Ronald Reagan did not think socialism was a good thing

September 29, 2026

One of my favorite presidents is Ronald Reagan. I’m not saying he was the best ever, but he surely wasn’t the worst. And he darned sure was a really good one.

He had years of experience in leadership and government experience, he was wise beyond his years, and he had a great sense of humor. What more could one ask for in a president?

So, let’s start with an example of Reagan’s wonderful sense of humor. This one is a story he told at an appearance he made: “An evangelical minister and a politician arrived at Heaven’s Gate together. And St. Peter, after doing the necessary formalities, took them to show them what was available. He showed them a small room with a bed, and a chair, and a table, and said this was for the Clergyman. 

“And the politician was a little worried about what might be in store for him. And he couldn’t believe it when St. Peter stopped in front of a beautiful mansion, with lovely grounds, many servants, and told him that these would be his quarters.

“And he couldn’t help but ask, ‘but wait, how? There’s something wrong. How do I get this mansion when that good and holy man gets only a single room?’

“And St. Peter said, ‘You have to understand how things up here are. We’ve got thousands and thousands of clergy. You’re the first politician who ever made it!’” 

And now, to the serious stuff.

Many conservatives remember and mention Reagan these days, four decades after he was President of the United States. They remember things he did, like helping to win the Cold War, rebuilding the nation’s military, cutting taxes, and he believed and often said that America is a great country.

And, as you might imagine, he was very popular. In one of his elections, Reagan won 49 of the 50 states.

Reagan trusted people, and believed they could be trusted with their own freedom. These days, there is a large faction that believes people should depend upon their government, instead.

In his time communism was thriving in the Soviet Union and East Germany. Millions of people lived under communist rule. There was a wall in Berlin, built to keep people from leaving the country and look for a better life. And the general story about communism was that it “was simply the world that we lived in.” And that situation in those countries, regarded as quite normal, was not about to change.

But Reagan rejected that idea. He told Mikhail Gorbachev, who was President of the Soviet Union at the time, to tear down the Berlin Wall. Standing at the Brandenburg Gate in West Berlin on June 12, 1987, he said that now-famous comment, “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" Such a statement was quite extraordinary back then. And it has been fondly remembered ever since.

However, not surprisingly, the people suffering under communism were getting tired of it, and a few years later, the people of Berlin were seen standing on top of the Berlin Wall holding sledgehammers.

Reagan believed that America is good, that communism is evil, that freedom is better than tyranny, and that people should be free to run their own lives. Today, millions of Americans want to trade the benefits that America offers for a nation built on socialism.

However, many people understand that socialism is not a good system. It may look that way from the outside, but its record of failure says otherwise. Here are a few comments about it:

“If socialists understood economics they wouldn’t be socialists. - Friedrich Hayek

Socialism and communism are but two sides of the same coin.

Socialism: You can vote your way in, but you’ll have to shoot your way out! 

And former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Margaret Thatcher, had many comments. Here are three:

* “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.”

* “Socialists cry ‘Power to the people,’ and raise the clenched fist as they say it. We all know what they really mean - power over people, power to the State.”

* “Communism produces neither dignity nor prosperity. It takes all power away from the people and places it in the hands of a self-appointed elite. And because it distorts and manipulates the distinctive talents of individuals rather than letting those talents flourish, it prevents progress and prosperity.” 

But the one that ought to get the most attention is this one: “What is usually called socialism was termed by Marx the ‘first’ or lower phase of communist society” - Vladimir Lenin, founding head of government of Soviet Russia.

People who campaign for socialism will tell you things like that socialism really is roads, firefighters, or public schools. But that is false. Those are somewhat natural things. Socialism is control by government of the means of production such as businesses, factories, land, and capital. And that control expands over time to include everything.

Let’s close with this from Reagan. “You know, they say there are only two places where communism works: in heaven, where they don't need it—and in hell, where they've already got it."

After 250 good years, now is not the time for major changes

September 22, 2026

We are living in a time of rage. The outlook of so many people is one of anger, and impatience with things they disagree with, instead of understanding and accepting that it is okay that not everyone thinks alike. It’s been a long time since we have seen this level of anger.

It is quite disturbing to observe so many Americans being so adamant about changing our system of government and amending or destroying the U.S. Constitution. 

Maybe they just dislike some aspects of the system. Or, maybe they do not understand how this unique and wonderful system of government came to be, and why it has worked so well for 250 years. 

Today, the left has a long list of radical changes they want to make and things to eliminate. 

One thing on their list is the United States Supreme Court, which they want to pack with “friendly” justices that will vote their way on legal or constitutional matters. Some of them would rather eliminate it completely.

There is a very sensible reason for our Constitution and our body of laws. The Constitution controls how the government operates, and the laws protect its citizens. But the left does not want a system of government and a body of laws designed to be followed as created.

Former Attorney General Eric Holder thinks packing the Court should be a priority. Massachusetts Democrat Sen. Elizabeth Warren says the Court is illegitimate because it does not follow “widely held public opinion,” It doesn’t. And it shouldn’t.

