Connect with us

Opinions

Conservative Picks for the Minnesota Primary

Published

on

Conservative Picks for the Minnesota Primary

Minnesota has a lot of action and potential relative to other states. Minnesota has three blue districts Donald Trump won in 2016. This means the right candidate can come along and upset the “blue wave” or at least mitigate potential losses. Minnesota is hopeful because in almost every race, there’s at least one candidate that doesn’t suck. It would be nice to see a little more enthusiasm in the Senate races(courtesy of Al Franken.) The GOP can look to make progress in what has been a staunchly blue state for decades. Minnesota has become redder with each of the last three presidential elections, so the Democrats reign is in trouble.

Best Picks: Jim Newberger, Tom Emmer, Jen Zielinski
Worst Picks: Carla Nelson
Best Race: District 7
Worst Race: Senate Special Election

US Senate Special Election

Karin Housely is the GOP favorite in this race. However she comes off as a RINO who would expand the debt. Her stint in the State Senate shows she really isn’t all that Conservative despite having a more Conservative 2017 session, which every other Republican did as well, so it seems. She doesn’t impress up front. Her main opponent is Bob Anderson. Anderson fancies himself as an outsider. He comes off as a populist rather than a Conservative, but that is preferable to the shining RINO that Housely would likely be. Anderson is anti-establishment so he is more likely to shake things up.

Conservative Pick: Bob Anderson

US Senate

The most serious candidate here seems to be Jim Newberger. As a rep in the Minnesota House, Newberger has an outstanding record. For that reason, it’s a good thing for Conservatism that he may walk into a easy victory here in an underwhelming race. Merrill Anderson is a populist and perhaps a conspiracy nut. He doesn’t reasonably stand a chance. Roque De La Fuente is literally running for Senator in every state that has loose enough residency requirements. He isn’t Conservative. He is not the pick here, but he understands taking chances.

Conservative Pick: Jim Newberger

District 1

Jim Hagedorn looks to reclaim he seat he barely lost in 2016. This is district went red for Trump, yet he lost by less than 1%. His main opponent is Carla Nelson, a state rep. She is ACU’s lowest ranking Republican in 2016 and was tied for a repeat in 2017. She is no Conservative.

Conservative Pick: Jim Hagedorn

District 2

Jason Lewis is the highest rated Congressman in the state. He’s not a perfect Conservative, but deserves another term. He is unopposed.

District 3

Erik Paulsen is an unchallenged RINO.

District 4

Greg Ryan is an unchallenged RINO.

District 5

Jen Zielinski seems to be the GOP favorite in this race. She seems to have the potential to shrink the government. She also wants to make the Republican Party the “Party of Choice.” This is good branding for incorporating issues such as school choice. The other candidates don’t appear to be as serious.

Conservative Pick: Jen Zielinski

District 6

Tom Emmer hasn’t done a terrible job in Congress. His Liberty score of 69 shows a more fiscally responsible Republican than a typical RINO. He faces the same two challenges as he did last time around. Neither of these candidates are particularly inspiring enough to warrant a course change.

Conservative Pick: Tom Emmer

District 7

David Hughes looks for a rematch after losing by 5% in 2016. Hughes is a solid Conservative by looks. His platform is right of Trump on immigration and healthcare. His opponent Matt Protch is campaigning as an outsider. Rather than a populist, he actually seems Conservative. This race is winnable for the GOP so Hughes is perhaps the best bet here. But he lost a race where Trump won. This indicates weak campaigning. So perhaps its time to invest in someone new? However Collin Peterson has been in since 1990, too long. He’s also way more vulnerable in an increasingly red district. Perhaps Hughes can win with a second chance, now that he potentially has more name recognition. Or perhaps Protch is the choice.

Conservative Pick: David Hughes?

District 8

The most serious candidate here is Pete Strauber who seems like a regular Republican, and that comes with a bad connotation. This is another flippable seat in Minnesota.

Conservative Pick: Pete Strauber

Advertisement

0

Conservatism

A renewed call for prayers for our nation

Published

on

A renewed call for prayers for our nation

Prayer is a powerful thing. Whenever we give praise to our Father in Heaven and beseech Him for blessings, He hears us. He may not always grant us our wishes; he’s not a fictional genie. Our wishes are not His command. But He does hear us, and when the chorus of prayers for a particular event are strong, it is a benefit to the cause. Today, America needs prayers. Society is slipping into a state of decadence that only He can reverse.

We often rely on ourselves to get things done. Hard work and perseverance go a long way. We also often rely too heavily on our elected officials to do the right thing, but as solid as our constitutional republic is in form, it is beset by turmoil and a rising anti-Biblical worldview that is pervading the collective consciousness of many Americans who aren’t even aware that it’s happening.

