Connect with us


A case study in getting the conservative message to the voters



A case study in getting the conservative message to the voters

What would you do if you were a conservative candidate for public office in a deep blue state where the Democrats control all levels of government and have the media in their pocket? Oh, one more thing, the Republican Party is afraid of its own shadow and always plays Dem-Lite Games. The few politicians with an [R] after their name who actually get elected are virtually indistinguishable from Democrats once they take office.

Last year in Hawaii, I volunteered in the primary campaign of John Carroll for Hawaii Governor. At the end of June 2018, I interviewed him in his office and transcribed his words. Over the next four days, we worked together to ensure that his remarks were accurately conveyed in the article which I authored in his behalf.

There was just cause to believe that the article would be published in the local media in keeping with coverage of all candidates in the Gubernatorial race. At the time, the incumbent Democrat Hawaii Governor David Ige also had a primary challenger.

The article which you are about to read was ready for publication on June 24th, 2018 which was nearly 7 weeks before the August 11th primary. That was early enough to have had a significant impact and well before early mail-in and walk-in voting began.

Unfortunately, there was no objective unbiased media outlet here in the 50th state willing to let the voters make their own decisions after reading an article which contained not only political considerations but moreover was of significant historical value. It is presented here in NOQ Report verbatim in its entirety.

We will never know whether this would have altered the results of the Hawaii Republican Primary last year in which Andria Tupola prevailed, only to be defeated significantly by Governor Ige in the General Election on November 6th. Could John Carroll have done better in that one-on-one contest against the incumbent Governor? That question will never be answered.

For the 2020 election, we will need to rely upon media sources based outside of Hawaii to reach conservatives here in the islands. The shortcomings of Hawaii GOP which did not adequately promote the message of conservative candidates must also be addressed in the immediate future.

The implications of this media blackout extend beyond Hawaii. The isolation and self contained nature of an island state in the middle of the Pacific Ocean are definitely aggravating circumstances. However I’m sure conservatives in California, Illinois, New York and other blue states will empathize and see relevance to your own circumstances and challenges that you face in next year’s election.

Here is the original article which has been approved for publication in NOQ Report by John Carroll:


John Carroll Rates Every Hawaii Governor Since Statehood

By David Ware

On Behalf of John Carroll for Governor

June 24, 2018

In Hawaii, we honor our kupuna who have acquired enough life experience to become family and community leaders as they embody our natural respect.  Before you say, ok, but we don’t elect them as Governor of Hawaii, let’s pause together and consider the nearly 90 years of experience, of which almost 70 are here in Hawaii, that John Carroll brings to this 2018 gubernatorial campaign.

On August 21, 1959, when Hawaii became the 50th State of the Union, John Carroll had already been working for the people of Hawaii for 10 years. He is familiar with every Hawaii Governor since Statehood.  His rating of each man and woman who has held the highest office in these islands will give insight into his urgent agenda for the road ahead when he takes the oath of office next December 3rd.

The following are John’s own recollections of each State of Hawaii Governor along with his explanations of what he will do differently. It may really surprise you whom he rates as the best and whom he rates as the worst Governor.  This will give you a window into what to expect from John Carroll when you elect him our next Hawaii Governor.

William F. Quinn [Republican]

August 21, 1959 – December 3, 1962

[Hawaii Territorial Governor August 29, 1957 – August 21, 1959]

Bill Quinn was one of the very nicest people I’ve ever known. He was a good Catholic, good family man and very, very good Governor. We had an excellent economy at that time. Everybody was employed. There were no beggars, there were no homeless, nothing of that sort. He managed based on what I would call Republican principles. I was basically a fighter pilot and airline pilot during the time that he was in. I used to play volleyball with him and knew him from that basis and also knew a couple of his kids who were friends of mine. So the only thing I could say about him was that I think he was a very good Governor and I listened and heard him talk. He was a very good singer by the way and part of his political career was based on his ability to sing. All I can say about Bill Quinn was God bless him.

