Monday, August 10, 2020

Derek Sloan, The Only Canadian Conservative to Reject C-8 "Conversion Therapy Ban in Full

I hope that Conservative Party members take a stand for what is right and select Derek Sloan to be the leader of Canada's Conservative Party.
Let's hope he gets the victory. We need this kind of boldness.

Arthur,
One of the radical left’s favourite strategies is to redefine the meaning of words in order to hide the truth and advance terrible ideas.
This is exactly what Justin Trudeau’s government did back on March 9, when they tabled Bill C-8, their bid to ban what they define as “conversion therapy”.
The problem is that their definition of “conversion therapy” includes situations in which people are helping a child identify with the body they were born with.
For example, if your 8-year-old son comes home from school one day and announces that he thinks he is really “a girl trapped inside a boy’s body,” efforts to persuade him otherwise will be considered “conversion therapy” and will be illegal.
Meanwhile, the same Liberals celebrate giving a child artificial hormones and irreversible, mutilating plastic surgery, and they call this “gender affirmation”. 
This is despite the fact that studies show that over 80% of children who question their gender end up by the age of 18 happily identifying with the way they were born. 
If that doesn’t make any sense to you, well, that’s because you’re not a radical gender ideologue. And truthfully, what Bill C-8 is really about is silencing everyone who opposes radical gender ideology.
C-8 is legislation that both extends a ban that is far too broad and represents an unacceptable overreach into personal liberties and parental sovereignty.
Under C-8, Canadian parents can be jailed simply for trying to help their children accept who they are during a time of confusion. 
This legislation will do nothing less than enshrine a form of child abuse – by the government – into Canadian law. 
I have never made a secret of my opposition to Bill C-8, and my position has earned me many messages of support from all kinds of Canadians, including from members of the LGBT community, who recognize that the lives of children are currently being sacrificed on the altar of gender ideology.
My leadership opponents have varying views on C-8.
Leslyn Lewis has expressed opposition to it, but she hasn’t been actively campaigning against it as I have. If Leslyn finds her way into Parliament soon, I hope that she will join me in voting against C-8.
Erin O’Toole has been strangely silent on the legislation. Why? Ask Erin.
Peter MacKay actively supports C-8, and he has gone on record as calling my harsh criticism of C-8 “reprehensible”.
I find it “reprehensible” that Peter MacKay won’t oppose this anti-child, anti-parental rights legislation, legislation that prevents Canadians from freely engaging in private conversations.
That what’s “reprehensible”, Peter MacKay!
When I become Prime Minister, I will get rid of Bill C-8 and I will also introduce legislation banning sex change operations for children under 18, as lawmakers in the U.K. have recently done. 
But I need your help. If this is important to you, Arthur, please donate today to help my campaign “get out the vote” in this crucial stage of the leadership contest.
We are in the midst of a culture war, and gender ideology is one of the radical left’s favourite weapons. 
But Justin Trudeau and his Liberal government should leave children out of it.
Sincerely,
Derek Sloan's signature
Derek Sloan
Member of Parliament

Friday, August 7, 2020

Haters Gonna Hate, Want to Shut Down MassResistance (SAD!)

I love my haters!

These little bigots really think they can make a difference by reporting MassResistance on social media:
This is just SAD!

They have no authority, no capacity to stop MassResistance.

We are making the difference!

Thursday, August 6, 2020

Corporate Child Abuse: Parents Subject Child to Drag Queen Lap Dance

This is what Drag Queen Story Hour is really all about:
This is what the promotion of LGBT perversion onto children is really leading up to.

This tweet was released in the final week of February, earlier this year.

It's about desensitizing children, then grooming them, exploiting them, and then finally abusing them.

This kind of scandalous material was spreading like wildfire across the Internet in the earlier months of 2020.

It's amazing what has happened in this country--and across the world--over the last six months.

There was so much evil becoming prevalent in our society. Could anyone imagine allowing drag queens to seduce little girls, seated in chairs, surrounded by adults who were raving and cheering on this perverse, disgusting display? This kind of abuse is all too common among LGBT militants and their advocates.

It's evil, it's wrong, and it also showcases how important it was for the COVID-19 outbreak to stop this spread of this greater LGBT malignancy.

Black Progressive Admits It: Progressives Are Racist

Here's all the proof you need that progressives are racist. This statement says it all:

"I bet most, if not all, of my white progressive friends and colleagues wouldn’t think of belonging to a club that expressly excludes Blacks. But many of these same people live, work and play in racially homogeneous environments."



Progressive writer admits that progressives are racist. No kidding.

Progressives have been targeting black people since the movement began in the early 1900s. Margaret Sanger of Planned Murderhood fame targeted black people. Woodrow Wilson expelled every black civil servant from the White House.

It was only when Republicans were restored to power, that normalcy returned with Warren G. Harding, and black people's natural rights and standing were restored in the United States.

Progressives are RACIST!

Look no further than Lyndon Baines Johnson for further proof:


Trans-Insanity Hate: Jae Red Rose of San Diego

Jae Red Rose, a man pretending to be a woman, has been harassing the men and women of San Diego MassResistance for a number of months.

He--yes, HE--was the weirdo who showed up with his bullhorns shouting "We love drag queens!" when San Diego MassResistance protested the Chula Vista main library for hosting Drag Queen Story Hour on September 10, 2019.



This man is a couple shades short of a drag show, to put it mildly!

Check out his Facebook page:

https://www.facebook.com/MxRedRose?fref=profile_friend_list&hc_location=friends_tab

This guy has no business being in the general public, let alone around children.

When I write that "Transgenderism is a mental disorder", look no further than Jae Red Rose.

I mean ... seriously?

This man claimed that it was hate speech to call him ... a he.

YES, HE DID!

This is what the San Diego LGBT movement is relying on to push their perversity on children and adults alike. Creepy weirdos like this guy want to promote their selfish delusions and make everyone acquiesce and accept them.

When does this hateful, self-loathing insanity cease?

American Library Assocation Admits It: Drag Queen Story Hour is About Boys Wearing Dresses

CHECK THIS OUT:

No, Drag Queen Story Hour is not about literacy. It's about indoctrination. It's about having boys wear dresses. It's about grooming children to be abused.



And ...

