Tuesday, December 31, 2013

Thanks to all my Friends and Happy New Year

Hello friends, its 11:11 pm on New Year’s Eve 2013 and I have spent the night posting what I thought to be the best of what I have written throughout the year. It certainly has been interesting, this past twelve months. I have to admit that I am a bit nervous contemplating what 2014 may bring. I see a lot of reason for renewed optimism as the nation’s prayer for an awakening among the masses seems, for all practical purposes to have been answered. I also see a great deal of uncertainty as nothing seems to slow the boiling hatred and contempt the socialists in control have for this society. Somehow, and I’m convinced it is due to mass propaganda and psychological conditioning methods, the liberals are able to act as if their biggest failures are actually monumental successes. Somehow they are able to continue unabated with their hostile agenda even though they have been exposed for what they are. LIARS! So, with the optimism there is also the pessimism and the doubt, but the resolve to stay in the fight is still there, and this brings me to the point of this writing.

I have a lot to be thankful for as some good people have enabled me to participate in the fight by allowing me to contribute to their web sites, Fred Brownbill of The Save America Foundation, David Goestch of Patriot update and Tim Brown of Freedom OutPost. These people as well as many others who have engaged me in conversation by responding to my thoughts have helped me out in more ways than anyone can realize. This year has been a tough year for me, one in which I finished a master degree program and wasn't allowed to graduate because of my view points and opinions. The school of course would offer other explanations but they are very transparent, to say the least. Throughout my whole educational career I was being educated by people who claim to have a monopoly on empowering people, however my opinions were not welcome and they did nothing but attempt to humiliate me.

Being able to contribute to the conservative movement in the manner in which I have this past year has been an amazing experience for me. It has reminded me what exactly is at stake when society forgoes its liberties and takes them for granted. I have also been able to explain to people exactly what I have witnessed being educated by leftists seeking to change your children in to “cultural change agents,” which is just a nicer way of saying communist agitator. I wouldn’t have been able to do this without these three people seeing that I had something to offer. I also need to thank Janna Brock because the past few days she has been a huge supporter of my writing on twitter. I am not that great with social media and she is showing me the ropes. I also have to thank my wife and kids as my life literally is dominated by politics, but my wife sees my passion for it and while she prefers to stay away from it, she understands the necessity of my message.


Collectivism vs. Individualism…..Reframing an Argument... David Risselada

Could it be possible that the very ideals we hold dear in this nation are the ones that are actually holding it down? Is individual liberty the tool the socialists are using to separate us from our founding principles? Would a “collective” commitment to understanding our constitution and the benefits of individual liberty be an effective tool against those seeking to divide us?
We all know that there is an insidious movement to transform our society from one of liberty to one of tyranny. Would they be able to do this if we already possessed one of the characteristics they seek to impose on us? What if Americans were not so focused on accomplishing their individual lives and we all understood that our constitutional republic depended on a “collective” understanding of our constitution that we all bore a responsibility of maintaining? I do believe that was the intent. Please do not misread me, I am not advocating for collectivism here just making a point. I am simply observing that because of the nation’s commitment to individualism, the collectivists have found a way to use that which has made our country great, and turn it into our greatest weakness. It’s easy to look at our society today and see these tactics being employed. Multiculturalism, separation of church and state, freedom from religion, flag burning, egalitarianism, these are all misrepresentations of rights and ideas that have been radically misinterpreted to suit an agenda. They are also concepts that have forced us to question our commitment to individual liberty, as was their intent. You can’t say you live in a free country if you can’t “burn a flag” in demonstration of a grievance for example. This is how they turn our values around to suit their purposes. How does a nation truly advocate justice for all if people are not allowed the liberties of their own indigenous cultures? This is the ideal of multiculturalism and it is intended to destroy the nation.
Saul Alinsky says that your opponent can be slaughtered by these tactics and our universities are subversively training their social change agents to employ these “change” strategies. The students are none the wiser because we as parents are too busy to counter balance this. I have given much thought to this subject and I have long believed that a constitutional republic and individual liberty provide the means to a “collective” society in which we all understand the ideals of our nation and the importance of loving our neighbor as we would love ourselves far better than what the socialists are advocating for.
 It’s simple to come to this conclusion when you take into consideration certain truths such as, “you must take care of yourself before you can take care of another.” What this means is when we are free to pursue our own interests and provide for ourselves we are left in a position in which we can look after those that are less fortunate. The natural tendencies of human compassion are in effect and we begin to work towards better ends for society as whole.  The socialist's would have you believe that their ideals of state run utopia, the welfare state, wealth distribution and most importantly the ideal of Marx- “From each of those according to their ability to each of those according to their needs” is a better, more effective solution.
The truth is that socialism breeds selfishness as those that are contributing to society are constantly having more demanded of them in order to meet the needs of those that are unwilling. This harbors a deep resentment as many don’t mind taking care of a deserving poor but are working harder and harder to have their own needs met while there is a segment of society living off of their labor.
Our job is to reframe the argument and make these points to our younger people who are poised to assume leadership positions in the coming decades. How do we do this? How do we turn their argument against them? What weapons do we have in our arsenal when we are living in a time when welfare benefits are worth more than a week’s work? The Marxists have worked strenuously to separate us from our freewill, which many would argue is our natural connection to God. After all, the Marxists are clear in their intent to “Destroy God in the minds of men” in the Communist Manifesto. We have to reattach people to their freewill and re-teach them how to think objectively. We have to prove to them that hard work, saving money and committing to an ideal higher than themselves are the ways to secure their well being and the blessings of liberty. We have to destroy the idea that they are entitled. We have to remind people that our constitution protects the freewill of man to pursue that which will lead to the prosperity of society.  In essence we have to do as they have done, infiltrate and reeducate. Failure to do so will be our undoing.

The Culture Changing Pop Tart....David Risselada

Does anyone remember the story of young Josh Welch being suspended from Park Elementary for biting a pop tart into a “gun shape?” As ludicrous as this may sound it is becoming a regular occurrence throughout our country. No, not kids biting pop tarts into gun shapes, but liberal administrators playing their part to change Americas culture of rugged individualism to a state of little pansy’s completely dependent upon the government. This was but the first of many examples where children are being exposed to the liberal ideology that demands pacificism and fear from its citizens. The very same week we saw another kid being sent home with reprimands because his mother put toy soldiers on his birthday cupcakes. The soldiers were frowned upon because they represent the “culture of violence” that everyone is now supposed to be afraid of. Interesting, I suppose these peace loving liberals would love to see the actual military put in its place as well, after all; how dare they use violence to protect the rights of liberals to be idiots?

I called this school to try to figure out why they would do something so stupid. This isn’t the first time I have tried to call out liberal insanity in our schools. I sent an email to the school in Texas suspending a Mexican American who refuses to swear allegiance to a Mexican flag and is demonstrating pride to be an American. I call the schools that ban clothing with the American flag. I have talked with school principals who ban pro U.S.A. chants at sporting events and every single time I get absolutely nowhere. Why? Two reasons I believe, one is that these people really hate America folks. Make no mistake about it. They really believe that freedom is bad and that mankind is incapable of self governing and making their own decisions. They hate the constitution; they hate the culture of individualism and most of all, I think they hate themselves. Isn’t that what we were taught when we were kids? Jealousy and hatred are internal problems that stem from our own insecurities? In other words liberals are afraid of guns so we all need to be too. Reason number two is because we are allowing them to get away with this. They do not see any reason to stop with this insanity. They think its fun. (Read your Saul Alinsky) I don’t think enough freedom loving Americans understand the attempts to “affect change” through the culture. If they keep enough of today’s young children petrified of firearms they become tomorrow’s “cultural change” legislators ready to impose more restrictions on our rights. The only thing is, they may not have to impose anything. By that time these kids may be willing to surrender them voluntarily. A recent high school graduate told me she had no idea what I was talking about when I mentioned the constitution and bill of rights. Do you think this school in Maryland is teaching Josh Welch the importance of the second amendment? Of course they’re not. The schools have taken on the role of the cultural change agent.