John A. Burns [Democrat]

December 3, 1962 – December 2, 1974

Governor Burns was a retired Police Captain. Very smart, nice guy. I knew him only as Governor. I did not know him other than that he was Governor when I was first running for politics. I was never in office while he was Governor other than possibly for a while after 1970. He was a reasonably decent Governor. The one thing that he did do which I will do quite differently is that he basically turned over all of the activity which was productive by the prisoners in the various prisons including in Kulani on Hawaii Island and Olinda on Maui as well as on Oahu. He did a disservice to the idea of rehabilitation vs. recidivism. He was endeared to the union leadership. The net effect of that was basically to eliminate hard labor and allow prisoners to play volleyball or handball or weight lift or just fool around and waste time. I think what he did was a terrible disservice. When he took office, one of the first things he did was to look at the prison system. Apparently the people who helped get him elected against Jimmy Kealoha were union leaders of both private and public sector unions. What he did was to take all of the printing, automobile repair, license plate construction; all of those things were taken out of the prison system and given to private sector interests. This basically ended up costing the tax payers a lot more money but endeared him totally to the union leadership. The thing that bothered me about it is that it left the prisoners who could be being rehabilitated with nothing to do. I think that was a terrible disservice and what I intend to do as Governor is to get hard labor put in as a major tenet of the law. If anybody is sent to jail for a misdemeanor or felony crime, it will be for hard labor. Prisoners could earn a small stipend of perhaps 50 cents per hour to earn and to build up a small bank account for accessing when they are released. I also intend to get the license plate production, printing and auto mechanics as well as stream cleanup and other types of work to be done by the prisoners into law. Nobody’s going to be sitting around cells wondering what to do as soon as they get out of jail. I think Burns did a very, very bad thing with respect to that particular issue. Other than that, he seemed to be a decent Governor.

George Ariyoshi [Democrat]

December 2, 1974 – December 1, 1986

When Governor Ariyoshi came into office in the early 1970s, I had been in the Hawaii State House of Representatives for two terms. I had worked well with Jean King, Tadao Beppu and other Democrat leaders. With George Ariyoshi’s help we were able to get passed all of the current environmental law that is on the books in this state. That goes for everything from monk seals and green sea turtles protection to clean water act and shoreline protection management act. Geothermal or other types of alternative energy use. I believe that Ariyoshi was an excellent Governor of all of the Governors I served under here or have been in office under their administration. I should say has he has really been the best and I include Lingle in that comment. The best thing that I know about him is that when we ended up my last term in office as a State Senator, we had over a 500 million dollar surplus and the state was in really good condition financially. I don’t remember any homelessness, jobless or anything of that sort so I would give George Ariyoshi an A+.

John D. Waihee III [Democrat]

December 1, 1986 – December 5, 1994

When Waihee came into office, I had known John as a first graduate of the Richardson Law School.  I was a House Committee member involved with getting the new school put into being. I met him after a hearing in which he had submitted a document which was questionable. I asked him: why did you do this? His response was “we do what we have to do”. Later on when he became Governor, I never forgot that particular instance and I watched him go on to increase the cost of, or at least the numbers of, state employees by over 25%. The cost of government increased dramatically and the economy started to go downhill from that time. I consider Waihee probably the worst Governor that we ever had here other than, possibly, Lingle.

Benjamin J. Cayetano [Democrat]

December 5, 1994 – December 2, 2002

Ben Cayetano and I were friends in the State House and in the State Senate. We always got along well. I found him reasonably conservative. I thought he was a breath of fresh air after getting rid of Waihee and I worked well with Ben. By that time I was completely out of the political arena in terms of having anything to say about what was going on. Ben wrote a book in which he condemned me for getting single-member districts as opposed to multi-member districts. I did that through the U.S. Federal District Court. All in all, I think he was a decent Governor and reasonably conservative but not as conservative as I would have liked.