Drag Queen Story Hour is about hatred:

Hatred of Children
Hatred of Innocence
Hatred of Common Sense
Hatred of Decency
Hatred of Basic Morality
Hatred of Donald Trump -- yes, there is very much a political agenda behind all of this insanity. They want to get rid of President Trump and accomplish the destructive, hateful "progressive" agenda which Barack Obama had started.
Hatred of Free Enterprise
Hatred of America.

Why allow drag queens, adult entertainers read to children?

It's all about making boys wear dresses. This is evil. It must be stopped.


LGBT Self-Promotionalism: San Diego Democratic Operative Tom Lemmon Hates His Daughter

In the City of Chula Vista, California, San Diego MassResistance has been working diligently to put an end to the Drag Queen Story Hour perversion which had swept the city last year. The residents did not want this travesty, and the community at large did not want to promote LGBT themes and perversities.

In the last two months before the COVID-19 outbreak, a hate group from the San Diego County Democratic Party showed up to try and defended the perverted, openly gay city councilman Steve Padilla.

These Democratic Party miscreants were actually defending allowing sex entertainers to be around children. They actually think it is OK to pervert the minds of youths with flamboyant lies about homosexuality, transgenderism, and other sexual perversions.

There is no sense, no sensibility to such hatred. What we see on display is a gross hatred of children.

And there is no greater example of this than Mr. Tom Lemmon:



He is a union hack working for the San Diego Building Trade organization in the area. He teamed up with some of his regressive buddies to go to Chula Vista City Council meetings during the first two months of the year.

At one point, he took out a picture of his daughter, showing her backpack to the audience.

She was carrying an LGBT six-colored flag. Her daughter is a lesbian.

And he wants to flaunt it, to show how woke he is.

This is a perfect example of the irresponsible parenting that has become so commonplace in this country. Instead of taking a stand for the best moral judgment possible for their children, these parents have just given up and said that their children can do whatever they want to with their bodies. What is this madness?

Tom Lemmon wants to prop up her daughter so that he can score political points.

His daughter is killing herself slowly, and yet he wants to celebrate this fact. Homosexuality is harmful, aberrant, destructive, based on lies, and yet this "father" has no problem using his daughter in such a crass, brazen fashion.

This is the San Diego County Democratic Party.

This is Tom Lemmon. This is one of the supporters for Councilman Steve Padilla.

Let's state the facts plainly: Tom Lemmon hates his daughter.

San Diego MassResistance is committed to standing against this abuse. MassResistance is committed to exposing and extinguishing this hatred of children, of the culture of death, of society as a whole.

Give Tom Lemmon a call, and tell him to stop hating his own daughter!

Tom Lemmon
San Diego County Building and Construction Trades Council, AFL-CIO
3737 Camino del Rio South, Suite 202
San Diego, California 92108
Telephone: 619-521-2914
Fax: 619-521-2917


Heritage Foundation Goes Full SJW: "America is a Racist Country"

I did not have the chance earlier this year to comment on this trainwreck of an article.

Thank God for Tucker Carlson going out of his way to expose the cancer among Conservative Inc, and particularly how the commentators have shown no interest in standing up to the falling cultural malaise that has become all too common in the United States.



Instead of stoking the flames of racism, the head of the Heritage Foundation Kay Coles James needed to point out that the United States is one of the least racist, if not THE least racist countries in the world. Why would anyone want to come to this country if the United States is so racist?

The problem is not that the United States is a multi-ethnic or monolithic country. This country has withstood and stood firm by the promise that people can come from anywhere in the world and become American citizens.

What has been happening, however, is that interest groups in place have wanted to push for their own power by stoking racial division and animus. That is the problem. Furthermore, communistic infiltrators have been barging into academia for decades, teaching the next generations of students that the United States is a fundamentally hateful, racist, perverse country which must be destroyed.

The truth is that the United States has had the flaws which other nations have endured, but unlike those countries, the United States and its people have overcome these flaws, these failures. They did not simply allow for slavery or the degradation of fellow man to remain extant within the confines of the country. The American people have fought back time and again to end these evils and make sure that our elected official live up to the principles and precepts laid out in the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution.

And yet for all that our country has endured and overcome, with have Conservative Inc. talking heads like Kay Coles James (who takes money from Big Tech), telling us tha the United States still has the cancer of racism at its core:


The senseless and completely unjustified killing of George Floyd – an unarmed black man – by a white police officer in Minneapolis on Monday should shock the conscience of America.

We have now learned that George Floyd pretty much did himself in by getting high on depressants and stimulants all at the same time. This Floyd creep was no hero at all. This is Michael Brown and Ferguson all over again.

Besides, what happened in Minneapolis had nothing to do with race. If it had been a black man with his knee on another black man's neck, the outrage should have been the same, right? Besides that, there were police officers of different ethnic backgrounds who were standing around, doing nothing to get Officer Chauvin to remove his neck from the George Floyd.

While I understand the frustration and anger, I do not condone the violence spreading across this country in response to Floyd’s horrific killing. Rioting tearing apart Minneapolis and cities coast-to-coast will never lead to anything but more suffering. Those who are committing crimes are distracting us from the even larger group of people who are peacefully demonstrating.

Here's the thing: most of the peaceful protests were not peaceful to begin with. This uproar over Floyd turned into another excuse to raise hell and push a Marxist revolution, all under the banner of Black Lives Matter.

But we cannot shrug off Floyd’s killing – along with the killings of so many other black Americans throughout our nation’s history and up through today.

Why are so many black Americans getting killed, though? They are killing each other. Does anyone want to talk about those harrowing statistics? Anyone?!

How many more black people must die, and how many more times will statements of sympathy have to be issued? How many times will protests have to occur? How many more committees will have to be formed until America admits that racism is still a problem in this country?

Racism is a problem in the United States? OK, but is it the biggest problem? Hardly. Black Americans across the board talk about concerns for the well-being of their families, economic opportunities, and the need to confront the steady breakdown of the black family. Why aren't we talking more about black fathers? Why are we not confronting the alarming number of children born to single mothers, and there is no father? This breakdown of the family needs more attention than all this talk about racism.

Racism in America is a fatal wound. Every time another incident occurs we put a Band-Aid on it, but the Band-Aid keeps falling off. Band-Aids are not enough to ever stitch this country back together.

Kay, cut the crap. The United States is not only the least racist country in the world, but it has seen a growing, marked decrease in racist events and episodes. Once again, what happened in Minneapolis was not about race in any way, shape, or form.

