Connect with us

Conservatism

How President Reagan’s two harshest warnings are at play in America today

Published

on

How President Reagans two harshest warnings are at play in America today

President Ronald Reagan is famous for his one-liners. Some were funny, such as “there you go again.” Others were threatening, such as, “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.” It seemed like he was always going to say something profound when he spoke which helped make him one of the most liked Presidents in modern history.

There were two quotes in particular that are at play today. Both were warnings and both seem to be coming to fruition in ways many Americans likely didn’t think possible a decade or two ago. I know I didn’t. I knew it was possible for things to change over time and for the overarching sentiment of the nation to shift, but I did not anticipate we would be so close to them becoming a reality in my lifetime, let alone in such a short period of time.

Let’s look at the two quotes and how the warnings from President Reagan are not being heeded, thus setting us on a collision course with what he feared for America’s future.

“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.”

When my son was in high school, I often asked him about the state of affairs with the youth of the time. He is a patriot and I always heard the doom and gloom from many parents who said the schools were indoctrinating their children into false belief systems and failed ideologies. Despite these reports, I never feared for his generation because they were just as appalled by 9/11 as mine was. They may not have been as cognizant of the geopolitical implications, nor were they as concerned about Islamic radicalization as the older generations who reacted to the attacks, but they still loved America.

In many ways, the leftist indoctrination was incremental. The internet and the rise of gaming technology had much more of a negative effect on his generation than any ideological pushes. But today’s younger generation is different. We see them doing things that make no sense. I don’t want to make blanket claims, but this isn’t the same thing as the standard generational condemnation placed on youths from parents who don’t understand. I do understand what this generation is seeing and doing. It’s not good.

This is a generation that is polling between 40%-55% in favor of socialism. Think about that. Such concepts were unthinkable to all previous American generations because they all recognized the fallacies of socialism based on what they were taught by parents, teachers, professors, each other, and most recently on the internet itself. But the fringe professors of the past are the mainstream professors of today. Even high school teachers have become so unhinged with their teachings that many, particularly younger ones, feel it’s necessary to instill a sense of hostility towards their own country.

What was once anecdotal is now so commonplace it no longer makes for a good headline. It’s expected. The gap in understanding about the nature of socialism, communism, and other radical philosophies in government have yielded a generation that no longer cares so much about their freedom. They are a generation of contradictions and enigmas; they don’t want to be told what to do yet they want the government to step in and get involved in everything.

How did this happen? How did we go from a generation like the one that grew up under Reagan and the subsequent generation that grew up through 9/11, both of whom loved and appreciated America, to the generation of today that is suddenly against everything signified by America’s actual existence? To answer that, we need to look at Reagan’s second great warning.

“If we ever forget that we are One Nation Under God, then we will be a nation gone under.”

I don’t think I need to explain this one at all. If you’re a believer in the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, one who practices a Judeo-Christian faith, then you are very well aware that our nation is slipping away from the religious foundation that not only built us but kept us improving as a country until recently. One can look at Roe v. Wade, gay marriage, or other political examples of the nation’s faith slipping away, but those are symptoms. The cultural shift away from the faith is the root cause of our nation’s moral distress.

One cannot be surrounded by sin and expect that it won’t creep into his house.

But the Biblical writers often told of challenges from within the church itself. We’re seeing this as the spirit of antichrist today manifesting in false teachers and dismal representatives of the Gospel. Ask today’s youthful generation to name a religious leader. The answers will vary but chances are strong they’ve heard of a prosperity gospel megachurch pastor or a corrupt televangelist. They see the greed that drives so many in false church and they believe this is what the faith is all about. They see Westboro Baptist Church, the priest sex scandals, and pastors telling their congregations they need a bigger jet.

If the “church” represents greed, bigotry, and sexual misconduct to this generation, why would they turn to it for their own understanding of life?

It’s not a stretch to generalize that this generation, at least a very large chunk of it, worship on the altars of climate change, transhumanism, and Hollywood morality. They cannot reconcile their strong beliefs against the persecution of the LGBTQ community and still find personal solace in a religious movement that is allegedly doing the persecuting.

I had a jarring conversation a few years back with a gay friend. We were up late one night talking about his beliefs. He knew (as all do deep down) that there must be a creator, but no argument I made for the truth of the Bible could convince him righteousness could be found there. This was my own shortcoming, something I’ve regretted ever since. I failed him by not being able to overcome the perception of hatred he felt was directed towards him by “church folks.”

We must all do better.

Reagan feared a generation that abandoned freedom and a country that abandoned faith. It shouldn’t be surprising that the greatest threat to our future as a nation is the symbiotic expansion of both of his greatest fears.

Advertisement

0

Conservatism

Dr Wen was pushed out of Planned Parenthood because she’s not a wartime leader

Published

on

Dr Wen was pushed out of Planned Parenthood because shes not a wartime leader

Some leaders are meant to bring people together. Others are made to get from one point in an organization’s development to the next stage. On occasion, an organization needs to go to war, and that’s what Planned Parenthood believes it needs to do right now. Their former president, Dr. Leana Wen, believes she is a combination of the first two types of leader – bringing people together and transitioning Planned Parenthood. She believes this is why she was pushed out the door by the board.