Linda Lingle [Republican]

December 2, 2002 – December 6, 2010

Linda Lingle was a very intelligent but totally self-oriented person. I had known her before she got elected and had actually helped her get elected. I had held signs for her, spoken on her behalf, things of that sort. I ended up running against her for the Governorship in 2002 on the basis of various things that she had not done as Party Chair. I believed at the time that she really was not a person who should be Governor. She was a very clever politician. She worked well with the unions but the things that she did I find totally destructive. The first one and the foremost in my mind is that she refused to even discuss the elimination of the shipping restrictions which are imposed on the state by the Jones Act. We had had as part of the Republican Party platform plank for years the fact that we do everything as a Republican Party to rid Hawaii of the Jones Act restrictions. She had that plank taken out as Party Chair about 2002 and continued on that course from that time on. In addition to that, she was basically a Democrat in Republican clothing. She was able, by working with the unions and giving them what they wanted, virtually to negate any other good that had been done in earlier years by Ariyoshi. I felt that Lingle was a disaster in terms of getting anything done positively for this state. We ended up with the homeless starting to come in. We ended up with higher taxation. The whole theory of Hawaiian homes issues were not resolved. Agriculture was in decline. Nothing that needed to be done was done. The reason that I am currently running for Governor is to correct the things that happened during the Lingle administration as well as Waihee’s.

Neil Abercrombie [Democrat]

December 6, 2010 – December 1, 2014

I knew Neil Abercrombie for several years before he was elected to the State House. Ultimately around 1972, I believe we were in the State House together. We then went on to the State Senate in 1978 where we again served together. I served only two years. He served four. As far as his political philosophy is concerned, on some issues such as environment we were closely aligned. On other issues that tend to be more socialistic or Marxist, we were totally opposed. I always considered Neil a friend. As Governor, I watched what he did pretty carefully. I think he was dealt a kind of a bad hand because he took it over from Lingle. Things had already deteriorated and he did not seem to have the ability to do much except talk. The ultimate result of his period in office was that he served only one term and agriculture, business, housing, homelessness, all of those things became worse during his tenure. I still consider him a friend but I would never vote for him for Governor.

David Y. Ige [Democrat]

December 1, 2014 – (December 3, 2018)

I met Governor Ige for the first time before his current term. We were both campaigning at the same time, he for Governor and myself for the United States Senate. He seemed to be a quiet gentle man who appeared intelligent. What I’ve known of him since that time is approximately the same. I believe that he has been dealt a very bad hand to deal with the Democrats who have run this state into the ground. We have no agriculture. We have high homelessness. We’ve got people living hand-to-hand mouth-to-mouth barely making it once a month. People have two or three jobs just to survive. The cost of living is 25% higher than any state in the union and higher than the highest states in the union and it is probably 100% higher than places like Alabama and Arkansas. The thing about Governor Ige is I think he’s a very good person. I think he’s trying to do the best that he can but he’s been given an almost impossible job. The changes that need to be made obviously are to get rid of the shipping restrictions, number one, to reduce the cost of government, reduce the taxation. Those are things that will never be done by any Democrat. I like Governor Ige and I’m sorry that he’s in the position that he is in. The only good part of this is that it makes a very clear-cut demarcation between what needs to be done and what’s been done. I will make that very clear in this campaign.

Looking at the 2018 Campaign

Now let’s turn a page from this review of the past & current gubernatorial administrations to look through John Carroll’s expert eyes at the other major hopefuls to replace Governor Ige in 2018. Following are his views on his Primary opponent and his potential General Election opponent to contrast his knowledge of governance with their track records.

Andria Tupola

Republican Candidate for Hawaii Governor

Well, first of all, she’s one of the most attractive candidates we’ve ever had here. If this were a beauty contest, I would not even think about entering it. Unfortunately, other than being a teacher and apparently a very nice person, she has almost no background to be Governor or perhaps anything else in terms of her business background and legislative background. She is the House Minority Leader, but a review of her history as a House member has been that she’s voted 92% with the Democrats and she’s offered no legislation that would indicate anything that would be helpful in terms of the economy, in terms of agriculture, in terms of reducing taxation. In addition to that, she has voted for things such as giving Driver Licenses to illegal aliens. She has voted or at least asked for a study regarding this so-called everybody-gets-paid-bill. In other words, a socialistic thing where everybody gets a certain amount of money so nobody can say that they’re unemployed. I just don’t see anything that she has authored as a legislator or stated in any speeches that would indicate capable leadership. In fact I see nothing other than failures if she should be elected Governor.