The arrest of fired Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin on Friday on charges of manslaughter and third-degree murder is a welcome step, but it is just a Band-Aid.

Now we know that this arrest was unjustified. George Floyd died of cardiac arrest at the scene, granted. The police officer did not kill him, though. He did not pass our and die fromm asphyxiation folks. His drug-abusing ways killed him. George Floyd was no martyr. Not at all.

Chauvin is seen on cellphone video kneeling on Floyd’s neck as Floyd lay on the pavement handcuffed and helpless. Other officers with Chauvin did nothing as they watched Floyd die, and should face justice for their inexcusable inaction.

During my 70 years on this Earth I have lived through the civil rights movement, I have seen the highs and lows of this country, I have seen America’s goodness, and I have seen its hatred.

Oh really, Kay? This country's hatred? That hatred does not belong to the entire country. That hatred stems from individuals or movements within the country. Did Kay Coles James really think she could get away with such overheated rhetoric? She must have thought that she could such false, inflammatory remarks simply because she was black--and that is racist in itself. No one should believe that they are more or less immune to criticism because of their skin color. Let's talk Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. at his word, and let's judge people not by the color of their skin, but rather by the content of their character.

There is no other country like ours in the world – nothing compares to its greatness. But the issue of racism is America’s Achilles’ heel. It has been embedded into our culture for 400 years, since the first Africans were seized from their homes on the other side of the world and brought to colonial America in chains and enslaved.

No, racism has not been embedded in the culture. It more likely, or rather most likely has been embedded into Mrs. James' education in higher institutions of learning, or she is just going along with the race-baiting talking points because the Heritage Foundation gets big money from Big Tech.

The racism experienced by black Americans is not a political issue and to anyone who tries to use it as one, on the left or the right, I say shame on you. No longer should our communities be pieces in a grand chess game.

On the contrary, the racism experienced by black Americans is very much a political issue. The Democratic Party, the regressive Left, all these institutions of left-wing lunacy have been pushing their racist dogmas, dog whistles, and doctrines for decades. This is very much a political issue. The Democratic Party pushed for the enslavement of black people. The Democratic Party enacted Jim Crow laws and segregationist policies throughout the South and the United State as a whole. 

The promise of the Declaration of Independence that we are all created equal applies to people of every race. This is not about politics – it is about morality.

Now this is absolutely true. Would that James had begun her editorial with the Declaration of Independence rather than a Declaration of Systemic Racism.

It’s time America takes responsibility and expands human flourishing to all of its citizens – not just the majority of them.

Who exactly needs to take responsiblity for what is happening in the United States regarding these riots and race-based conflagrations? These outburts of violence are not even about race. They are Marxist hordes determined to tear down the United States. These hateful crowds are made up of mostly racist white liberal, bubble-head bobble brats who think that the world owes them everything. So suffused with a sense of entitlement, these Antifa-Black Lives Matter hordes want the whole world upended and turned into a radically fair utopia where everyone has everything they need, and no leader ever fails "the people." Such dystopian fantasy will never come about, of course. The havoc and destruction wreaked in the question for this communist nightmare are all too apparent.

Instead of bad-mouthing the United State as some racist empire, James should have talked about all the good that the United States and her people have accomplished. Yes, she could acknowledge that there is still racism, since this perverse need to distinguish, discriminate, and denigrate is all to present and prevalent in human nature, but that the United States crafted a system of government, or rather of governments (state as well as federal) to check, to frustrate the hasty powers of men, including the most racist and base among us.

This country’s founding principles have created a system for injustices to come to light. They are designed to enable the human flourishing of all America’s citizens.

Let’s use those principles to guide us. It’s time America takes responsibility and expands human flourishing to all of its citizens – not just the majority of them.

It's time for Democrats to take responsibility for their policies of hatred and division. James is all wrong to cast all the blame on all Americans.

Americans must speak up and reject the racism and division in their own communities. There has always been a remnant outside the black community fighting for racial equality. It can no longer be just a remnant. Racial equality is something that every one of us, regardless of skin color, must work toward on a daily basis.

There is hardly any racism in many communities throughout the United States. The most racism one will find occurs in aggressively "progressive" cities that are pushing all kinds of destructive outcomes, which hurt the very people whom they claim to care about.

Individually, we can make a difference by promoting peace and prosperity for all people, knowing that life is better for everyone when we as Americans succeed together.

All of a sudden, Kay Coles James is talking about individual actions and individual responsibilities. These are the themes, the ideas that she needed to talk about at the outset. Where was the responsibilithy and accountability for George Floyd, who had committed multiple felonies in the past? Where was the accountability for the politicians in Minneapolis who spent more time virtue-signalling rather than signalling virtue?

It will take courage to speak up, but it is the only way we can overcome racism and the problems plaguing our nation.

Mrs. James, we were looking for the real courage to call out this false narrative of America's so-called "systemic racism" problem. Systemic racism occurs in municipalities where political operatives and machines put the well-being of their party and their own profit ahead of the people whom they are supposed to represent.

Simple acts like starting a dialogue with a neighbor or teaching your children the difference between right and wrong can have a profound impact now and for generations to come.

Nothing can bring George Floyd back to life. But if his horrific and needless death proves to be a turning point to make Americans finally end the ugly racism that stains our nation’s history and afflicts us like a cancer of the soul, he will leave behind a legacy we sorely need.

His death was needless, but we don't need to blame the entire United States of America for this death. It was George Floyd's fault at the outset, since he was high on drugs, low on morals, and determined to break the law, even admitting that he had passed a fake note at the convenience store before he was pulled over the Minneapolis police department.

Final Reflection

It's a really sad reflection on our political commentary, especially on the right, that we see everyone rushing to blame "systemic racism" for every failing in the United States. What happened in Minneapolis was not an issue of race. It was an issue of bad actors, bad policies (there is no reason to keep one's knees on a suspect's neck when he is down for good), and bad decision-making.

For the head of the Heritage Foundation to play the race card the way she did, however, is just inexcusable. No, the United States does not have this fatal flaw of racism. No, the problems which came to a head in Minneapolis were not a result of racism. Conservatism must do better than just repeat left-wing talking points.

George Will is An Affront to Conservatism

In the previous post, I mentioned how Conservative Inc.

Now, I want to focus one particular miscreant of Conservative Inc.: Agnostic turned fool (or rather, atheist) George Will.