America, I have told you before that I have witnessed firsthand the leftwing radicalism that is today’s liberal university. Our students are being trained to change the culture from the inside just as Antonio Gramsci had once described. They are targeting our children in an attempt to get them to voluntarily surrender their rights because that is the only way that they can be taken, by teaching them the idea of natural rights is ludicrous and collective rights are better suited for today’s complex world. Yet we still sit and watch as the left gets closer and closer to its ultimate goal of a communist paradise. They have literally gotten away with rewriting the second amendment in a school text book.

When I called this school I asked the administrator on the other end if they could have possibly over reacted a bit. She insisted that they did what was necessary to keep the kids safe. When I asked her about the importance of teaching the bill of rights and the constitution she asked me what my point was. When I told her that these actions were a disgrace to the men and women who have died for her freedom she started getting angry and when I told her how foolish her school looked for doing such a thing she hung up on me. America, the culture has been changed and we are realizing it a day too late! The only way we can change it back is by having the willingness to employ the social activism tactics the left have been employing for years. We have to do what they do folks. Raise hell. We have to ensure that when our kids come home from public schools we are spending the necessary hours with them to undo what damage has been done. We have to drop political correctness at all costs and realize that the future of our families are tied to the future of the nation and her freedom, and that has to take precedence over everything else. If it doesn’t, don’t expect to win this culture war.

Sexualizing your Children with "Value Clarification Education"

Many people are currently becoming alarmed by the “common core” curriculum that is being shoved down our throats, and rightfully so. It is nothing but an attempt to standardize mediocrity in our nation and in essence dumb down the whole country into one standard curriculum. That curriculum has absolutely nothing to do with teaching children about American values and how to be successful; it teaches them to be good global citizens who are more concerned with creating a world of total equality, environmental awareness and sustainable development. Most people understand those words as being part of U.N. Agenda 21. With this comes the white privilege education we have been hearing about, but there is also something called heterosexual privilege. This is where as heterosexuals we are the beneficiaries of a system that acknowledges all the benefits of being involved with another person, as long as it is with the opposite sex. What we are seeing with this heterosexual privilege education is an attempt to normalize homosexuality and demonize all who oppose as being bigots, and the same radical tactics that have been used by legitimate civil right struggles are being used in a manner that is offensive to those that faced real discrimination. In case you haven’t heard there are great efforts underway to give the appearance that pedophilia is just another “normal sexual orientation” as well. The end goal, as I have written in an earlier article, is to make the homosexual agenda completely accepted by mainstream society and that includes sexual interaction with childrenhttp://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2012/02/pedophilia_is_normal_because_o.html
Across the country more and more schools are being exposed for teaching children very inappropriate and explicit information about sex, and at very young ages. In Wisconsin for example a first grade class was introduced to concepts that were not only inappropriate for first graders but had little to do with biological sex education. (Its o.k. for schools to teach legitimate sex ed, to a degree.) There has been a massive push by groups like NAMBLA and the Gay Lesbian Straight Educational Network to push homosexuality into our schools. In Fact, one of the leading members of GLSEN, Gerald Hannon has all but admitted a need to infiltrate our schools by saying that one of the biggest challenges the gay movement faces is recruiting young people to the movement. They were able to infiltrate by using words like homophobia, or using AIDS education as a cover. Let’s not forget Kevin Jennings, the safe school czar appointed by Obama who was a member of NAMBLA.  NAMBLA stands for North American Man Boy Love Association and one of their goals is to repeal the age of consent laws because they believe sex between men and boys is beneficial. This is according to Bruce Rind in his article entitled “A Meta analytical examination of assumed properties of child sexual abuse using college samples” which was published in 1998. Basically they are attempting to change our children’s morals and they are using the technique of values clarification to get them to challenge what they have been taught by you.
Values clarification is another tool used by the globalists to turn our children into good global socialists. Outcome and competency based education are other examples. Values clarification is designed explicitly to force children to challenge their beliefs and morals while causing a moral dilemma of sorts that coaxes them into looking at things through a different perspective. Once the moral breakdown has been accomplished they crush modesty and all inhibitions the student may have by exposing them to shocking images and films. This is why you have heard so much about students reading books about gay penguins and daddy having two boy roommates. They also employ humiliation tactics which shame a student for clinging to old ideas, like president Obama believing he can shame gun owners by calling us bitter clingers. Finally they encourage the student to engage in open, suggestive discussions about how they feel and voila! Techniques such as these are far more effective on innocent seven year olds that don’t even know the traditional definition of marriage. What they do understand however is fairness and their liberal teacher is more than happy to challenge their assertions about the fairness of two people who love each other not being able to get married. Here are some examples of what children are being exposed to in school.
“Testing your ability to function sexually and to give pleasure to another may be less threatening in the early teens with people of your own sex.”
Fisting often gets a bad rap. It usually isn’t
about the pain, not that we’re putting that
down . . . [It’s] to put you into an exploratory mode.
Another example includes a state funded school in North Carolina presenting a seminar called The New Gay Teenager and encouraged students to not only explore sexuality but to challenge the biblical notion of homosexuality as being wrong and misguided.
Relating all or this back to common core and agenda 21 we have to ask our self if there is even a darker purpose to all of this. There was a news report not too long ago that entailed a Planned Parenthood clinic describing unwanted pregnancy as the worst thing that can result from sexual behavior. Is all of this an attempt to regulate and reduce the human population? All of these kids growing up being indoctrinated into homosexuality while Planned Parenthood sets up clinics in their schools. That may border a little on the conspiratorial side however; so did the story of kids being forced to read about gay penguins in California years ago. We also know that there is a massive effort to keep the idea of abortions being an absolute right, and in fact that idea is being pushed to the limit as after birth abortions have been thrown into the mix. If we do not find a way to reverse this and take back the minds of our children they are not going to know the value and importance of honoring the gift of life.
Sources: Sprigg, P. Homosexuality in your children’s schools. Family research council

White Privilege Education and the Delphi Technique...David Risselada

I write a lot about white privilege and critical race theory. The reason for this is because as a student in the field of social work, I was told that I wasn't fit to work in the field because my views did not support these radical theories. As a matter of fact I was simply told that because I didn't believe in a world view that advocated social justice and wealth redistribution I wasn't fit to be a professional helper. My professor went on to explain that whole educational curriculum in social work education revolved around the idea of “white privilege” and I would likely have a hard time making it in the field. This is why I seem to be so consumed by the topic because I literally witnessed the methods used to indoctrinate people into this worldview and it was quite alarming. I drove my professor’s nuts because I never shut up and ultimately, I vowed to myself that I would let the world know what was going on.
The main technique they use is called the Delphi technique and it is quite effective. It is employed in many academic and business settings as well as the highest levels of government. It isn't specifically designed to push white privilege, but to get people to agree with what they normally may not agree with, or identify the non players and eliminate them. To be more specific it is designed to root out any and all opposition to liberalism, and it is so effective that I witnessed student after student line up and admit they hadn't realized just how racist they were until they were educated on the subject.
How does it work? The Delphi technique is a means of employing the Hegelian Dialectic. Putting two opposing factions against one another with the intent of reaching a predetermined conclusion; this conclusion is Marxist in origin. With this technique however you have a facilitator who is well trained in the Alinsky method, and psychological manipulation. This facilitator could be a teacher, a group leader, a democrat politician, you get the picture. The idea is for the facilitator to get everyone in groups and discuss the topic at hand. Up to this point there is a general consensus in which direction these discussions will go. (If you are a college student your bells should be ringing) The job of the facilitator is to identify those going against the “group think” mentality. They are looking for those strong, independently minded people who are grounded in their belief system that present any intention of being able to prove them wrong, essentially. Once this person is identified the humiliation tactics begin, the accusations start to fly, and they try to put you on the defensive to discredit you and your conservatism. (This has been my whole college experience)
How do you combat this? That’s the hard part and perhaps even harder is recognizing when it is being done to you. The most important thing to remember is not to let them put you in a defensive mode. That is the best gift you could give them. Stay calm and try to have fun because liberal socialist can be very easy to discredit because they have nothing that proves their theories work. Remember that at all times. What I liked to do was to think four or five steps ahead and be the first one to start asking questions. Think about the future consequences of whatever is being discussed and force the facilitator to answer those questions. (Perhaps that is why they tried to kick me out) Of course, once I realized what I was being taught I began educating myself. Be polite, be kind and realize you are putting your rear end on the line, but it has to be done or else ten years from now your 8 year old will be turning you in to the white privilege police for not wearing your racism sensitivity bracelet.