Colleen Hanabusa

Democrat Candidate for Hawaii Governor

Colleen Hanabusa ~ I do not know her personally other than to have met her at various functions. I know that she’s bright. I know she’s an attorney. She’s totally the opposite of me on almost every issue I can think of. People don’t remember it, but I clearly remember that when Ed Case put in as a US House member a resolution to have the Jones Act either repealed or at least eliminated as far as Hawaii is concerned, she through Dan Inouye’s efforts got over $800,000 from Alexander & Baldwin and Matson and other connected groups to take Ed Case out and he’s been out ever since. It’s so remarkable that she’s as popular as she is given the fact that what she has done over the years has been nothing except take care of union or major business interests such as HECO and Matson and Alexander & Baldwin. She’s certainly bright, she’s certainly capable but she’s wrong-headed on virtually every subject matter that I can think of from taxation to business control to agriculture.

What Is Next for Hawaii?

Now that John Carroll has contrasted his own conservative views with those of past Hawaii Governors and current gubernatorial hopefuls of both major parties, let’s see what he has to offer in terms of his own positive vision for the next four years under his own administration.

John S. Carroll

Agenda for 2018-2022 as Hawaii Governor

My first interest in politics began in in high school when I heard about the grassroots landslide which kind of appealed to me. My dad was involved with the Manhattan Project and rehabilitation of Japanese chemical industries and things like that. There was always some talk about Republicans doing this or that and for the most part I tended to disagree with him as he was a very strong Democrat.

As far as my own personal involvement was concerned when I came back from law school, I was a Major in the Air National Guard and an attorney. I was asked to run against the U.S. House Democrats, Patsy Mink and Spark Matsunaga. I was asked to run as a running mate with Jimmy Kealoha who had been a Lieutenant Governor with Governor Quinn and former Mayor (Superintendent) of Hawaii County. He had run against Quinn. They had both lost to Governor Burns.

They needed to try to pick up at least one of the House seats. They had Jimmy but nobody else so they asked me to run basically as a sacrificial lamb. I did so thinking that I could win anyway. But the only thing that I won was that I ended up beating Jimmy Kealoha by about 5000 votes but of course came nowhere near beating Patsy Mink or Matsunaga.

With my appetite having been whetted, I then went on to run two more races which I lost. Then finally won my first race, which was for the State House of Representatives.

My diving, hunting and other outdoor activities had me very concerned about the environment. To make a long story short, I put in bills to protect the monk seal and the green sea turtle. I went on from there to introduce a large number of environmental-protection-oriented bills. None of them passed under my own name but check the standing committee reports and my name is on all of them.  I’m very proud of that legacy of environmental law protection.

The challenge before us right now is really to rectify that chaos, the economic chaos that’s stated clearly in everyday life here. People are working two or three or four jobs just to get along. They’re living month to month with their paychecks. The education system here is terrible. Agriculture is almost non-existent. Homelessness is out of control. While we have a very low unemployment rate, the problem is there is just nothing for people to do and they quit looking for work and end up going on welfare.

I intend number one to get rid of the Jones Act restrictions to get shipping opened up worldwide. The Jones Act, by the way, totally violates the Commerce clause by being imposed on this state.

The basic rules as far as operating a business here need to be looked at very carefully. We are terribly overregulated. There are other issues such as Hawaiian homes distribution. 24,000+ qualified Native Hawaiians should have homeland grants. There is no homeland being given out to speak of by that commission. I intend to find out why that is happening. I want to get homelands in fee simple to each qualified Hawaiian. I intend to do that in the first two years that I am Governor.

Those are the major things that I have in my mind other than a forensic audit of the rail HART. We must know where every dime came from, to whom it went and if people have to go to jail, then so be it.

I am honored to be allowed to run for Governor and I’m definitely old enough to run.

Putting It All Together

As we conclude this excursion into the analytical mind and caring heart of John Carroll, let’s take a moment to ask a member of the generation that lived through World War II what he remembers about that date that will live in infamy, December 7th, 1941. John was just under 12 years old and living in scenic Marin County, just across the Golden Gate Bridge north of San Francisco.