Now, about the point that William F. Buckley and his conservative gang have been part of the problem, not the solution, I would like to share with you an article written by George F. Will, himself another part of the do-nothing Conservative Inc. cabal.

In this column, Will showed how he and William F. Buckely were never really committed to fighting back -- only in being respectable, and how their disdain for Trump exposes their true egotism, while ignoring the needs of the whole country (FYI, this article was written during the height of the 2016 campaign, August 2015 :

By GEORGE WILL

In every town large enough to have two traffic lights there is a bar at the back of which sits the local Donald Trump, nursing his fifth beer and innumerable delusions. Because the actual Donald Trump is wealthy, he can turn himself into an unprecedentedly and incorrigibly vulgar presidential candidate. It is his right to use his riches as he pleases. His squalid performance and its coarsening of civic life are costs of freedom that an open society must be prepared to pay.

Right away, we see the coarse and diffident arrogance of this Beltway elitist. He looks down on small towns, and he looks down on the individuals who live in these towns as empty people who have wasted their lives and contribute nothing but their solitary delusions of grandeur. This very arrogance is what turned off many Republican voters to Romney, and perhaps also hurt John McCain and Bob Dole in their respective bids for President, too.

When, however, Trump decided that his next acquisition would be not another casino but the Republican presidential nomination, he tactically and quickly underwent many conversions of convenience (concerning abortion, health care, funding Democrats, etc.). His makeover demonstrates that he is a counterfeit Republican and no conservative.

Three years later, these conversions were about more than mere convenience. He has initiated and completed a number of conservative policies for the greater good of the country which many other conservatives had talked about but never accomplished.

He is an affront to anyone devoted to the project William F. Buckley began six decades ago with the founding in 1955 of National Review — making conservatism intellectually respectable and politically palatable. Buckley’s legacy is being betrayed by invertebrate conservatives now saying that although Trump “goes too far,” he has “tapped into something,” and therefore . . .

Making conservatism intellectually respectable and politically palatable meant ... losing often, and losing gracefully the Left. That way, the major newspapers and television stations would continue to invite conservative pundits like George Will, Bill Kristol, and Jonah Goldberg onto their programs, although them to pontifate their points and sell their books--but at the same time ensure that none of them were making a difference to shape the culture for the better.

Therefore what? This stance — if a semi-grovel can be dignified as a stance — is a recipe for deserved disaster. Remember, Henry Wallace and Strom Thurmond “tapped into” things.

This riff is a slimey character smear. President Trump is not a racist. President Trump's economic and political populism has actually restored constutional foundations in this country, too.

In 1948, Wallace, FDR’s former vice president, ran as a third-party candidate opposing Harry Truman’s re-election. His campaign became a vehicle for, among others, Communists and fellow travelers opposed to Truman’s anti-Soviet foreign policy. Truman persevered, leaders of organized labor cleansed their movement of Soviet sympathizers, and Truman was re-elected.

He won also in spite of South Carolina’s Democratic governor Thurmond siphoning off Democratic votes (and 39 electoral votes) as a Dixiecrat protesting civil-rights commitments in the Democratic party’s platform. Truman won because he kept his party and himself from seeming incoherent and boneless.

No. Truman won because the Republican candidate that year, Thomas Dewey, was a weak nominee who took no strong positions or proclaimed any committed advocacy for doing what was best for the country. He did not give a strong platform or presence to distinguishing himself from Harry Truman at all. 

Conservatives who flinch from forthrightly marginalizing Trump mistakenly fear alienating a substantial Republican cohort. But the assumption that today’s Trumpites are Republicans is unsubstantiated and implausible. Many are no doubt lightly attached to the political process, preferring entertainment to affiliation. They relish in their candidate’s vituperation and share his aversion to facts. From what GOP faction might Trumpites come? The establishment? Social conservatives? Unlikely.

More elitist arrogance. On the contrary, many Republican voters were deeply enmeshed in the political process, and they saw one establishment candidate after another refuse to follow through on policies, platforms, or promises for the greater good of the country. Republicans were continuing to push different forms of amnesty. Working-class Americans saw their jobs being shut down and shipped overseas. The public safety issues eroding middle American gnawed on many Americans, and the basic dignity and quality of life which Americans had worked hard for was slipping away from them, while government-allied crony capitalists continued to get richer, and the rest of us paid for it. They wanted a bold change to this status quo, and they elected Donald Trump.

I do submit, however, to the truth that the new cohort of Trump voters does not fall neatly within the Republican framework. Disaffected Democrats and populist independents lined up behind Donald Trump, as well. There is a massive political realignment taking place, and conservatives can benefit if they pay attention and reach out to core constituencies across the country on the trade and illegal immigration issues.

A party has a duty to exclude interlopers, including cynical opportunists deranged by egotism.

And grifters, which include all the so-called "gay conservatives". and bookish types like George Will!

They certainly are not tea partyers, those earnest, issue-oriented, book-club organizing activists who are passionate about policy. Trump’s aversion to reality was displayed during the Cleveland debate when Chris Wallace asked him for “evidence” to support his claim that Mexico’s government is sending rapists and drug dealers to America. Trump, as usual, offered apoplexy as an argument.

George Will has demonstrated a greater aversion to reality. He doesn't seem to understand that conservatives in particular and citizens in general are fed up with the caving in. They want to see results, not just talking points and verbal jousting matches on live television.

A political party has a right to (in language Trump likes) secure its borders. Indeed, a party has a duty to exclude interlopers, including cynical opportunists deranged by egotism. This is why closed primaries, although not obligatory, are defensible: Let party members make the choices that define the party and dispense its most precious possession, a presidential nomination. So, the Republican National Committee should immediately stipulate that subsequent Republican debates will be open to any and all — but only — candidates who pledge to support the party’s nominee.

President Trump did the right thing when he had indicated that he would not necessarily support the GOP nominee (if it wasn't he). Keep in mind that four years later, sellout RINOs like John Kasich have openly opposed President Trump and are contemplating whether to speak at the Democratic National Committee Convention in August.

This year’s Republican field is the most impressive since 1980, and perhaps the most talent-rich since the party first had a presidential nominee, in 1856. But 16 candidates are experiencing diminishment by association with the 17th.