America, all of the drivel coming out of the media is the Delphi technique in action. Anytime some liberal news anchor goes on and on about you being racist and selfish, for the rich and against the poor they are forcing us into a corner awaiting the reaction. They are waiting for their opportunity to prove themselves to be the more enlightened among us as they so often do. The Delphi technique is being employed right now by Alinsky trained agitators with the intent of passing gun control legislation. The technique is so effective our fearless republican leaders are shaking in their boots in Washington D.C. because they are afraid of being called a racist and offending people that already hate their guts because of the Delphi technique. Let that sink in America!

White Privilege..White Slave?......David Risselada

Earlier this past year, The Public Department of Instruction in Wisconsin jumped on board the “white privilege, white male” choo choo train and teaching their students that it is unfair to be privileged with white skin. You have to be racist in the first place to think that because it implies that the pusher of this backwards ideology believes there is something unfair about being black. That’s the problem with moral relativism, it destroys simple truths that we grow up figuring to be common sense. Such as, for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. How about that? If it’s unfair to be white than that means whites must be better somehow and there is something fundamentally flawed about being black. Hey, don’t get mad at me, I have been fighting this false white privilege ideology for three years only to find out that people prefer to be treated like oppressed victims, even when they’re not.

Most of this white privilege education stems of course from the history of black slavery and black oppression throughout the 18th, 19th and early 20th centuries. In fact I have written many articles detailing the facts about the Democrat Party’s involvement in suppressing civil rights legislation, creating the Klu Klux Klan and implementing Jim Crow segregation laws , after decades of successful integration no less. I could go further by pointing out Woodrow Wilson, known for being Americas first fascist president was the one responsible for re-segregating what had already been desegregated. The unfortunate reality here is that we have all been lied to concerning slavery in America. I am not suggesting that blacks were not slaves, they were; however, they were viewed by the slave owners to be more valuable than the other slaves. The other slaves that arrived on American shores nearly a century before than any African slave had; the white slaves from Eastern Europe.

The word slave actually originates from the word slav, which is a term that used to be used to describe whites from Eastern Europe. Do you think that the professors at the University of Wisconsin, who are trying to convince your children to believe in critical race theory, will ever teach them that?

While history typically teaches us that black slaves were beaten, chained, murdered and raped by their evil white slave masters, it turns out that white slaves were enjoying some of these same privileges long before the black slaves arrived, as early as the 16th century even. In fact nearly half of all first arrivals to American shores were white slaves.

It was not uncommon for half of the slaves loaded onto the boats for the journey across the seas to be dead by the time they arrived because of the horrible conditions they endured. These conditions were equivalent, if not worse than those of the African Slaves in later years. Whites that were born into slavery were made into slaves just the same as blacks, and they remained enslaved for the duration of their entire lifespan, even when blacks were able to purchase their freedom. It was not uncommon to see black slave owners, and it was not uncommon to see free black men owning white slaves.

Many of these white slaves were also brought over from Australia, which of course was an exile of sorts for Britain’s criminals. The Walthom act of 1723 brought nearly 100,000 white slaves from Australia to American shores. Even before the voyage to the new world the poor working class of England often found themselves and their children being kidnapped and sold into slavery. In fact the origins of the word “kidnap” date back to these times and refers to children being sold into slavery.

Historically speaking these white slaves were generally referred to as indentured servants. If any academic discussion arises about white slaves they are sure to be referred to in this manner. The term indentured servant only serves to minimize the fact that whites were America’s first slaves and they were treated just as horribly, if not worse than the black slaves.

Can you imagine the possible ramifications of today’s social welfare policies if these truths were to be exposed in public education? The democrats would lose all power as blacks in America, having been taught the truth, not only about white slavery but their own amazing contributions to the shaping of this country, would truly be empowered. Right now black people in America might as well be wearing a noose as democrat politicians and a racist public education system seek to convince them that holding on to victimhood is far more beneficial for them than actually realizing their own amazing potential. White privilege is a part of something larger called Critical Race Theory which seeks to accuse innocent Americans for being racist for everything they do because our society supports discriminatory practices. I personally think that affirmative action is discriminatory because it teaches blacks and other minorities that they are not good enough to compete, so they need help from the democrat politicians. Affirmative action is a liberal democrat policy. Who’s the racist? Critical Race Theory also seeks to convince blacks that they need to hold onto their victim hood status and that success in America means little more than selling out to the white man’s ways. Is it any wonder they are disproportionately more impoverished?

What about those of us who have Eastern European ancestry? What special rights and privileges do we get to demand from the government?

Source: Hoffman, M. (1993) They were white and they were slaves. The untold history of the enslavement of whites in early America. Wiswell Ruffin House

Constitutional Militia......David Risselada

Thanks to the main stream media and anti gun political agendas the word militia is likely to have most running in fear. The word brings to mind images of ragtag red necked racists running around the woods with “machine guns” and swastikas. While there are certainly radical groups out there claiming to be militias; the concept of an organized militia derives its authority from the U.S. constitution for the purpose of maintaining liberty and defending the nation from hostile invasions. Article 1, Section 8, Clause 15 states that-
“The congress shall have the power to….provide for the calling forth of the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrection and repel invasion.”
According to Richard Henry Lee, the “militia,” when properly formed is made up of the people themselves and includes all men who are able to bear arms.  Put in the context of the U.S. constitution this makes sense because the idea of our republic is that the people are sovereign to government power and the government is a servant to the people. This could not be the case except for the first ten amendments to the U.S. constitution which are known as the bill of rights. Today it seems as if many people accept the idea that the federal government, through the supremacy clause has total power over the states. This is untrue, they only have supreme power over those laws that support the constitution and the tenth amendment explicitly states that-
All powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved to the states and the people, respectively. 
This supports the rights of the people to be armed and ready to act in defense of the nation. Many people today feel that the idea of militias and an armed citizenry is outdated and unnecessary because we have an Army. In fact many would argue that the National Guard is the constitutionally authorized militia. Not true, the reality is that the only constitutionally authorized military force to be funded and maintained by the government is the United States Navy. Article 1, Section 8, Clause 13
“The congress shall have the power to provide and maintain a Navy”
While Article 1, Section 8, Clause 12 states that-
“The congress shall have the power to raise and support armies, but no appropriations of money to that use shall be for more than two years.”
That means that the standing U.S. Army is in fact an unconstitutional entity receiving money illegally. The founders, at the time of signing the constitution understood that standing armies historically have been the greatest threat to the liberties of the people.  That is still true today as the tyrannies of the twentieth century saw the world’s most brutal dictators use their standing armies to commit mass murder on an unprecedented scale. At the time of course the founders would have been referring to the armies of Great Britain and the history of the Roman Empire as examples. This clause explicitly describes the congress’ responsibility to provide funding for the state militias while giving it a choice to provide for a “national military.” This is more evident by the actual wording of the second amendment. Not too many people realize that the second amendment is the only place in the constitution where the word “necessary” is found. The word is referring to the maintenance of the peoples militias.
The purpose of our constitutional republic based on the rule of law is to protect the sovereignty of the people, and ensure government did not have the power to suppress the rights of freemen.  Our constitution is not a granter of our natural rights, it only states what they are, while establishing a system of government where the power to protect those rights is derived from us, the people of the United States. Any law that is passed in direct contradiction to the constitution is null and void and people have no obligation to follow such laws. The precedent for this was established in Norton vs. Shelby County in 1886. http://www.ncrepublic.org/lib_unconstitutionalact.php Failure to understand this is essentially the only way a free people can lose their rights. This is why there is such an influence of the social and behavioral sciences colluding with government and education. They seek to psychologically condition you to surrender your rights out of fear and uncertainty.
The constitution describes the powers of the federal government as few and limiting in scope so as to ensure that the vast majority of political power would remain with the states and people, as described above in the Tenth amendment. When government abuses these powers the people are under no obligation to offer allegiance as the governments primary responsibility is the preservation of life, liberty, property and the people’s right to pursue their own ends, to pursue happiness. In fact, it is the responsibility of sovereign state governments to immediately enact laws that protect the constitutional rights of its citizens in the face of such usurpations. This includes but is not limited to laws concerning the constitutional militia and gun control. In fact, 1903 a law was passed that was to prohibit the federal government from ever trying to enact gun control laws based on this very reasoning. This was called the Dick Act of 1902. http://patriotaction.net/profiles/blogs/dick-act-of-1902-the
While the context of this article will certainly appear radical to many, it doesn't change the historical facts presented.