Sex and violence have been normalized as “entertainment.” More attention is often paid to our mobile devices than our children, who themselves are given mobile devices to keep them busy so we can spend more time on ours. Churches are becoming more progressive to keep up with changes in society. Meanwhile, other religions such as Islam, atheism, and transhumanism are growing dramatically.

On the political front, many Americans are becoming increasingly dependent on government and are embracing politicians who want to bring us all into a forced state of dependence. Washington DC in general has denied the wise tenets of limited-government federalism and gone for full-blown federal supremacy across the board. We have good people fighting for us in DC, but they are outnumbered and oftentimes overpowered by their cohorts, bureaucrats, and an activist judiciary that holds its own delusions of grandeur.

I find myself seeking solutions to America’s problems most hours of the day. It’s my job to analyze what’s happening in the news and decipher what it means to the American people. Then, I try to either side with the most righteous solutions or offer new ones of my own. In this daily cycle, I often lose sight of the true nature of this world. There is Divinity holding everything together, but there are also principalities and powers stacked against us.

Unfortunately, part of our weakness as humans means the allure of the anti-Biblical worldviews and the progressive mentality on governance ring wonderfully in our ears. We hear the call of evil forces and all-too-often it sounds appealing to us. It’s like candy to a child. They’ve been told eating their broccoli is better for them but they love the candy so much more.

America needs a few revivals. We need a revival both of the church and within the church. More people need to be attending as well as actively participating more than one day a week. Meanwhile, the churches themselves need to abandon the politically correct version of Bible teaching and focus on the truths of the text itself.

We need a revival of conservatism. Populism may be alive and well, and for now it’s an acceptable alternative to the evils of radical progressivism, but we must strive for a stronger adherence to the philosophies that are necessary to keep American exceptionalism alive and widespread throughout our nation. There are simply too many “RINOs” out there not realizing their pushes for political expediency are betrayals to America itself.

Above all else, the United States needs more citizens to pray for our nation. Pray for wisdom for our leaders. Pray for discernment among the people. Pray that more people will open their eyes to the truth of the Gospel and our hearts to the gift of Jesus Christ. We must keep fighting the good fight, but doing so mustn’t get in the way of praising and beseeching our Creator.

Perhaps Daniel did it best in his prayers to our Lord.

Through all of the existential threats brewing in and out of the worlds of politics and religion, there is one action that is undeniably positive: Prayer. If we diligently pray for our nation and have others pray for her as well, perhaps there really is hope.

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

Entertainment and Sports

HBO should can Bill Maher, but don’t hold your breath

Published

on

HBO should can Bill Maher but dont hold your breath

Until yesterday, I actually liked Bill Maher. I never agreed with his politics but he got an “entertainer’s pass” in my books as someone who can’t really do much to harm the political process and actually helps galvanize conservatives against the clear media bias mounted against us. But then he went to a new low, saying he was glad David Koch was head and hoped he died in pain.

It’s too far. Even if we disregard the fact that it’s disrespectful of Koch’s loved ones, the hideous nature of the comments makes it something we as a people should denounce. When Ruth Bader Ginsburg dies, which may be soon, I’m hopeful no notable conservatives act the way Maher did. If they do, I’ll condemn them just as quickly as I’m condemning Maher.

This behavior is beyond being a provocateur and HBO shouldn’t stand for it. But they will. In fact, they’ll probably support him. He’s good for subscriptions and espouses their collective ideology. Therefore, a toxic jab at a dead Libertarian is far from grounds for termination and may be grounds for added support from executives at HBO.

Here are some Twitter reactions:

People like Bill Maher have the gall to point at President Trump as a reason for the degradation of American society. It’s true that we’re losing our civility, but it’s mostly at the hands of progressives who have no respect for anything American.

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

Culture and Religion

Moving left into the province of propagandists, the AP avoids the pesky issue of due process

Published

on

By

Moving left into the province of propagandists the AP avoids the pesky issue of due process

More akin to being authoritarian propaganda, a media source ignores an important civil liberty while casting opinion as fact.

Trying to come up to speed on what is going on in the world each morning is quite often akin to the “kawoosh” seen in the Star Gate genre, with a sudden onrush of stories and opinion pieces cast as ‘fact checks’. It’s also important to stay out of any type of echo chamber on either side, thus we check what AllSides would consider to be ‘Centrist’:

A Center media bias rating does not always mean neutral, unbiased or reasonable, just as “far Left” and “far Right” do not always mean “extreme” or “unreasonable.” A Center bias rating simply means the source or writer rated does not predictably show opinions favoring either end of the political spectrum.