And guess what? The 17th became President, because the political realignment that so many of the Republican base were craving finally came to fruition. This realignment bothers beltway elites like George Will. He wants to sit at the cool kids' table and make lots of rich kids' money. All of this takes place while the country descends into abject chaos and culture war cacophony.

Soon the campaign will turn to granular politics, the on-the-ground retail work required by the 1.4 percent of the nation’s population that lives in Iowa and New Hampshire. Try to imagine Trump in an Iowa living room, with a macaroon in one hand and cup of hot chocolate balanced on a knee, observing Midwestern civilities while talking about something other than himself.

That imagining was not necessary, and would turn out to be irrelevant, since Trump did not campaign in Iowa to begin with. As many pundits have shared, and as Trump probably figured out, it did not make a difference whether he won Iowa's caucuses or not. Those election contests help to clear the field rather than isolate the strongest candidate for the nomination. President Trump was the only candidate who would not only defeat sixteen other candidates, but beat down the Hillary Clinton-DNC juggernaut which was propped up on nothing but lies, deceit, theft, and murder. Only Trump had the guts and gumption to get it done.

Television, which has made Trump (he is one of three candidates, with Mike Huckabee and John Kasich, who have had television shows), will unmake him, turning his shtick into a transcontinental bore. But not before many voters will have noticed weird vibrations pulsing from the GOP.

On the contrary, Trump has continued to manipulate and take down the media like no other. He has exposed their rank hypocrisy so well. Conservative Inc. finks like George Will want to keep close ties and happy connections with the corporate media because it's their bread and butter. They want to keep writing articles, giving speeches, selling books, etc. Of course, all of that money-making has come at a price for the rest of the country.

So, conservatives today should deal with Trump with the firmness Buckley dealt with the John Birch Society in 1962. The society was an extension of a loony businessman who said Dwight Eisenhower was “a dedicated, conscious agent of the Communist conspiracy.” In a 5,000-word National Review “excoriation” (Buckley’s word), he excommunicated the society from the conservative movement.



This is the most damaging indictment yet that I can find against George Will. The John Birch Society is in no wise a racist organization, or is it some "looney extension" of conspiracy theories. The organization emerged out of frustration with the fact that Republicans did not dismantle and destroy the New Deal Socialism of FDR and the Democratic Party. The fact that so many Republicans were swept into office in the early 1950s was a clear testimony to the fact that Americans wanted normalcy and a return to constitutionalism, not globalism or communism.

And yet, the communistic underpinnings of the New Deal were not removed during the Eisenhower Administration. In fact, they grew worse under the Johnson Administration--much worse. And where was George Will in the midst of that discussion, by the way?

Buckley received an approving letter from a subscriber who said, “You have once again given a voice to the conscience of conservatism.” The letter was signed, “Ronald Reagan, Pacific Palisades, Cal.”

Not sure why Ronald Reagan would share such a sentiment. Then again, President Trump has said, written, done many liberal things throughout his life, but has turned out to be an effective conservative juggernaut in the White House (Aside from the spending, of course).

With the article above dissected and dispensed with, I would share that indeed Georg Will is the affront to true conservatism, not Donald Trump.

George Will wrote a lot, talked a lot, pontificated even more, and has had nothing to show for all these efforts. Conservative Inc. talking heads like Will have not conserved anything. In fact, now is the time to push back hard not just on the Left but the Conservative establishment, which has been content to get nothing done but make money and make a profile for themselves while the country falls apart.

With all the rioting going on in the streets, with the increased kow-towing to the Left on one cultural issue after another from Conservative Inc., it is no surprise that more people are getting tired of the chattering classes and want to see real change, real leadership from their ... leaders!

George Will is an affront to conservatism, and President Trump has exposed the conservative chatterati like George Will and Jonah Goldberg for who they really are: a bunch of do-nothing talking heads who never wanted to do better for this country. And with the decline of print media, their influence is on the inevitable wane, and all for the better.

Why Conservatism Failed (Conservative Inc. Tells All)

Luis Miguel wrote the following blog:

Why Conservatism Failed

Here are my thoughts in tandem with the remarks that he wrote late last year.

Honest, patriotic, conservative Americans who only read the headline of this article without examining its content may think that I’m some liberal celebrating the left’s major wins in culture, society, and politics over the last 100+ years.

Far to the contrary, anyone who follows this blog and my social media accounts knows how staunchly of the right I am. That’s why I’m being so blunt: I want to see our side win. And if we want that to happen, we need to be honest with ourselves about why the left has beaten us time and time again, to the point where they now control government, the media, the schools, academia, and virtually every other aspect of society.

This point of "I want my side to win" speaks volumes about the so-called Conservative movement over the last thirty years, at least since the Regan Administration. Conservatives have not really been interested winning. They have wanted to coast on Reagan's victories, and then do no more. Just standing their ground has been their main stance--and that is not working.



Because of the vast nature of this subject, I won’t attempt to cover every factor in conservatism’s defeat in this post. I’ll likely revisit this question in future articles. So consider this Part I of “Why Conservatism Failed.”

Conservatism is Dead

The first thing you need to understand is that conservatism is effectively dead. When I say this, realize that “conservatism” is not the same thing as “the right.” The principles that we collectively tend to consider the political right—Christianity, family, personal responsibility, limited government, national sovereignty, constitutionalism, a dedication to our English-speaking, Anglo-American heritage —exist independently of the modern conservative movement.

This distinction may be helpful, and may be confusing at the same time. Talking about "The Right" and "conservatism" as synonymous is not the problem, and it's not going to help with the solutions needed. Those institutions, those media brands that are talking a good talk, but not walking a good walk: those entities should be the targets of our ire.

Conservatism, as in the brand of “Conservative, Inc.” found at places like National Review and The Weekly Standard, is largely a 20th Century phenomenon. The movement, led by men like William F. Buckley, Jr., Bill Kristol, and Jonah Goldberg, often landed book deals and mainstream media gigs for its thought leaders, but ultimately accomplished little of substance.
Hence, why I say conservatism is dead—because at this point, there is nothing left to conserve.
Atheism, feminism, homosexuality, transgenderism are all regularly taught in public school classrooms—regardless of which party is in power.

Conservatism as a movement needs real thought leaders who will put their thoughts into action. This problem among Christians and conservatives alike is actually not that new a problem. This was an issue even in the late 1940s, when Douglas Hyde informed his audiences that Communists were gaining considerable ground despite their relatively small numbers because they were not just committed to their cause, but they want out of their way to infiltrate, educate, and recruit others to take up the communist fight.