Why Does the Government Mistrust its Own Citizens?

"A government that does not trust its law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms is itself unworthy of trust."
James Madison
I find this to be very true. I think it is safe to say that the reason they do not trust us with guns is because they have sold us down the river and they know it. The best example I can give to illustrate this truth is just a simple examination of human relationships. What do you care about the guns your neighbor owns? Nothing because you know in your heart and soul you have done nothing to wrong that person. (Let’s leave the insane criminals out of this equation for a moment) Only when one has taken an action against the interests of another is there an inherent mistrust formed. This has little to do with mass shootings and the mainstream and politicians know it. You have to be a fool to not understand the presence of guns in the hands of the good guys would have prevented the tragedy at Sandy Hook or others like it. Gun control kills and the politicians advocating for gun control will do all in their power to keep you from knowing the truth.
They know the guns will stay in the hands of the criminals, look at the people running our government. They want guns in the hands of criminals because they themselves are criminals. Don’t people have an inherent tendency to congregate with their own kind? This comes down to fear. They know full well our second amendment was written to prevent tyranny. They have to convince people to turn against their own self interest in order to protect theirs. In order to be able to physically disarm us they have to first psychologically disarm us. Fortunately this is still the United States of America and people understand that the right to freedom is God given and the second amendment is written not to grant us freedom but to restrict the government’s power to take it away. The second amendment binds the hands of government and frees the hands of those they would seek to enslave. In order to get this message out people must break free from the grips of political correctness that have grasped the nation.
While we have the majority in numbers and spirit, in activism and direct action we are by far the minority. Understand that right now as you speak your child or grandchild who is attending a public university is being taught that activism, direct action and advocacy are the best methods of affecting social change. They are learning that Saul Alinsky’s radical tactics are appropriate methods for doing this. They are being trained to believe the country we love so dearly is an oppressive war mongering machine as was the desired tactic of the communists in the document known as the Communist peace offensive. At your expense our children are actually learning techniques such as social deviance, and staging mass protests in order to fight for a cause they can’t even describe. I witnessed firsthand our public universities aiding the formation of a local “Occupy Protest".” I say that if these are the methods they are so willing to teach to our kids while keeping them dumbed down to the truth than these are the methods we employ to teach the truth. Failure to do so will lead to our own demise.
If we are not willing to adapt to such methods for love of country when the opposition is willing to push the envelope to its extreme limits out of dire hatred, what chance do we have? Do we have to have an armed insurrection? No, that would be playing right into their hands and aid in their efforts to disarm us because that is the trap they have set. Let them be the aggressors. We simply have to get every red blooded American that has ever been afraid to say what is on their mind for fear of appearing politically incorrect to stand up and say NO MORE. Any thought of successfully winning this struggle is all but destroyed if we cant even muster the resistance to say no. I am quite certain that there enough Americans that still cherish the ideals of liberty. We need every red blooded American to take the argument to the streets and humiliate every self indignant liberal who takes offense to our very presence with facts that cannot be argued with. Thinking people will listen. Most of all this has to be done with the same attitude that liberals and socialist spread their filth. It has to be done no matter the cost. If you are not willing to stand for truth out of fear, than fear has already won and you are a slave. If love for children’s future and freedom cannot motivate you, then all will be lost.

Monday, December 30, 2013

Unshakable Convictions....David Risselada

In the film “Agenda, Grinding America Down” http://vimeo.com/63749370 the narrator does a fantastic job of detailing the one hundred year plan to transform the culture of the United States. Focusing on the social science of instilling tyranny, he describes the mindset of those that believe human beings can be conditioned to believe what they are programmed to and trained to exhibit “desirable” behaviors. In other words, social science is Godless and views mankind strictly through a Darwinian/Marxist worldview. One quote the Narrator mentions is pretty telling concerning the social science approach to understanding human behavior. This quote is by Bertrand Russell, who incidentally had a tremendous influence on how education is now approached. He believed that freewill should be trained out of individuals while being educated; he believed this because he was a communist. The quote is as follows, “The social psychologist of the future will have a number of classes of school children on whom they will try different methods of producing an unshakable conviction that snow is black.” This can be seen here http://www.whale.to/b/russell_h.html.

In some indirect ways this has to be viewed as absolute proof of a socialist agenda. Basically what these people are saying is that they believe they are able to create any type of society they wish simply by controlling what individuals in society are taught at the earliest of ages. Today we live in a world where our education system seeks to teach that America has been the world’s oppressor and the only way to rectify this is to accept the transformation to collectivism as opposed to individualism. Individualism is greedy and selfish we are now taught. Correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t it individualism that made the United States the power house of a nation it once was? This isn’t really what the article is about but you can see the significance of such a belief and the effects propaganda can have on a society. In my last article where I discussed the discrediting of our constitution the point was made that by foregoing an education concerning the constitution, and referring to it as something that is a hindrance to progress, the communists have effectively discredited it in the minds of many.

What I think is far more significant here is the fact that we have generations of black Americans who are still to this day, being taught that they live in an oppressive society where the white man is their oppressor. Actually, if you have majored in any liberal arts degree lately you would know that the white man is everyone’s oppressor, but we can discuss that later. This is a topic that I have spent a great deal of time writing about because I believe it is a tactic designed explicitly to cause hate and discontent in order to collapse our society and instill a despotic tyranny.

Stop and think a moment, if social scientists such as this Bertrand Russell really believed they could produce an unshakable conviction that snow is black than why haven’t they taught the black man that they are just as capable of achieving success as white men? Why not teach them that they have been freed from slavery and the United States is one of the only places in the world where they can pursue their dreams the same as any other? If they can convince them snow is black, surely they can get people who live in a free society, that desires to be colorblind no less, to believe that they are free? This question kind of puts things into perspective doesn’t it?

Instead of teaching them that they are free they have waged a relentless campaign teaching them that they are oppressed and in need of special “class protection” from the government in order to even have a chance of making it in this racist, oppressive society. If you look across the country you will see democrats have controlled the most impoverished cities for decades. http://www.topix.com/forum/city/bellefontaine-oh/TJGDJSMI6P1NL7NDB These are the same democrats that blacks vote for time and time again because they have been trained to have an unshakable conviction that Republicans are racist and only care about money. My friends, I have witnessed this type of education myself. I have seen a real concerted effort to reinforce in the Universities I attended (OU and NSU) the idea that America is racist and any disagreement with our first black president equates with racism.

This all goes back to the belief that we are simply empty vessels that can be programmed. It comes from the Darwinian worldview that man is but another species of animal in need of management and training. Bertrand Russell’s goal of destroying free will is essential in the pursuit of a collective society because free will allows an individual to think “individually” from the rest of the collective. We have free will per Gods design, which means as long as we are aware of our free will we will use it to seek guidance from a higher source than the state. In a collective society the state must reign supreme.

Communists believe that evolution occurs through conflict. They believe that man can be perfected through “created, artificial conflicts,” by deliberately teaching one class of people that they continue to be oppressed by another, the stage for conflict is being set. This is evident by the fact that they believe they can condition anyone to believe anything. If they truly desired peace and wanted what was best for everyone, an unshakable conviction that the slave history of the United States is all but over and it was the Republican Party that ended it would be taught. All they have to do to accomplish this is teach the truth. As you well know, the truth has no place in the minds of liberals.

Contextual Analysis of the Communist Goals......David Risselada

29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
13. Do away with all loyalty oaths
17. Get Control of the Schools. Use Them as Transmission Belts for Socialism and Current Communist Propaganda. Get Control of Teachers Associations. Put the Party Line in Text Books.