They want to go to war and Wen is not a wartime leader.

This may sound like a bad thing for pro-life organizations as their top nemesis is clearly positioning to be more of a political organization willing to play dirty and force the issue of abortion on as many people as possible. But an astute examination of the way things are today reveals one truth: America is polarized, so it’s better to go to fight ideology versus ideology rather than attack an organization trying to build bridges.

It may have been difficult for Wen to truly coax moderate pro-lifers, liberty-minded ant-government folks, and people on the fence on the abortion issue, but she was laying the groundwork for such things. This is why I’m glad to see her go. I know the threat of a proper radical progressive who hates pro-lifers to the core is worrisome to some, including our top pro-life writer. But the writing is on the wall: war is on. Planned Parenthood is looking for a battle-hardened fighter to shame people in Alabama, scare people in Georgia, and celebrate progressives in New York. They want someone who will push the feminine healthcare aspect of Planned Parenthood to the backburner and focus solely on advancing pro-abortion laws and planting more abortion clinics around the country.

We’re not just fighting for the lives of preborn babies, though that is plenty of incentive to fight. But we’re also fighting for the soul of the nation. For the pro-life, conservative, and Judeo-Christian worldviews to regain prominence in America, it’s important that we stake our claim to unambiguous differences between our beliefs and their’s. Some will tell me we need more unity, but the only unity that’s possible in today’s polarized society is if the left gets their way and enough on the right accept it. The left will not accept our perspectives. Therefore, we must force the issue. We must get into an ideological war. Most importantly, we need to put our truths up against their best lies.

The best lies they tell are that abortion is a right, pre-born babies aren’t people, and killing the “lump of cells” in the mother is somehow considered healthcare.

In an article posted today by the NY Times, Wen explains why she was ousted and gives hints about the direction Planned Parenthood wants to go without her:

With high-quality, affordable health care out of reach for so many, Planned Parenthood has a duty to maximize its reach. I began efforts to increase care for women before, during and after pregnancies, and to enhance critically-needed services like mental health and addiction treatment.

But the team that I brought in, experts in public health and health policy, faced daily internal opposition from those who saw my goalsas mission creep. There was even more criticism as we worked to change the perception that Planned Parenthood was just a progressive political entity to show that it was first and foremost a mainstream health care organization.

Perhaps the greatest area of tension was over our work to be inclusive of those with nuanced views about abortion. I reached out to people who wrestle with abortion’s moral complexities, but who will speak out against government interference in personal medical decisions. I engaged those who identify as being pro-life, but who support safe, legal abortion access because they don’t want women to die from back-alley abortions. I even worked with people who oppose abortion but support Planned Parenthood because of the preventive services we provide — we share the desire to reduce the need for abortion through sex education and birth control.

The Planned Parenthood of the near future is one that doesn’t worry about reproductive health or the safety of babies. They simply want more abortions. There’s an evil at the heart of the organization that is actually darker than we’ve seen in the past, if that can be imagined. We need to fight this darkness, and Wen was in the way trying to make Planned Parenthood inclusive and acceptable. That went against their new goal. They want the issue forced.

Our truths are able to shine brightest when the opposition is at its darkest. A kindler, gentler, inclusive agenda isn’t as dark as Planned Parenthood’s desired goal of advancing as many abortions as possible. I’m glad to see Wen removed.

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

Conservatism

Beauty queen Kathy Zhu was robbed because she’s a conservative

Published

on

Beauty queen Kathy Zhu was robbed because shes a conservative

It’s okay to be “woke” if you’re participating in Miss World America. Several contestants have expressed radical political, cultural, and religious views that would be considered offensive to many conservatives, including support for dismemberment of preborn children, anti-law-enforcement sentiments, and one instance of clear racism against Caucasians. But it was the outspoken conservative beauty queen, Kathy Zhu, who was stripped of her title and forced to disassociate herself from the competition immediately.

She posted her conversation with Miss World America Michigan state director Laurie DeJack as well as the email correspondence with the organization regarding her ousting:

Some news outlets are reporting the ousting had to do with her controversial response to being asked to “try a hijab” in 2018, but the text messages do not reflect that. It could have been cited during a phone conversation, which apparently happened in the midst of the text conversation.

But the directly attributed reason was a Tweet in which Zhu addressed an unknown person or group who was apparently complaining about African-American deaths. In response, she noted that black-on-black violence is the most prevalent circumstance in African-American homicides.

She worded it a bit differently:

“Did you know the majority of black deaths are caused by other blacks? Fix problems within your own community first before blaming others.”