Legal and illegal immigration continue forward unchecked in ever-greater numbers, resulting in a demographic transformation of our country away from its English-Speaking, Anglo-American heritage—regardless of which party is in power.

Legal immigration has not met with assimilation, and that results in invasion. No question about that. Big Business has been propping up Conservative Inc. to pay lip service to real immigration reform (reduction of numbers, promotion of the American culture and character)

The scope and size of the federal government, particularly the executive branch, continues to grow to despotic proportions—regardless of which party is in power.

Our country continues to engage in pointless wars, cede authority to unelected international bodies, and rack up the national debt to mind-blowing levels—regardless of which party is in power.

Conservatism could not even conserve the women’s restroom.

The problem is not a label or an ideology. The problem is that the people carrying the mantle, or so they had claimed for years ... didn't carry it.

I recall what William F. Buckley had said about conservatism, that it was a movement in which man would stand up and shout "Stop" or put up a "Stop Sign" to the Leftist juggernaut assaulting the country through the universities and the other institutions and icons in the culture.

How Conservatism Died

Conservatism is dead. It failed. And it failed epically.
Why? Because it was always intended to fail.

Its leaders were and are false prophets. Buckley was a Skull and Bones internationalist serving the CIA. Kristol, his father, and the neocons are Trotskyist world revolutionaries.

This is where Luis gets into conspiracy theories, and in my view, they don't provide real insight on what to do about many of the problems.

The truth is that Bill Kristol and George Herbert Walker Bush were globalists, they were social liberals. Another neo-conservative, Charles Krauthammer, admitted that plainly in a number of the articles he had written. I later learned that Krauthammer was in favor of gun control as well as single-payer healthcare. These are not truly conservative positions at all.

Here’s how the game was played:

The establishment insiders who control both major American political parties want two things:
1.      The transformation of America into a non-Christian socialist state.
2.      The creation of world government, or a global new world order.
So what did they do? They captured the liberal and progressive movements, along with the Democratic party, to overtly advance both planks of their agenda.

Then, they backed the conservative movement, along with much of the Republican party, to serve as controlled opposition.

This matter of controlled opposition is a serious concern, and worth investigating further. Indeed, corporate interests were indeed pulling the strings in both parties, especially on issues like immigration.

The Republicans and media conservatives always claimed to oppose the left on plank #1 above, the transformation of America into a non-Christian socialist state. But in every cultural and political battle, every time it really counted, they were more concerned with being gentlemen and “losing with dignity” than putting up the fight necessary to actually win.

Yes. No one can doubt this. John McCain, Mitt Romney and others were never interested in really fighting. The Heritage Foundation and many other conservative groups have not really been interested in winning these political fights. They want to just get by, give the impression that they care enough to stand up to the current issue that needs rebuffing, and the quietly give up and move on to the next issue.

Fortunately, a greater number of grassroots groups are rising and fighting for the cultural values and norms that more Americans care about. The Pro-Life movement has become militant in its pressure to protect life at every stage of pregnancy. Their efforts have become so pronounced, that President Donald Trump is the first President to speak at the March for Life procession, which has been rallying in Washington DC every year for a number of years.

So the left would score another victory. Then another, each time moving government just a little closer to full socialism, moving the culture just a bit closer to anti-Christian, secular humanism.
And every time the left gained another win, conservatives would refuse to try to take that ground back. After all, if they’re all about “conserving,” that means they have to “conserve” the new liberal order, right?

Standing your ground doesn't mean much when the ground keeps shifting under your feet.

So they never dared touch the left’s victories. “You guys created a new unconstitutional government agency? Oh, we just have to accept it. What’s done is done. Oh, you’ve legalized gay marriage? Oh well. We can’t do anything about it now!”

So while conservatives were purposefully losing to the left on #1, they were actively working alongside them on #2—the creation of world government, or a new world order.

Notice that Democrats and Republicans always work toward the same foreign policy objectives—having our military spread out all over the world (except on our own border), meddling in other countries, sending our troops to die in pointless wars. In other words, the establishment of a worldwide empire—one run according to the rules of international bodies like the United Nations.

A number of lawmakers have pointed out that the two political parties agree too much. Recently deceased US Senator Tom Coburn complained about this issue, even when Congress was facing unprecedented gridlock during the Obama Administration. The government on both sides of the aisle still finds so much room for agreement.

At this point in the country's history, however, it has become all too clear that the two parties are fundamentally different in their views and values about the United States as a whole. The Democratic Party has embraced communism and anti-Americanism as its mainstays. They work every day to undermine the President and scuttle even the most basic laws and policy proposals to help the country, especially during this Coronavirus problem.

Meanwhile, back at home, the conservative talking heads and Republican insiders were selling all this to their constituents as “keeping America strong” and “making America a superpower.”

These false conservative prophets told well-intentioned, patriotic American voters that we were somehow made safer by having our service men die in a stone-age Middle Eastern country that has no means of attacking us. Yet these same “principled conservatives” scream to high heaven against a common-sense security measure like preventing migration from known terrorist strongholds.

At the same time, these same “true conservatives” made it their job to vehemently oppose genuine right-wing voices by smearing them out of the movement. Anyone who was actually willing to fight and win had to be denounced, as Buckley did to the likes of Pat Buchanan and the John Birch Society. As his magazine, National Review, did to the likes of Ann Coulter and John Derbyshire. As the #NeverTrumpers tried to do to Donald Trump.

Pat Buchanan has been quite vindicated in the last three years with the Trump Presidency. He has actually accomplished a number of the conservative policy platforms which previous Republican presidents and presidential candidates had often vouched and advocated for.

And so, step-by-step, the establishment insiders have brought their plan almost to full completion. And they couldn’t have done it without the help of their faithful friends, the American conservatives.

That is why I proclaim conservatism dead. And I say, good riddance! Conservatism was all about defense. And strictly playing defense is a lousy way to fight a war.

This last point is more than well-taken. Playing defense is not playing out well. Conservatives, or people on the right, need to play offense. The question becomes: when will Luis and others start going on the offense?

Where We Go From Here

The time to merely “conserve” is past. To be a conservative today would be to conserve socialism, globalism, and hedonistic humanism.