Most of us are beyond fed up with elected officials who swear an oath to uphold and defend the constitution only to watch them stomp all over it. It’s as if oaths have absolutely no meaning to them whatsoever. Why should they? Taking an oath to uphold something is to acknowledge that there is something above you, a greater power if you will that you acknowledge is higher than yourself. Communists, socialists,and collectivists in general don’t believe in anything higher than humanism and moral relativism, so why would they care to uphold an oath to a constitution that guarantees freedom? Besides that it gets in the way of their agenda. Would it shock you to know that one of the  45 declared goals of the communist party is the doing away of all loyalty oaths? Remember, communists need you to lose hope. What better way to get you to lose faith in the system than to watch people you vote for continually violate their oath of office? Eventually, (and it is happening already) an argument would have to be made against the constitution itself because the reason people violate their oath is the constitution "stands in their way" of doing what’s right.  They claim that there argument is so moral and that their intentions are so good that the constitution itself has become the oppressor as it stands in the way of creating the perfect paradise.
How many times have you heard President Obama claim the system that the founders put in place was standing in his way since he has been in office? Take note of the last sentence of goal number 29 stated above.  Over the past year we have seen China issue a report calling our 2nd amendment a threat to human rights http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/foreign-policy/item/11615-communist-china-blasts-second-amendment-us-human-rights-record and  we have witnessed President Obama blame Mexican drug cartel violence on the 2nd amendment. http://www.naturalnews.com/040239_mexico_gun_violence_fast_and_furious.html 
 Discrediting the constitution has become a global game folks because it is the last stronghold of freedom in the world. The goal is to give the illusion that our right to keep and bear arms is an impediment to the ongoing attempts to bring safety to a violent world. Remember, Dostoevsky (quoted in Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals) said that people will accept anything in place of the current system if they feel hopeless enough. The goals of the left are to present our constitution as something that promotes violence and world conquest. This is why there is so much emphasis on the first and second amendments; these are the two amendments that provide the framework for the entire notion of a free society. By making people believe they have a right to not be “offended,” they discredit the first amendment. By whipping up fear and discontent, they give the impression that the second amendment is the reason there is so much violence.
 These goals, in my opinion do a lot to explain why we have kids walking around in a virtual la-la land, totally clueless about who they are, or why they live in a “free country.” The funny thing about the constitution is that it fits in your back pocket almost unnoticed. It takes a half hour to read and yet people have been “brainwashed” into believing a 2500 page health care law that was never read is the better alternative. This is the effectiveness of communist propaganda. Just to develop the mindset of where we are as a nation educated about the constitution, a college student once told me he wouldn’t read it because it was too long and too complicated.  
While many conservatives would argue that there is reason for hope and optimism amid the colossal failure of Obamacare; without attempting to be too pessimistic I have to ask; what difference has this made? Sure, many people are awakening to the dangers we face created by this administration, and many others are realizing that president Obama has broken one promise after another, this does not change the fact however; that many of the presidents newly found critics are upset because they believe him to be “too conservative.” http://www.imdb.com/news/ni56570412/ If they are defining conservative in their sense the way they define it for us; “being too rigid and unwilling to accept new ideas” then I whole heatedly agree, Barrack Obama is too conservative.  I think you realize that this is not what is meant by conservative. They feel that he has not gone far enough to the left. To further demonstrate my point, many people believe that the Democrats are in full panic mode and are in dire fear of their political careers due to their support of Obamacare. If this is the case then how do you explain a republican controlled house capitulating to liberal demands instead of fighting for the principles they were elected to uphold?
The goal of discrediting the constitution has been so successful for the communists that for many people, not only is returning to constitutional governance not an alternative, many people simply don’t know what the constitution says. We can thank the public education system for this. It matters little that people are awakening to the destruction of our nation while the education system continues to teach our children to be willing accomplices in its destruction. Schools are politically correct houses of terror as they do little but teach kids how to act on emotional response and care more about offending someone than standing for truth. Our kids are being inundated with anti second amendment propaganda that in a generation or two we will see people voluntarily surrendering their firearms. In fact, the second amendment has been rewritten in some high school textbooks to give the impression that only government can possess firearms. http://www.themainewire.com/2013/09/high-school-textbook-rewrites-amendment/ The goal of taking control of our schools is one the communists have fulfilled very effectively. 
As you can see, if we don’t do something to take back our education system it will not matter how many patriotic up-swellings there are because the communists will just be educating another generation of usefull idiots.  By discrediting our constitution as an impediment  to “progress” they are enlisting the help of those who have been indoctrinated to believe that  solutions to our problems can only be achieved by subverting and avoiding our constitution as opposed to governing by it.

Saturday, December 28, 2013

Total Equality and the Approaching Paradise......David Risselada

As a student in the social sciences I once had a professor who claimed that through the field of social work a Utopian paradise could be created. One in which all people were totally equal and no one experienced any discrimination, we were all equally prosperous thanks to left wing redistribution and of course, we all lived happily ever after in this liberal la-la land. The desire to create this utopia was driven by their belief that the United States is the world’s oppressor where the desire for riches and prestige rule the hearts of our “white male” dominated society.  In fact through five years of so called higher education I never heard one reference to the United States being a free country where equality meant one individual was as free to pursue that which made him happy as another. The right to “pursue” happiness is not good enough for America’s left wing; they feel they have the ability to force their version of happiness upon us. They believe that by forcing their ideas of what it means to live in a free society, their ideas of what it means to live in a society where all men are created equal they will be bring us to this promised utopia where there is no suffering because there is no competition. There is no need to be the best because we are the same. It’s as if the left has this deeply embedded disdain for the U.S. because we have been the world’s richest nation, the world’s greatest superpower; though Rush Limbaugh has said this on numerous occasions it can’t be said enough.  The left wing liberals in this country believe that we have acquired this status unfairly by oppressing the rest of the world.  You don’t need to listen to Rush to realize the depth of this reality, just major in liberal arts at your local university.
How is this journey to utopia working out for us? How well are the Marxists actually implementing policies that will see us to this egalitarian paradise? Every day we see the debate rage between conservatism and liberalism and the liberals, seem for all practical purposes, to be winning the debate because they hide behind one key word that they claim all of their policies are based on. It doesn't even matter how much of a dismal failure they are, this one word allows them to hide behind their failures time and time again. This one word is compassion. They claim that the good intentions behind their policies are what are really important no matter how badly they have failed or are hurting other people, and the liberals that support these types of politicians eat it up over and over. By teaching the leftist worldview in our Universities and by using teaching methods that draw on emotions and use words that draw reactions, the left ensures that its voting base will remain ignorant to the facts at hand and will make decisions based on feelings instead of logic. This is exactly how the left is still able to convince a vast number of Americans that their health care law is good and not an abysmal failure. Again, the question must be asked; how is this working for us?
No where has this never ending quest for total equality been more prevalent than the feminist movement. By making the claim that the world we live in is a male dominated society where men view women as nothing more than “objects” to project their desires upon, the left has been able to make great progress in fundamentally transforming the world in which we live.  To be clear, there is nothing wrong with a woman expecting to be paid the same as men if they are performing the same job. This isn’t the type of feminism I am speaking of. I am speaking of the type that virtually turns women against their very purpose, and that is being a mother to their children. The left wing communists in our society have turned motherhood into one of the methods by which the male dominated society oppresses women. It’s been a very successful tactic as well. This is evident by the sheer number of women fighting for their rights to be able to murder their unborn children. This is kind of akin to the arguments I have made concerning white privilege and so called “reverse racism.” Here, I am simply suggesting that a women’s role as mother in our society has traditionally been a cherished one, yet as I argue this point, women are demanding the unimpeded right to abortion. According to liberal logic, my view of women is oppressive while their view of abortion and breaking free form the stereotypical role women are expected to play is liberating. The left has been able to accomplish this by using terms like “gender oppression” and “societal norms.”
What many women who have found themselves enamored by the feminist movement fail to realize is that it was started as a communist plot specifically designed to destroy the traditional, nuclear family structure.  The left has long known that the easiest way to break our moral compass is to destroy the nuclear family. By using tactics that convince women to view themselves as oppressed victims, the communists created a lifelong ally in their fight to fundamentally transform the United States. Betty Friedan is known to be the founder of the feminist movement and she was an avowed communist who had many ties to the activities of The Communist Party in the United States. Her book, “The Feminist Mystique” sold millions of copies by convincing women that their lives were little more than “comfortable concentration camps” in which they were the victims of oppression in a sexist, male dominated society. www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1037115/posts This is all being done in the name of equality and compassion for societies lesser privileged citizens of course.
How well is this working out for us? Where has this insane ideology brought us? Well it can certainly be argued that the traditional idea of mom and dad having separate but equal roles to play in raising children has all but been destroyed.  The virtue that went along with being a respectable mother is now nothing but a laughing stock as many of today’s women are more likely to seek abortion clinics upon hearing that they are pregnant and finally this attempt to gain a complete equal footing with men is putting the lives of many women in danger as our military is being forced by the feminists in our government to drop their standards and allow women to serve in the infantry and special forces. http://cnsnews.com/news/article/barbara-boland/female-marines-not-required-do-1-pull The Marine Corps announced this week that a vast majority of their female recruits can’t even do one pull-up. By January first of 2014 female marine recruits were supposed to be able to complete three full pull ups by the end of basic training. This deadline has been delayed because of their failure to do so. Look, I am not saying that there aren't female marines who can’t compete with men, believe me, when I was a marine I knew a few hard core female marines. This doesn't change the fact that most women cannot; and by forcing this socially engineered equality upon us they are endangering the lives of not only the females who can’t meet the standards, but those that have to serve with them as well. What about the children of women who join the service as a means of supporting their families? How compassionate is it to send a woman who can’t do one pull up into a combat zone?  There are those out there who would call me a male chauvinist simply for asking such a question. The liberals call this utopia, they call this equality.
Like so many other liberal programs that are designed to bring societies oppressed victims on equal footing with their white male oppressors, this one is destined to fail. Of course, once you understand that it is designed to fail it makes more sense. By continually teaching Americans they are oppressed victims they are able to bring them to the table and accept radical new ideas that convince them they are aiding in the creation of the promised communist utopia.