John Carroll Devotes His Life to Service

I recall it was a Sunday morning and we had heard that Pearl Harbor had been bombed and I believe I was walking to church and thinking about what would happen, what we were gonna do about it. Why it even happened was kind of a mystery to me but my main thought was to get revenge. I started immediately to think I want to get into military and do something about this. I was an altar boy at that time.

A Purposeful Life

The war ended in 1945 when John Carroll was still just 15 years old, but he later fulfilled his dream while living in Hawaii. He became both a fighter pilot in the United States Air Force and a commercial pilot for Hawaiian Airlines. He has always kept trying until he accomplished his goals.

What Happens Next?

When you cast your secret ballot in the Republican Primary on August 11th and in the General Election on November 6th, your economic future may well outweigh your political party affiliation. Ask yourself whether or not making Hawaii affordable for Hawaii families once again is the number one factor in your choice of our next Hawaii Governor.

Will you vote for the best interests of your family or for a straight party line that has stagnated Hawaii’s economy?

It’s up to you.


NOQ Report Needs Your Help




The left has destroyed their cause by jumping the gun and demanding confiscation, Part II




The left has destroyed their cause by jumping the gun and demanding confiscation Part II

Leftists have dropped all pretence of being reasonable, destroying their socialist national agenda on gun confiscation.

In Part I we began our examination of how the left has damaged their cause of eviscerating everyone’s inalienable human rights. This part will detail some of the implications of their dropping of the authoritarian mask.

Leftists have the absurd idea that gun confiscation will be the natural outcome of a certain level of societal violence. That a death toll factor ‘x’ multiplied over time ‘t’ will equate to an overwhelming demand for gun confiscation ‘c’. Despite the lies propagated by the authoritarian socialist left, we on the pro-liberty right are always deeply saddened by these tragedies. This is why we offer thoughts and prayers to the mockery of our betters on the left.

Were it not for the constraints of civility, we would assert that the liberty grabber leftists revel in the pain and suffering of others to the point of encouraging future attacks. Those on the other side of the political spectrum are supposedly our moral and intellectual superiors, therefore they should be well aware of the psychological phenomena of Media Contagion whereby the breathless wall to wall coverage propagated by them results in additional tragedy. Thus the conclusion that they are merely projecting their delight on their political enemies.

Leftist demands for gun confiscation are coming into a new light.

As one who has studied and researched the deluge in confiscation demands  occasioned by tragedy over the years, it was no surprise when many of the democratic presidential candidates jumped on the gun confiscation bandwagon after recent events. Many others took notice, easily looking past the Orwellian terminology to come to the stark realization that the left has finally dropped the mask of being reasonable. These kinds of demands have been common place for years now, the latest – but somewhat dated – list from last September tells the tale.

In most cases leftist liberty grabbers tend to couch the demands for confiscation in softer terms while casting the subjects, both inanimate object and possessor, in the harshest terms possible. They love to call the outright confiscation of private property a ‘buy-back’ implying collectivized ownership narrative to the whole affair, while the rightful owners of said property will supposedly be ‘compensated’ [with their own money] for this government sanctioned theft.

They, of course, tar those who want to conserve liberty as ‘gun nuts’ or ‘terrorists’. While the love to lay on the hyperbole labeling the modern-day musket a ‘military style assault weapon’ or a ‘weapon of war’. Never mind that ordinary citizens commonly use these to defend themselves.

This is just a small sampling of leftist demands for gun confiscation that have been spewed forth over the years:

Daily Kos: How to Ban Guns: A step by step, long term process

New Republic: It’s Time to Ban Guns. Yes, All of Them

Boston Globe: Hand over your weapons

Esquire: Okay, Now I Actually Do Want To Take Your Guns

This time around prominent ‘democratic’ politicians were making these demands in the national public spotlight:

Medium: Senator Elizabeth Warren: My plan for gun violence prevention.

NOQ Report: Kirsten Gillibrand wants to confiscate guns

Daily Wire: ‘NO COMPROMISE’: Biden Goes Extreme On Guns, Calls For Ban On All Magazines, Rips Texas For Allowing Worshipers To Defend Themselves

Bearing Arms: No One Is Coming For Our Guns? Someone Needs To Tell Beto

The left openly demanding gun confiscation has changed the debate.