Today, we of the right are the revolutionaries. The name of our movement is irrelevant. We are Christians, patriots, nationalists, republicans (believers in Republicanism), freedom-lovers.
What’s in a name? At the end of the day, we’re fighters. Winning is all that matters.
And win we shall.

Yes! It's time to fight and win territory in the culture wars. It's time to push back on the corrupt politicians and rogue judges. It's time to stop accepting the slow acceleration of the statist status quo. I could not agree more with Luis' assessment.

I am not sure I agree with his theories about Bill Kristol as a krypto communist, however. In fact, that part of this discussion is quite irrelevant at this point. What I do agree with, however, is that so-called Conservative Inc. has been ruining the Conservative movement because they never had any interest in winning. The only thing that they wanted to do was write books, give speeches, and make big money.

This does not help us win the culture war. We need to fight back and win, not worry about civility or appearing civil. Do we want to make a difference, or just make headlines and money?

THE BATTLE FOR THE SOUL OF A NATION - Professor Thio Li-Ann

I discovered this post from Dr. Thio Li-Ann of the Republic of Singapore.

I am sharing her remarks with the general public, since they deserve recognition and reflection.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



History teaches us that nations are destroyed in two major ways:

1. An overwhelming aggressive external force - think Alexander the Great, the Roman empire, Nebuchadnezzar - but history shows that all human empires are temporal, and exist by the leave of El Elyon: Acts 17 :26

2. Internal rot - through moral corruption, through narcissism, through tribalism, pitting tribe versus tribe, "us" versus the "other".

This involves the deployment of the tactics of Cultural Marxism which always involves positing an "oppressor /oppressed" binary, then channeling hatred towards whoever is labelled the 'oppressor.'

We can see this in action in the USA, with the spread of lawlessness and divisiveness, outrage mobs and the virtue signalling 'woke' vigilantes (who prefer to look good or feel good, rather than to be good). All talk of the 'common good' seems to have evaporated, as fast as rain on a tropical steamy day. There is only the world of the 'evil tyrant' and the 'social justice warrior.'

Justice we should seek, but social justice? There is a difference. "Social justice" is determined by those in charge of social opinion; this in the West is wielded by the hard-left liberal elite.

Social Justice ain't Justice: https://www.prageru.com/video/social-justice-isnt-justice/

Is there injustice in the world? Certainly. Are there perfect politicians? Of course not. Politics cannot bring about "utopia" or a perfect state of things (unless you are a deluded ideologue, whether a hard left marxist or illiberal liberal who secretly wants to be a totalitarian).

Politicians can do "some good" and they can do "a lot of harm." Its unfortunately a mixed bag, because politicians want (need?) to be popular and that can devolve into pandering.

A politician may support 3 good causes and 1 terrible one. How do we choose, when one politician can speak up for causes we have sympathy for, and advocate for causes we must resist because of their deleterious impact?

Who has wisdom up to the task? Who has discernment that will transcend emotional "thinking with our feelings," which always betrays the condition of our heart. There is the tendency of orphan spirits to elevate 'compassion', over the hard work of making difficult choices and tolerable trade-offs, which require both our reason and conscience to make decisions, by doing the heavy lifting of understandings the implications and consequences of an action or decision. And for certain fundamentals, we do not budge. Build and Protect, Tend and Keep.

It is hard to be a statesman and to demonstrate moral heft and leadership in such a setting. It sometimes requires a firm principled stand against populism or the demands of those who shout the loudest or who are most skilled in the base art of spin, PR, political pressure tactics like score-carding.

I am sick of 'woke' culture, 'cancel' culture because it seeks to crush viewpoint diversity and freedom of expression borne out of a commitment to the well-being of a polity.

It is the self-righteous strategy of Cultural Marxists who arrogate to themselves the power to determine what is right/wrong, what should or should not be tolerated, all while pretending to speak in the name of "social justice" (who died and made you king?).

The playbook of Cultural Marxists ("cultural" because they foment the "culture war" which is really a debate about public morality and how this affects law and policy) includes

A) POLITICS AS WARFARE NOT DELIBERATION, NEGOTIATION AND LIVABLE COMPROMISES

Seeing politics as apocalyptic warfare, rather than an enterprise requiring the art of compromise, the discipline of civility, an appreciation that politics is the art of the possible and not a way to bring about some form of 'utopian' salvation

B) BINARY WORLDVIEW, REJECTING COMPLEXITY AND EMBRACING THE SIMPLISTIC

Adopting a lens by which everything is classified into the category of "oppressor" and "oppressed." There are wiser perspectives which do not trade in binaries but appreciate that apart from non-negotiable principles, things (in politics) reside along a continuum...there is always some 'third space' for idealistic realists and principled pragmatists.

Cultural Marxists want to destroy their opponents, discredit them, engage in name-calling (argument by chanting slogans, you can see this all over US college campuses). They are not fellow-citizens to be engaged with, they are to be eradicated. Exiled to some kind of cold cultural Siberia. Place them on 'time-out', exclude them (while chanting for a more inclusive society: Ergo, to expose the hypocritical double standards, when someone demands tolerance - ask what they would not tolerate, when someone chants diversity and inclusivity, ask what they would exclude).

Every theory of "consent" has a moral limit - the question is: who gets to determine what this is?

A-ha, stealth power grab!

Valorise 'consent' and choice, demonise what is chosen. Choice is not the ultimate meta value; some choices should not be chosen. Some things ought not to be tolerated. Some things ought to be excluded. This is why you don't eat a slab of butter every day, even if it is appealing to you.

Opportunity costs.

C) DAMN THEM: DEHUMANISE, DEMONISE AND DOWNGRADE DEBATE (TACTICS OF INTIMIDATION, SILENCING AND OBSCURING STRONG COUNTERVAILING ARGUMENTS)

After identifying who is the "oppressor," the strategy is then to dehumanise and demonise your opponent, to engage in the spurious "argument by insult" not because his/her arguments are good or bad, but because you want to turn other people away from assessing the argument, to win an argument by default rather than tenting it to the quick, unpacking it, giving due credit to good points, exposing poor reasoning.

If you give someone or something a bad label e.g. "this mee pok is not tasty", no one will try it. So you may say: e.g. X is a secular / religious fundamentalist and nothing he has to say is worth thinking about.

Think about it, in your certitude that you are right, you can become self-righteous - "I am he who cannot be questioned because I am absolutely right - you are a bigot and I will whack you into silent submission and tolerate you only when you (abjectly) agree with me."