Hate Crime legislation....Racial Identity Politics and the Lefts Institutional Racism......David Risselada

In 2009 Eric Holder went on record and testified before a Senate judiciary Committee. The testimony was shocking to say the least and could have very well changed the way that laws are enforced in our country. Eric Holder, on that 25th of June proclaimed that the new hate crime legislation would not protect “white people” or “Christian ministers.”  Generally speaking a hate crime is defined as a targeted attack against an individual or groups based on characteristics such as race, religion, ethnicity and now even sexual orientation. Eric Holder, while being grilled by the committee maintained his position by stating that the new legislation was written to protect those that have historically been oppressed and targeted because of skin color or religious affiliation, giving African Americans and Jews as examples. When asked some simple question pertaining to how the laws would be enforced Mr. Holder stumbled over himself a bit as he struggled to justify his reasoning. One question posed to him involved a preacher being violently attacked by a homosexual militant because of the preacher’s sermon on homosexuality. While a crime such as this would certainly be motivated by hatred and focuses on religious beliefs as a motive, Holder refused to call that a “hate crime.” The reason for that is simple if you understand “white privilege” and “social justice” education. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOABBn5Tnm0
Just as a reminder, “white privilege” education means your children are currently or will be taught that white men are the beneficiaries of a system that is biased towards and only benefits them. As a result, white men, knowingly or not, are automatically contributing to the oppression of the minorities in the United States. This mentality is also the premise of multiculturalism. Social justice is just another nice sounding term that essentially means taking from those that earned and giving to those who haven’t. When you look at the heart of what this doctrine is actually saying is that only white people can be racist because we have the power of the institutions behind us to reinforce our discriminatory behavior, while minorities do not. Therefore minorities cannot be racist; they can not commit crimes based on racism. Wouldn't protecting minorities with hate crime legislation that doesn't apply to whites be an example of having an “institutional power” behind you?
Throughout the course of the past couple years we have been witness to a shocking rise in racial violence. Through flash mob‘s or the so called knockout game, blacks have been systematically targeting helpless white victims. Through “white privilege education” and “critical race theory” the left would have you believe that these incidents result from years of systematic, institutional oppression in which the victims can no longer control themselves. They would argue that the violent actions of a few teenagers towards a helpless old man are justified due to the “historical oppression” their people have had to face. This is a premise of critical race theory. This is why these people are not prosecuted under hate crimes legislation even though the first white man recently busted playing the knock out game will be. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/dec/26/federal-authorities-charge-white-knockout-suspect-/
You have to wonder if this theory does more to de-humanize the black population than it does offer an excuse for their behavior. The theory itself definitely excuses the behavior but at what cost? By justifying these crimes based on a dead history that we as Americans have done everything we can to rectify,(affirmative action, welfare programs, hate crime legislation) is the left actually telling society that blacks are less than human who are unable to live up to the consequences of their actions, or deal with their anger in a different way? Being human means learning from our mistakes and dealing with our emotional issues; and by doing so we can expect to grow and become stronger people. Are the proponents of white privilege and critical race theory denying this opportunity to black Americans by making them believe they are still being victimized? You only have to look at the disastrous results of other left wing equality programs like affirmative action or the Great Society welfare programs to see what happens when liberals interfere. Today the vast majority of black families are fatherless and impoverished as a result of failed liberal promises. In an attempt to hide this failure the left ridicules all successful black Americans as being Uncle Tom’s or sellouts, while continuing to discredit white America for having a society based on institutional racism.
Let me demonstrate this using another example. The left initially claimed that the Benghazi attacks of Sept. 11 2012 were the result of an offensive video and because the video was offensive to the Muslim culture we were supposed to accept their response to it. Really, what the left wants us to accept is that the Muslim culture is so immature and so sensitive that the only way they can respond to something offensive is through senseless violence? We are supposed to view them with compassion and understanding while the left justifies their actions because they were offended? Again, this attempt at reverse psychology, in my opinion, does more to harm the Muslim population by excusing their murderous attitudes than it does to make us feel sorry for them. This is the backwards world of liberalism we live in today.
The institutional racism that is built in our society is the responsibility of the left. Throughout history it has been the democrats who have supported segregation and slavery while continuously voting against civil rights legislation. Today, they attempt to hide their history through racial identity politics, and the creation of a system where inequality is the new equality. By creating laws based on racial preferences the left is telling minorities that they believe they are not as capable as white men and therefore need their programs in order to stand a chance in the racist United States of America. This does little but reinforce hatred while attempting to justify black on white violence. This also solidifies an existing entitlement mentality where there is no need to work as everything will be provided by the government. This backwards thinking is destroying generations of families and the left calls it compassion. It is also setting a dangerous precedent where the definition of racism is radically changed. Through the lens of liberalism racism now means believing that blacks in America can achieve something without their help. The insistence that black American's need these programs is evidence enough of the racist attitudes of the left, only by believing that blacks are not equal would they have the audacity to create such a system of racial preferences. 