This time around, these demands were met with defiance. This time around everyone realized that with the left losing the plot, they had just dropped the mask on being reasonable. The liberty grabber left used to at least portray an outward appearance of being reasonable with talk of ‘common sense gun safety’ or similar folderol.

Discarding all of stepping-stones to their ultimate goal has revealed the gun-grabbing zealots they truly are. Many patriots on the pro-liberty right already knew this to be the case, but now everyone knows that when leftists talk about ‘gun reform’ they really mean gun confiscation, never mind the Orwellian sugar-coating.

Now that we have proven that the nation’s socialist left has truly come out once and for all for gun confiscation, let us consider the full implications of this emergence. Beginning with abject rejection of these authoritarian demands by those on the right imbued with the conservation of liberty..

The almost instantaneous reaction to these game-changing decrees from the left was defiance across the board. This of course is named after the false narrative nickname of the man spearheading the destruction of everyone’s inalienable human rights: Robert Francis O’Rourke.

The ‘Beto’ Backlash.

‘NO to more govt. intrusion’: TX Rep. Matt Schaefer’s thread pushing back on gun-control causes heads to EXPLODE

Texas Lawmaker Delivers Blistering Rebuke To Anti-Gun Democrats, Media

Why ‘Mandatory Buybacks’ Are A Non-Starter

HAMMER: I Will Never, Ever Let The Government ‘Buy Back’ My ‘Assault Weapon’

Talking to the Left About Gun Control Is a Chump’s Game and We Aren’t Playing

The Anti-Gun Left and the Media Can’t be Allowed to Destroy the Second Amendment – The Truth About Guns

An Open Letter To Beto O’Rourke

This open defiance of our betters on the left was met with instant condemnation. After all, how dare we speak out on conserving our inalienable human rights?

The full implications of the ground shifting under the left.

To begin, we should preface this discussion that this should be a cautionary tale for anyone steeped in an echo chamber. Leftists tend to believe their own false narratives, for example a poll that shows most are concerned about ‘mass shootings’ and will agree with whatever is the stepping stone to gun confiscation de jour. As reported in the Daily Wire, this poll was perfectly decimated by gun expert Loesch.

Those misleading polling results are contradicted by the fact that NICS background checks on guns jumped 15 percent in August. As someone postulated on the site The truth about guns Everyone’s Happy to DO SOMETHING After a Shooting, As Long As It’s Done to Someone Else.

Giving up the pretense of being reasonable.

It has always been an essential part of the lefts debating points on guns. Rhetorically speaking, the left would always wield their current restriction of liberty as a sword, while using the ‘no one is talking gun confiscation’ lie as a shield against any counter arguments.

‘Universal’ background checks are clearly meant to set up for gun registration’/licensing, ‘red flag’ gun confiscation SWATing laws and ‘assault weapons’ bans are of course for the outright taking of guns from the people. Leftists would simply use the ‘no one is talking gun confiscation’ lie to deflect any arguments against these measures. Most likely throwing in a little personal attack that anyone pointing this out is ‘paranoid’ at the truth staring them in the face.

This is the one main reason for the left keeping a death grip on that outright lie. They could sound reasonable while casting aspersions on their opponent. Now with the left dropping the mask on gun confiscation, they no longer have that shield, they no longer sound reasonable.

Confiscating guns takes away any benefits they provide.

The fact that guns save more lives than are lost, is one of the left’s major sins of omission. Dropping the pretense of practicality and making demands that guns be taken from the innocent changes the dialog from ‘common sense’ to endangering the innocent as exemplified in this article from The Federalist: entitled: Why Criminals Looking To Victimize Women Love Gun Control.

The left is throwing away the mask of being liberal.

One of the major implications of the left dropping the mask on gun confiscation is that they can no longer claim to be liberal. Those studying the left have known this for some time, but this and their increasing attacks against the 1st Amendment have made it clear that they no longer have any use for liberty. These attacks also reveal that they have no use for the bill of rights or individual freedom.

Maintaining the ‘no one is talking gun confiscation’ lie at least gave them a toehold on being within the bounds of the Constitution. Coming out for confiscation eviscerated any questions of constitutionality for them.

The bottom-line: A repudiation of republican self-rule.