Perhaps you should doubt your certainty. It could belie an infantile blinkered perspective. We live in a plural world. On things that count, there will be differences.

You can believe you are right, you can stand on principles which are true - relativism is not an attractive proposition because it has its own absolutist premise: All views are equal (the same) except the view that A is a better view.

You can believe in absolute principles, defend them, persuade others, fight to spread the wisdom, but you don't have to have an absolutist frame of mind which refuses to think, comforted in your own infallibility or refusal to engage diverse viewpoints. There is a difference between absolute principles and an absolutist mindset. A good debater thoroughly understands, engages with a different view.

As John Stuart Mill argued, if you argue with someone and you discover you are wrong, you can change your mind. If you argue with someone and discover you are right, you can solidify your tested opinion.

As John Milton stated: "Let Truth and Falsehood collide: who ever knew Truth to be put to the worst, in a free and open encounter."

Throw 'truth bombs" not "shut up bombs". Metaphorically speaking of course.

To be 'self righteous' is not having the inclination to engage or the ability to understand opposing arguments: not to say 'all views are equally cogent' (because clearly they are not) but to assess whether an argument makes a valid point, a half baked point, a refutable point or is utter twaddle.

So, Cultural Marxist, demonise someone, silence them by intimidation, clear them out of the public sphere so you can do a power-grab. Are your bullying ways above reproach?

d. MORAL CONFUSION: THE POLITICS OF VICTIMHOOD AND THE STRATEGY OF SUPPRESSION

The victims victimise, and the oppressor, oppresses. The innocent are tarred and feathered, the wicked get off scot- free. "Poor me, I am so oppressed, while I oppress you."

Victim Chic? The Rhetoric of Victimhood
https://www.jubilee-centre.org/cambridge-papers/victim-chic-the-rhetoric-of-victimhood-by-michael-ovey

e. TRUMPING TRUTH WITH NOXIOUS NARRATIVE

There was a video of a white Louisiana couple having dinner in their own home. BLM protesters crashed into their home, broke their gate, threatened to kill them and their dog. They rang for the police, no one was coming to help. The man took his rifle and shouted at the protesters to leave his property.

Who was the victim? Consider how the liberal left media painted the couple as the oppressors, how the liberal left District Attorney wanted to charge them (for the crime of self-defense?). Utterly disgusting. Painting the victim as oppressor and the oppressor as victim: Isaiah 5:20 - woe unto you for calling good evil, and evil good.

Truth is sidelined in favour of Narrative and Narrative always fuels a political agenda. When cultural marxism - the desire to impose a comprehensive ideology and to brook no dissent - is the driving force, totalitarianism beckons.

See for yourself.

1. The leftwing Washington Post reports: "St. Louis couple point guns at crowd of protesters calling for mayor to resign" https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/06/29/st-louis-protest-gun-mayor/

2. And on the right side of things:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CiIZTVuSUiY

You can see who the real aggressors are. If you faced a mob of 30-40 people invading your house, threatening you what would you do? Say 'well done' and bow the knee?

Brains? Spine? Anyone?

Ah, elections, irritants pollute the air. What inspired this mini-rant of sorts?

A brilliant observation by Bill Muehlenberg, which must get its place in the honour roll of insight.

"The militant left hates Trump, hates America, hates freedom, hates Christianity, hates the police, and hates just about everything decent and honourable. So here is a good rule of thumb: the more the leftists hate something, the more you can count on it being of great value and worth."

https://billmuehlenberg.com/2020/07/08/trump-and-truth-versus-tyranny-and-treason/?fbclid=IwAR01T9HFTQjb8BRz9RpdQQQ7-di4GkPu9V-mO3xG5SGU1D4MAzirUEyfEo4

This is in relation to President Trump's brilliant Rushmore speech, which of course, the left derides.

It is worth reading in full - you can find it here:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-south-dakotas-2020-mount-rushmore-fireworks-celebration-keystone-south-dakota/

In it, President Trump says

... Our Founders boldly declared that we are all endowed with the same divine rights — given [to] us by our Creator in Heaven. And that which God has given us, we will allow no one, ever, to take away — ever. (Applause.)

...Our nation is witnessing a merciless campaign to wipe out our history, defame our heroes, erase our values, and indoctrinate our children. (Cue Cultural Marxist Sloganeering)

....One of their political weapons is “Cancel Culture” — driving people from their jobs, shaming dissenters, and demanding total submission from anyone who disagrees. This is the very definition of totalitarianism, and it is completely alien to our culture and our values,

...The violent mayhem we have seen in the streets of cities that are run by liberal Democrats, in every case, is the predictable result of years of extreme indoctrination and bias in education, journalism, and other cultural institutions.

....The radical ideology attacking our country advances under the banner of social justice. But in truth, it would demolish both justice and society. It would transform justice into an instrument of division and vengeance, and it would turn our free and inclusive society into a place of repression, domination, and exclusion.

....We are proud of the fact — (applause) — that our country was founded on Judeo-Christian principles, and we understand — (applause) — that these values have dramatically advanced the cause of peace and justice throughout the world.

........We believe in equal opportunity, equal justice, and equal treatment for citizens of every race, background, religion, and creed. Every child, of every color — born and unborn — is made in the holy image of God. (Applause.)

....We want free and open debate, not speech codes and cancel culture.

....We embrace tolerance, not prejudice.

Like or dislike President Trump, is there not weight in his words, do they not expose the tactics of Cultural Marxists? Of course there is a difference between aspiration and realisation and of course all politicians are imperfect (I defy you to identify one who does everything right in today's polarised world).

Are you able to assess a view, an opinion, or do you go on automatic demonisation mode? It's like saying 'nothing good can come out of Nazareth' (pace, paraphased).

A brilliant commentary on the speech and the response to it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64GgCVqRLzU

It is also worth evaluating the response to Trump's Rushmore address, as it offers a clear demonstration of the nature of the culture war, the battle for the soul of a nation, of many nations, perhaps all nations.

To paraphase a bon mot: If you don't stand for something, you will fall for anything."

How do things stand with you today?

As for me, I will hearten to Bill M's observation: "the more the leftists hate something, the more you can count on it being of great value and worth."

Vote wisely, make good choices, exercise your slice of sovereignty, keep on keeping on until Ps 84:7.