Thursday, December 26, 2013

Destroying the Individual in Pursuit of the Welfare State......David Risselada

Most of us seem to understand the damaging effects of an over bloated welfare state that pays people to become lazy instead of forcing them to find a job. Our current system is understood by many trapped in its endless cycle of dependency to be ineffective, as gains of finding employment or getting a raise usually result in a loss of needed benefits. This results in a loss of motivation on the part of people who are trapped in the system because whatever gains have been made are often not enough to make losing the benefits worth it, so they forego the advancement in favor of continued benefits. This is where the initiative is destroyed and people become content with living a life of government dependence. As someone educated in the social service field I would view this as being one of the most important issues that America needs to solve, moving people from dependence to independence. I can say with a great deal of confidence based on the way my conservative ideas have been treated in the academic environment that this is not the goal. At this point I am convinced we are witnessing the Cloward & Piven Plan in action. For those who may be unfamiliar with the Cloward & Piven Plan, I will explain it to you. Frances Fox Piven and Richard Cloward, both professors at Columbia university, wrote a plan that would aid in Americas transformation from capitalism to socialism. The paper was entitled “The Weight of the Poor: A Strategy to end Poverty” which can be viewed here. http://www.thenation.com/article/weight-poor-strategy-end-poverty#  This strategy essentially calls for the creation of a welfare state where everyone is entitled to some form of government welfare. The idea was to destroy the economy to the point where government would be obligated to provide an annual income for everyone. It can be said with little doubt that our universities, which are teaching “social justice education” are aiding in the creation of the Cloward and Piven plan. After all social justice means little else than the redistribution of wealth from those who have earned it to those who have not. In fact, the actual definition of social justice is ensuring that everyone is entitled to an equal distribution of society’s recourses.
I have spent a great deal of the past five years engaging liberal professors on welfare policy. I simply sought to find out how anyone could believe taking money out of the private sector to pay people not to work could benefit society. The college environment is ripe with people who view America as an “oppressive meritocracy.” This means that people with abilities to accomplish their dreams are oppressing the rest of society. Socialist professors seek to teach your children that applying themselves leads to unfairness and unequal distribution of wealth. If you would stop and think a moment you would realize this is where the idea that everyone should get a trophy for playing comes from. This is why some high schools across the country are eliminating their valedictorian programs. In order to create a society where everyone is completely equal, the belief that people can achieve must be done away with. Only by destroying the initiative of the individual can the necessary conditions be created where everyone will accept the idea of socialism. This is all being done in the name of fairness by people who claim to not only be enlightened, but also intellectually superior and compassionate. How compassionate is it to ensure people are dependent on a government that can’t manage its own finances? If these people were so intellectually superior wouldn’t they realize that trying collective policies, that when implemented in other countries lead to the deaths of millions, will only lead to disaster here?
 Right now as it stands the United States currently brings in 5.6 trillion dollars from tax revenue. Yet we spent 6.3 trillion dollars for fiscal year 2013 folks, and no one seems all that concerned about it. Of that sum of money 422,000,000,000 dollars was spent on welfare. That is roughly 34% of the gross domestic product, which is $14,219,300,000,000. Most college students majoring in the social services could not even tell you what the GDP is.  They are just being trained to believe in social justice, which, as mentioned earlier, is nothing less than wealth re-distribution. It just goes to show the ill effects of socialism and social justice education. By training people to hate capitalism and embrace the welfare state they are actually creating a society that will not have the means to sustain itself. The day will come when there will be millions the government can no longer afford to sustain. What will these compassionate people advocating a transformation to socialism do then? What will it take to get them to listen?
Actually the majority of the money being spent on welfare is being eaten up by the administrative state that oversees the implementation of wealth redistribution. In other words the wealth is being redistributed to the government bureaucracy that takes the money from us in the first place. The cost of welfare per day is roughly 168 dollars per family drawing benefits. That’s compared to a median income of a working family of 137 a day. http://www.budget.senate.gov/republican/public/index.cfm/budget-background?ID=f1f23669-79fb-4a25-bafc-6a28f82f9c75 How can a nation sustain itself when those not working are burning through more money than those that earn it? This figure doesn't even account for the cost of administering this system, which only drains more money from the private sector. Liberals supporting the welfare state just do not seem to understand that you cannot build up the poor by breaking down the abilities of those that know how to create wealth. I am not a rich man, I know nothing of how to run a business but I do know that if we did not live in a capitalistic society there would be no money to help anyone. People in the helping professions, if they really believed in empowering people would believe in conservative politics and capitalism.
One of the other aspects of this that has intrigued me over the years is the realization that there is a deserving poor out there that is unable to take care of themselves, and have no reasonable expectation to lead an independent life. This could be due to mental illness or physical disability or even mental retardation. It would be expected that the nation provide the means to help those in need that fall into this category. I personally believe that the homeless children should not have to go bed hungry, and that society has a certain obligation to take care of its children. These issues again demand that welfare policy be examined through the eyes of conservatives who understand economics and believe in the human spirit. With an over bloated welfare state that indiscriminately gives money to anyone there is a huge risk that needed resources are being spent needlessly and that someone who truly needs them could be going with less than what they deserve. This is the unintended consequence of allowing our welfare system to get so out of control. In the 48 year period since 1965 the United States government has spent 16 trillion dollars trying to alleviate poverty through means tested welfare programs, only to see poverty increase by one percent and the welfare rolls grow dramatically.  Nearly 50 million American are now drawing food stamps.

Welfare has done nothing but destroy the initiative of generations of Americans. Our nation continues to decline and we are seeing more and more people fall into the cycle of government dependency. Most of them will not look for work because the economy is not producing any. The jobs that are being created will only result in a loss of livelihood by those now enjoying the benefit of living off the backs of those paying into the system. It is way past time that these issues be reexamined and we divert welfare spending to those who really need it and start teaching personal responsibility to those who can learn it. I would suggest that young conservatives get involved in welfare policy and start to reeducate on the issues at hand. As I have said before this would put us in a position to directly affect the lives that if left in the hands of liberals will end up in a cycle of dependency, thus contributing to the continuing decline of our nation. 

Tuesday, December 24, 2013

Liberty Warriors Poem.....David Risselada

Liberty dies with tears of sorrow….

As foolish hearts forsake tomorrow

Frantically…desperately the truth we spread

Falling on ears of the spiritually dead…….

Liberty dies and free men cry.

Freedom dies with tears of pain….

For nothing now will be the same

Hope and change is the song they sang

To the reoccurring bells the reaper rang….

A man’s soul dies, tears dropping from his eye.

Liberty dies from lies that frighten….

Promises made to fools enlightened

Drawing ever oh so near……

The end of all we hold so dear

Liberty dies with the chill of fright….

As tears of anger fall tonight

For freedom dies not on this day…..

As freemen rise in tyranny’s way

Monday, December 23, 2013

Justifying the Death of Innocence.....David Risselada

How safe are we in our own country when people can justify killing a newborn baby simply because it is an inconvenience? Wouldn't that signify that we have crossed some morally reprehensible line where we are saying we have no value at all for the sanctity of human life? Where will we draw the line and say no more? Earlier this year, representatives from Planned Parenthood, (who else) had testified before the congress that they believe mothers who were attempting to have an abortion should retain their rights to kill that baby should it survive the procedure ,and still be born. How have we reached a point where the life of a baby comes second to the convenience of the mother? Over the past 40 years fifty million babies have been aborted and we have been inundated with abortion rights under the guise of it being a woman’s health issue or a women’s right to choose.  The only thing it has done is incrementally change the way we view human life. Our kids are currently being introduced to explicit sexual education where promiscuous sexual behavior is encouraged and homosexuality exploration is viewed in a positive light. Lacking from this education is the responsibility required to engage in such behavior and the fact that abortion has become such a wide spread, accepted practice there is no need to take responsibility. Oh how far we have strayed.
It’s not surprising to see Planned Parenthood advocate for such things. They are known for being the biggest advocates for unrestricted abortion rights for anyone. In some states, because of Planned Parenthood, girls as young as 13 can have an abortion with no legal requirements to contact the parents. Planned Parenthood representatives will also be establishing themselves in clinics in our public schools starting next year. This is according to Chelsea Schilling at (http://www.wnd.com/2009/09/109450/) where she cites parts of President Obama’s health care bill as establishing the authority and funding for them to do so. We have to remember that Planned Parenthood was founded by a eugenist by the name of Margaret Sanger whose primary goal was to use abortion to eradicate the black population, in fact these are her own words concerning blacks, immigrants and poor people.
..human weeds,' 'reckless breeders,' 'spawning... human beings who never should have been born."  Margaret Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, referring to immigrants and poor people   (http://www.dianedew.com/sanger.ht)
This is the founder of Planned Parenthood. She goes on to say that she believes married couples should be forced to apply for a permit to procreate to ensure they will not produce what she referred to as degenerates.
The idea of live birth abortions is originating in Europe. As is usually the case what happens across the pond will generally find its way over here. Alberto Grubilini and Francesca Minerva argue in The Journal of Medical Ethics that new born babies should not be viewed as human beings because they lack the characteristics and life experience that generally makes one a “person.” They go further by saying that personhood is generally defined by what the person is able to contribute to their own existence without becoming a burden on another. In this case babies are completely dependent upon the parents therefore they cannot contribute and are not considered people. They also argue that parents should be able to kill their children if they are mentally ill or present some form of inconvenience to the parent. (www.telegraph.co.uk/health) If they can justify that sort of mentality for the most innocent members of society where does it stop? Surely this has the potential to lead to the dehumanization of millions if not the justification of mass genocide of those that someone else defines as being useless. Conservative white males perhaps?
President Obama, as an Illinois state senator also made it perfectly clear that he is just fine with the after birth abortions. He continually voted to suppress pro life bills and was the only state senator to vote against The Born Alive Infant Protection Act which was introduced specifically to protect the life of babies who had survived botched abortion attempts. In fact in stating his position he argued on the senate floor that babies who had survived abortion attempts and lay on the hospital bed with their hearts beating and lungs pumping should not be considered people. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2060118/posts
This makes sense as we have witnessed a shocking campaign of those advocating for Obamacare push the issue of abortion rights to the point of forcing people against their own conscience to cover abortions under their health care plans, particularly in religious organizations. This is a blatant attack on the fundamentals of religious freedom and the conscience of mankind. Yet somehow people see this as being acceptable? What does this say about the way the government will value your life or the life of future generations? If you can justify the death of a baby and find the coldness in your veins to do so you can justify the death of anyone for any reason. As Planned Parenthood continues to advocate for full, live birth abortion rights remember that they may be setting up shop in your school and have access to your children very soon.