Please note that as they state in their FAQ, a centrist bias rating doesn’t mean neutral or unbiased, just that it supposedly doesn’t favor either side. The problem is the Associated Press has been moving inexorably left exemplified by two stories from this weekend.

Due process, what’s that?

In our first example, the esteemed Associated Press that labels itself as ‘independent’ produced a long piece on Gun Confiscation SWATing also known as ‘Red Flag’ Gun Confiscation. With an almost tangential reference to the infringement on Constitutional rights several paragraphs in on the piece, and only casting it as the contention of other law enforcement leaders while ignoring the fact that laws for Involuntary Civil Commitment already exist:

Involuntary civil commitment

Involuntary civil commitment is the admission of individuals against their will into a mental health unit. Generally speaking, there are three reasons why an individual would be subject to involuntary civil commitment under modern statutes: mental illness, developmental disability, and substance addiction. In the case of mental illness, dangerousness to self or others defines the typical commitment standard, with almost all states construing the inability to provide for one’s basic needs as dangerousness to self. In terms of process, every state provides for a hearing, the right to counsel, and periodic judicial review, while most states have statutory quality standards for treatment and hospitalization environment.

Source: Ralph Reisner, Christopher Slobogin, and Arti Rai, Law and the Mental Health System: Civil and Criminal Aspects (2009), pp. 704-705.

[Emphasis added]

They avoid any real discussions on critical Constitutional principles such as due process [5th amendment], searches and seizure [4th amendment], private property rights and of course the 2nd amendment. They spend an inordinate amount of time in what could be characterized as a one-sided infomercial for the destruction of due process and gun confiscation.

The headline for the piece was a masterful casting as the destruction of civil Liberties as a ‘tool’, while hedging their bets on this ‘tools’ effectiveness: ‘Red flag laws’ offer tool for preventing some gun violence.

Note the use of the phrase ‘some gun violence’ as a subtle hint that other measures against the cause of liberty will be needed. Authoritarianism never sleeps in keeping people safe and enslaved.

Opinion as a ‘fact check’

Our second example of authoritarian media bias also does a masterful job subtly casting opinion as fact in one of the national socialist media’s interminable ‘fact check’ diatribes. Once again we turn to the ‘independent’ Associated Press with a piece entitled: AP FACT CHECK: Trump’s swerves on economy, guns and migrants .

We’ll leave some of their use of ‘Newspeak’ on the subject of illegal Invaders and other issues to emphasize this excerpt on the subject of ‘gun’ violence:

TRUMP: “I don’t want people to forget that this is a mental health problem. … Just remember this: Big mental problem, and we do have a lot of background checks right now.” — remarks Sunday to reporters in Morristown, New Jersey.

THE FACTS: He’s oversimplifying the role of mental illness in public mass shootings and playing down the ease with which Americans can get firearms.

Most people with mental illness are not violent and they are far more likely to be victims of violent crime than perpetrators, according to mental health experts. They say that access to firearms actually is a big part of the problem.

[Emphasis added]

How are the terms ‘oversimplifying’ and ‘playing down’ even close to being statements of fact? What numerical values translate to ‘big part’? Does the staff at the ‘independent’ Associated Press know the difference between fact and opinion? For example, it is a fact of history that the National Socialist German Workers’ Party or ‘Nazi’ Party was in fact the National Socialist German Workers’ Party.

Whereas the descriptions layered on by the AP could hardly be considered factual in nature. As is usually the case, they couldn’t help themselves in also including a plug for the destruction of due process, touting something they would resist when it comes to their common sense civil liberties.

Their ‘FACT CHECK’ also included a push for Gun Confiscation SWATing, emphasizing the words of an executive of the American Psychological Association while forgetting the fact that media sources such as the ‘independent’ Associated Press contribute to the problem of Media Contagion.

The Bottom-Line: The equivalent to the media of ‘red flag’ gun confiscation

Since it’s been established that there is a direct connection between the mass murder tragedies and media coverage, would esteemed ‘independent’ sources such as the Associated Press agree to the ‘red flag’ gun confiscation equivalent for them: Prior Restraint?

They would most certainly object to the destruction of their civil liberties while they cheer for the same in the case of Gun Confiscation SWATing. Perhaps they need to understand that double standards are the grease that makes the slippery slope so dangerous. The whole point of the ‘first they came for..’ sentiment is that we who stand for freedom have to defend all aspects of liberty, Including the common sense civil right of self-defense.

Only defending one basic human right means that all the others will be soon swept away, with only one remaining on the chopping block.

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