In writing this dissertation, the subject always seems to circle around to why the left still uses the ‘no one is talking gun confiscation’ lie. It seems like every day a politician here or a pundit there proves that saying to be a ridiculous assertion. Most major publications of the national socialist media have come out for gun confiscation [or one of it’s thematic variations]. Most politicians of note from the national socialist left have advocated the destruction of the inalienable human right of self-defense. Thus it is patently absurd for anyone to use the ‘no one is talking gun confiscation’ lie. This begs the question one more time: why is it critical for the left to maintain this lie?

Leftists love to pride themselves as being ‘democratic’ as well as being ‘liberal’ while they are neither. Gun confiscation means that they no longer trust their fellow citizens with firearms, preferring to have the government imbued with a monopoly on the use of force. Instead of the means of self-defense equally distributed amongst the people, they would prefer to have power elite in control of the ordering of society.

Maintaining the ‘no one is talking gun confiscation’ lie, let them hold onto this false pretense while their recent demands blew it away. The right to possess arms distinguishes a citizen from a subject, or a slave. In dropping their authoritarian mask, the left has made it quite clear what they think of their fellow citizens: That they would prefer them to be subjects of their rule instead. They have crossed the line in wanting absolute power. That is why they should NEVER have it.

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


Medicare-for-All will become a nation-crushing reality if the GOP doesn’t surge in 2020



Medicare-for-All will become a nation-crushing reality if the GOP doesnt surge in 2020

Obamacare has been a debacle. Costs for both healthcare and health insurance have skyrocketed over the last nine years. Meanwhile, quality of care has suffered despite advancing technologies, better information, and more medical professionals available. This was what the Democrats wanted and it’s what America has right now, thanks in part to the feckless RINOs on Capitol Hill who blocked attempts to repeal and replace it in 2017.

The Democrats’ response to the looming healthcare crisis they created: Triple-down with single-payer. Around half of the people’s reaction to this notion: Sure, why not?

What Obamacare introduced with government meddling in health insurance may be a big problem, but it’s infinitesimal compared to the existential threat of Medicare-for-All. Keep in mind, Obamacare was never meant as a permanent solution. It was supposed to expose holes in the system over time and be replaced by a single-payer system preferred by socialists around the globe. The left want a system that gives total control over the healthcare of the people to incompetent and oftentimes uncaring bureaucrats administering how and even why people should receive healthcare.

But Obamacare was built to be a long-term stepping stone to allow the American people time to get acquainted with DC stepping all over our medical needs before slowly introducing single-payer. In the left’s master plan, Obamacare would transition into single-payer in two or three decades, four at the most. By 2050, every American would be insured by taxpayers. Then, something they didn’t expect happened. It failed from the start. It failed miserably. It failed much harder than expected. The foundation for socialism they worked so hard to establish in 2010 wasn’t going to make it to its first decade before being replaced.

It was a disaster, especially after the 2016 election when they realized their plans had been obliterated. All they had left was to hope the GOP would fail to deliver on their 6-year-old promise and then the people could be shepherded into giving Democrats a chance to replace their crumbling stepping stone with the real deal. These were both longshots, but if history has taught us anything, it’s that the people can be swayed into supporting what they once opposed. They can be led like sheep to their own slaughter if emotion can replace logic. And that’s where we stand leading up to the 2020 election.

The transition of Medicare-for-All over the last three years has been startling to me even as I’m well-aware of the ease in which opinions can be swayed on individual topics. In 2016, one can argue a majority of people were not only opposed to Medicare-for-All but also to Obamacare itself. They saw the results and it never delivered as promised. By 2017, repealing Obamacare had been tainted by a shifting perspective that doing so meant tens of millions of Americans with preexisting conditions would suddenly lose their health insurance. In 2018, Medicare-for-All started picking up steam with radicals and spreading into the consciousness of moderates as something to consider.

In 2019, a majority of Democratic lawmakers and a growing chunk of Democratic voters are now all-in for Medicare-for-All.

Majority of House Dems now support ‘Medicare-for-all’

The single-payer health care plan known as “Medicare-for-all” now enjoys support from more than half of Democrats in the House of Representatives, with top-ranking Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., adding his name to the list of co-sponsors.