Analyzing the Stated Goals of The Communist Party....David Risselada

Many people understand that when you are talking about liberals or political progressives (or regressives as my friend calls them) you are really talking about communists. Communists have been practicing the same rigid ideology while hiding behind new terms such as progressive and liberal for nearly a century. Today’s liberals have developed an array of effective, pragmatic strategies that convince many people that they are only concerned about peace, fairness and what’s best for the “greater good.” The best example is the way in which the United States seems to have taken an all out appeasement approach when it comes to dealing with Muslims. Only in a world infected with liberalism can we have people who attack us being treated better that people who swear an oath to protect us. This is a perfect example of a very sophisticated “Alinsky” style attack on our values of religious freedom. While most see this foreign policy approach as foolish at best, the useful idiots of our day seem to believe that this appeasement will eventually win the hearts and minds of Muslims and we can learn to “coexist.” We can coexist alright as long as you don’t mind your wife donning a Burka every morning. Others understand this appeasement strategy for what it is; a plan to bring the U.S. in line with the goals of global governance.

To see this with more clarity it is important to understand the goals and history of communism. It is understood by most that Vladimir Lenin had a vision of instituting a global communist government, and to bring the United States in line with this much would have to be done to break our spirituality and morality. Many communists believed that a violent revolutionary approach was needed; however, Lenin thought that this was the wrong approach and looked to infiltrate our political and educational systems believing that socialism would eventually prevail over capitalism. This is known as Fabian socialism or incrementalism, boiling the frog slowly in the pot in other words. Much could be discussed here from Marx and Darwin to Antonio Gramsci, to the Frankfort school of social research which developed Gramscis vision of cultural Marxism. What I would like to focus on is the 45 declared goals of the Communist takeover of the U.S. which was actually presented before the House of Representatives in 1963. To see these goals listed in their entirety is one thing, but to think about the level in which some of them have been reached is another. (You can also view these goals here at the Radical Conservative by scrolling down the right side of the page.)

Before I dive into the first three goals that will be discussed I want to remind the reader that a great deal of socialism/communism revolves around the issues of mental health, psychology and human behavior. The tyrannies of the twentieth century which killed so many were a deadly mix of Darwin’s Godlessness and Marx’s theories on economics with a little operant and classical conditioning thrown into the mix by the dog guy, Ivan Pavlov. Communists essentially believe that man is perfectible and through the tyranny of social science they believe they can root out societies “undesirables” and create the perfect utopia where everyone is exactly the same. With this being said I think a greater understanding will come from realizing exactly where we are in relation to the stated goals of the communists. Enjoy.

Goal number one: U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.

This was essentially a cold war strategy of the Soviet Union and as mentioned earlier revolved around the idea of instituting Communism without the bloody revolution many diehard communists believed was necessary. Through the use of the social science propaganda perfected at the Frankfort school known as Cultural Marxism, the communists came into the United States preaching peace and total equality. It is evident that a great deal of progress has been made as most people these days are more familiar with ideas like multicultural diversity and social justice then they are their own heritage and history of their nation. They have also done a brilliant job of painting the U.S. to be the aggressor in all the worlds’ conflicts, as will be discussed later in following goals. They have also turned issues revolving around civil rights into what Johan Goldberg cited as being “morally equivalent to war” in his book “The Tyranny of Clichés.” This so called cliché began in the early progressive movement and is a way the progressives have been able to take the moral high ground by attaching an urgency of morality to every issue. The end result is a society of nincompoops who are ready to give up their individual rights because it is more moral that we are all exactly the same. Goal number one, accomplished. This could also be referred to as Ideological Subversion. This is just a simpler way of saying that Americans have been brainwashed into accepting communism and they don’t even know it.

Goal number two: U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference of engaging in atomic war.

I don’t view this as being all that different than the first goal; however, it is very telling in describing the communist mentality toward those with a different opinion. The word capitulate means to surrender or to give another their way. Anyone who knows liberals understands that they never admit when they are wrong, and any disagreement with their self perceived brilliance results is a slew of vicious assaults that generally leaves one willing to let them have their way just so they will shut up. What this goal seems to be saying is that the U.S. will go along with soviet ideals or we will be engaged in nuclear combat. Evidence of the success of this goal is best seen by observing the youngest amongst us just going along to get along and believing all the main stream propaganda that is thrown them day in and day out. They are already communist and don’t even know it. It makes sense seeing as though Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev said this- "We cannot expect Americans to jump from capitalism to Communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving Americans small doses of socialism until they suddenly awake to find they have Communism." Some people claim that he never said this but I think the evidence speaks for itself. This also relates to the first goal as the moral high ground will always revolve around the avoidance of nuclear war. Creating a society in which there is no absolute right or wrong (moral relativism)in which people can claim superiority; in theory, will create the conditions where there is no need for war. Following the idea that man is a perfectible animal, it is believed that man can evolve into a society based on a higher “collective” consciousness. Everyone would be the same and to the Communists, this is morally superior as it devoid of selfishness and everyone is exactly the same.

Goal number three: Develop an illusion that total disarmament by the U.S. would be a demonstration of moral strength.

There are so many examples and analogies in which to describe the success and the psychology involved with this one. Let’s start with the most obvious. President Obama is determined to not only reduce our nuclear arsenal, but also tell our enemies how many nukes we have while reassuring them we will not use nuclear weapons in retaliation to terror attacks. All the while he is creating the illusion by telling his loyalists that the U.S. is leading from the front and setting new examples for others to aspire to. (He also spends a lot of time kissing the rear ends of brutal dictators if you didn’t notice.) It really does take the bigger guy to walk away from a fight but most people don’t understand how the fight is being taken away from us. That’s why the goal says “develop the illusion.” Again the use of social science and reverse psychology is being used to lull us into a false sense of security. I think a more relevant way to describe this is the appeasement strategy we use with the Muslims. American liberals really believe that by ignoring terror attacks and acting as if they are protecting the civil liberties of those that have vowed our destruction we are somehow showing a “moral superiority.” In some instances that may be true but when you ignore the facts that these terrorists continue to target Americans and Christians abroad unabated, and you continue to appease them, you are nothing but the useful idiot that the communists have trained you to be, a helpless automaton. Another good analogy is the immigration debate; we are showing a “moral superiority” by allowing all these people into our country when we know they have no inclination to assimilate into our culture. Not only do they refuse to assimilate, they show an absolute disdain as they go about acting as if we are oppressing them while they drain our welfare system dry.

In my opinion these first three goals of the communist party go a long way in describing the psyche of today’s American socialists as they foolishly sell themselves out to those pushing old ideas in new, brightly colored packaging. Many of the goals that follow will lend to a greater understanding of the overall goal of the communists. I believe this to be the creation of a perfect society where man is working more like a machine than a human being, where a human settlement resembles something more like an ant colony than a society of thinking beings. As we see the new common core curriculum being rolled out we are literally witnessing a new rebirth of Nazi like education techniques where there is a real concerted effort to root out those that may present as being “nonconformists.” While a great many people are opposing such a system, there are many who will just go along to get along because government knows best. Folks that is the attitude they want, that is communism. Goals one, two and three, for all practical purposes have been accomplished.