, because once you do that, you’ll see that BOTH major parties are full of the same hypocrites who don’t care about you. Stop looking for a politician to save you. You will always be disappointed, and if you’re not disappointed, it’s because you didn’t really know what you were looking for in the first place.

Benjamin Wilhelm served as a commissioned officer in the United States military for 10 years, serving one combat tour in Afghanistan. He is a recipient of the Bronze Star and Combat Action Badge among other military awards. Ben has worked in a variety of private sector businesses both large and small. He is a former military and civilian firearms instructor and an advocate for veterans issues. Ben is a strict Constitutionalist who sees the Federal government as an out of control leviathan, and the federal debt as a burden that will break the country. Ben is a divorced father of two boys.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
1 Comment

1 Comment

  1. rick rude

    August 17, 2017 at 4:28 am

    great article Mr. Wilhelm

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.