The bill, introduced in February by Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., calls for the replacement of private health insurance with a government plan covering everyone. Jeffries became the 118th co-sponsor.

“Given the enduring nature of our health care access and affordability crisis, more must be done,” Jeffries, chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, said in a statement to The Washington Post.

It’s time to wake up to the reality that Medicare-for-All could actually happen if Republicans do not come together, get organized, and reverse the shifting perspectives spreading across American consciousness like a plague. People often ask me how I went from being a conservative critic of President Trump’s to a staunch supporter. The answer is in the nation-crushing policies the Democrats are embracing. Their proposals for Medicare-for-All, open borders, and the Green New Deal are three of the biggest threats standing out in a sea of major concerns over their policy proposals.

This is why when NeverTrump Republicans try to convince me the GOP is so bad, I can only chuckle. It’s like telling me I should put down the heart-disease inducing donuts to save my life when there’s a terrorist with a knife at my throat. No, I don’t agree with everything the GOP or the President do, but the nuances in their handful of poor decisions are inconsequential compared to the freedom-sucking vacuum of socialistic principles that would be forced upon us if we don’t coalesce around the Republican Party immediately.

My priorities for both NOQ Report and the formation of the American Conservative Movement are these and in this order:

  1. Stop Democrats. They’ve rapidly transitioned from an annoyance with bad policies into the image of authoritarianism, anti-Americanism, and in many cases, true evil.
  2. Replace RINOs with conservatives. This can be done simultaneously with the first priority, but it must be practical. Attacking Republicans in ways that will get them replaced by Democrats is counterproductive. Helping conservative primary candidates evict moderate Republicans is a righteous goal.
  3. Educate the people. As I’ve long said, most Americans are conservative. Some just don’t realize it because of the stigma associated with the Republican Party. Minorities are particularly susceptible to this stigma as many of them believe in conservative principles but have been told that voting Republican is like voting for racists. The record-setting low unemployment rates for African- and Hispanic-Americans should counter this if we can get the information out there.

2020 must be an unambiguous mandate against the socialistic principles driving today’s Democratic Party. This needs to happen up and down the ticket to protect Americans from the existential threats being embraced as policy by the left.

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


Dinesh D’Souza: Gun confiscators are ‘coming out of the closet’ in ‘all-out assault’ on 2nd Amendment




Dinesh DSouza Gun confiscators are coming out of the vloset in all-out assault on 2nd Amendment

Dinesh D’Sousa makes the point that the gun grabbers have finally admitted the obvious truth of their ultimate goal.

Pro-liberty patriots such as Colion Noir have been saying it for years the national socialist left has only one ‘solution’ to the problem they created, confiscate guns from the innocent.

As reported on CNS News, Dinesh D’Sousa made the same point on Fox News’s Laura Ingraham program recently:

At first, for many years, I thought that the NRA was kind of using, you may call it the ‘slippery slope’ argument, which was essentially that once you start outlawing one type of weapon, you will then slowly proceed to outlawing the next type and eventually it becomes a kind of a comprehensive confiscation.

But I think what’s interesting here is this isn’t even a slippery slope. It now appears like there’s a whole group of people that from the outset want a comprehensive ban, and these mass shootings are making them come out of the closet, you may say rhetorically, and be more and more frank and candid about what their real agenda is. It never was a kind of targeted or narrowly tailored law. It’s ultimately an all-out assault on the Second Amendment.

And let’s remember, too, Laura, that the Second Amendment is no less important than the First Amendment or the Fourth Amendment, so we should very jealously guard against these constitutional rights being stripped away based upon some sort of pretext. If you’re going to abuse your rights, the solution is not to take away my rights.

[Emphasis added]

Democrat presidential candidate Joe Biden announced that he wants to ban magazines that hold “multiple bullets” — which means all magazines. Robert Francis O’Rourke has declared that he wants the government to ‘buy-back’ what is has never owned with money taken at gun point – rhetorically speaking. Senator Elizabeth Warren has also set out her own little gun confiscation plan with a ‘buy-back’ what the government never owned and a requirement to obtain permission from the government in order to exercise an inalienable human right.

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