Zhu quote-Tweeted a post sent to Vice President Pence:

Yes, her post was controversial. Was it racist? No, not in context. As she noted in her letter to the pageant, she was referring to statistical facts. Is that grounds for removal? Perhaps it is… as long as they’re being consistent. But Zhu isn’t the only contestant posting very controversial statements on social media. As of now, there seems to be no others who have indicated they were removed for similar reasons even though some have social media posts that should be considered even worse relative to the rules of decorum set forth by the pageant. Of course, the posts that should be considered worse than Zhu’s are generally progressive.

It’s a shame that Zhu had her title and future participation banned, but she has an opportunity to highlight the anti-conservative bias in such organizations. She may not be competing, but she can be even more influential now within the conservative movement than she was before. She’s currently studying political science. Maybe that will translate into a life in politics.

If Miss World America were fair, they’d strip crowns from several of the contestants over their controversial social media posts. But they won’t. They located the lone controversial conservative in the group. They’ll only remove MAGA deplorable Kathy Zhu.

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

Conservatism

The Suicide Squad wins the Twitter war but loses anywhere else

Published

on

The Suicide Squad wins the Twitter war but loses anywhere else

We can argue about whether Trump’s tweets were strategic or narcissistic. The result is the same: Trump provoked four Congresswomen into revealing their hatred for America. In doing so they took to Twitter to declare that President Trump is a racist. The Suicide Squad and their legions trended anti-Trump hashtags on Twitter for days. On the surface it appears that it was a bad weekend for Trump.

On the Twittersphere, Trump’s week is off to a bad start. The Suicide Squad has won the Twitter front, yet lost everywhere else. When CNN asked Republican women about the issue, they vehemently defended Trump’s statements. Earlier this week, they held a longwinded press conference that amounted to nothing more than a long campaign commercial for Trump 2020.

Echo Chambers

The media continuously overestimates American involvement on Twitter because the media is on Twitter and Twitter is where the news happens because the media is on Twitter. If that sounds circular, it’s because that’s how the media works. Polls show that Americans do not care about the Mueller Report, yet Twitter would have you think otherwise. The media wants you to believe that Twitter is an organic social platform, and popular stories, hashtags, conversation are the result of the merit of the stories. But Jack Dorsey is not neutral, saying so himself. Twitter Moments is the hand selected stories by Twitter for its users and the “For You” section of trends is certainly manipulated. So how significant is Twitter, really? Not that much. Let’s consider the words of MarketWatch’s Brett Arends:

According to the company’s own public filings, only about 20% of the U.S. population even uses Twitter. And less than half of those go on it regularly.

And as everyone knows, only a tiny percentage of those dominate the “conversation.”

To listen to Twitter two years ago, after the far-right demonstration in Charlottesville, you’d think everyone wanted Confederate statues knocked down. Actually, there wasn’t even strong support for that among African-Americans. A few months ago, you’d have assumed absolutely everyone wanted Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam to resign over the “black face” affair: Actually, even most black Virginians didn’t. Today you’d think everyone calls illegal immigrants “undocumented workers,” and wants them to have free, universal health care. Really?

So while most Americans are uninformed as to what Trump actually said, not having a Twitter account, the media will spin a poll by USA Today/ Ipsos to show that majority of Americans think that Trump’s tweets were racist. Here are their findings in their own words:

Trump’s controversial tweets open a wider discussion about racism versus patriotism. Two-thirds (65%) agree that telling minority Americans to “go back to where they came from” is racist. However, there is a 40-percentage point difference between Democrats and Republicans on this (85% of Democrats agree vs. 45% of Republicans). Similarly, the vast majority of Republicans (70%) believe that people who call others “racist” usually do so in bad faith, whereas just 31% of Democrats believe the same

Americans come together on the idea that it is patriotic to point out where America falls short and try to do better. Almost three-quarters agree (72%), with majority support even across party lines (80% of Democrats and 68% of Republicans).

Generically, telling someone to “go back” to their own country is likely racist, but applying these results to Trump’s tweets is devoid of context rendering the poll meaningless. Ilhan Omar is fundamentally anti-American and Trump questioning why she bothers staying is completely not racist within context. A poll asking generic questions with an assumed premise as to what Trump’s tweet was is misleading, and quite frankly, the results are underwhelming for the Socialist narrative even with overwhelming bias in the poll. The New York Post in carrying this false assumption about the poll said noted these findings:

But 70 percent of respondents say “people who usually call others ‘racist’ usually do so in bad faith,” while 31 percent of Democrats say so.

Going back to the CNN video we see women asked with the context known or presented whether they think that what Trump said was racist and they pushed back on the assumption of racism. The most powerful part of that video was the CNN lady defining racism assuming Trump’s words even remotely came close to surpassing the definition she read. She got wrecked.

Final Thoughts

The Trump campaign and, in the far bigger picture, the Conservative movement will undoubtedly win this issue in the real world. The challenge is communicating the context. Conservatives should continue fighting their ideas on Twitter, but our main focus should be on other platforms, including and especially the real world. As long as the Socialists think they are winning in their own echo chambers, they will continue losing in the real world.

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