And, former Rep. Eric Swalwell agreed with Warren, saying the Court “defies the will of the people.” And that is correct, because that is not its purpose.

The popular New York Democrat Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez wonders why we have a Supreme Court, asking, “How much does the current structure benefit us? … I don’t think it does.”

And, if those perspectives are not enough, the court-packing faction thinks it will make the Court “less partisan.” Seriously? And, former Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg wants the Court to have 15 justices consisting of five from each party, who will then select the remaining five.

Law Professor Jonathan Turley explains that a “non-partisan, independent judiciary,” such as what we have, “serves two essential purposes: it plays a vital role in preserving the separation of powers, which prevents all government power from being concentrated in one place, and it stands as a bulwark in defense of minority rights against a majority faction. To ensure its ability to perform these essential roles without being threatened by the political branches — the Congress and the executive branch — the Constitution gives federal jurists life tenure and salary protections.”

Another of the changes they want to make is to abolish the Electoral College.

The United States of America is by design not a pure democracy, where the majority always rules. A good example of why a pure democracy isn’t a good idea is this: In a pure democracy, in a group of twenty people, eleven can rule that the nine must go to jail.

Under such a design, a few large states would decide every presidential election, easily dominating the smaller states. 

Different states and areas of the country have different ideas about things, like what is good for them, and what is not good. But what is better for giant states like New York and California, may be very bad for others, like Vermont and Wyoming.

The Federalist Papers noted that there are 43 states with a smaller population than Los Angeles County, CA, meaning that the votes of each of those 43 states is less than one county in another state. If Los Angeles County was a state, it would be the 11th largest in the nation.

That’s why we have the Electoral College: so that the largest states do not always dominate and choose the president, based on the candidate that will do the most for them.

After much debate, the Founders settled on a compromise of ideas where instead of the raw vote totals of each state being added together to decide who will be president, the decision would be made by state-appointed electoral intermediaries — one for each senator and representative of each state — who would cast the actual ballots for the presidency. This tends to help balance the smaller states against the larger ones.

A lot of Americans do not like the Electoral College, and want to do away with it, because they feel it unfairly and improperly elects the president. However, in 250 years, in the 60 elections of our 47 presidents since 1789, only five times have presidential candidates won the popular vote, but lost the Electoral College vote. That’s about 8 percent of the time. It doesn’t seem to be the problem they want everyone to believe it is.

You do not have to have a PhD. in The Art of Deception to realize that following the left’s plan will create a situation where the left will forever dominate elections, and will rule the country until it surpasses Cuba, Venezuela and North Korea, and dies.

Our system has worked well for 250 years. We need to keep it.

Watching as the Democratic Party becomes more radical daily

September 15, 2026

The rising of this strong radical leftist movement toward socialism/communism is more than a bit troubling.

When our Founders were developing our unique system of government, they worked to develop one absent all the problems they had experienced and seen in other countries. The solution they arrived at was a constitutional republic based on principles of democracy.

Had the Founders gone with another type of government — like a kingdom, or a heavy socialistic or communist government, or a pure democracy — or even with the chosen system that got changed a few decades ago, it is quite likely that these people that now want to change the system would never have been born. This system they hate so much and want to change made it possible for them to even be around to hate it.

Despite the dramatic lack of evidence to support socialism, many on the political left seem to think that is a better route to travel than the current one that has done pretty darned well for 250 years. 

On this subject, American economist, economic historian, and social theorist Thomas Sowell commented, “Much of the social history of the Western world over the past three decades has involved replacing what worked with what sounded good.”

Venezuela may be the best example of how socialism doesn’t work. It was once Latin America’s wealthiest nation. But enter the socialist presidents Hugo Chávez and Nicolás Maduro. As a result, today, most Venezuelans are living in extreme poverty. 

The Democratic Socialists of America has taken the left’s radicalism to a new level. On Fox News Sunday recently, the co-chair of the Democratic Socialists of America, Megan Romer, said things like eliminating the Senate, replacing the President and Supreme Court “as we know them,” abolishing ICE, abolishing borders and more, were part of the DSA’s agenda. On that same topic, liberal talk show host Joe Scarborough warned that the DSA’s extreme policies, which he called “craziness,” will push voters to vote Republican. 

HBO talk show host Bill Maher is a liberal who isn’t afraid to call out the excesses of those on his side of the aisle, and does that fairly often. He recently dug into the sympathy that many on the left have shown for Muslims during last Friday’s 25th observance of the 9-11 attacks.

While 2,977 Americans were murdered that day, some on the left were more concerned with the anger at the Muslim terrorists who killed them, he noted. He was particularly upset with the results of a poll showing that one in five Gen Z respondents thought that Osama bin Laden was an “okay” guy.

Maher’s response was: “He’s Luigi Mangione in a turban.”

Maher also criticized the anti-Israel and pro-Islam perspective of the left surrounding the Gaza situation. He outlined the steps Israel has taken to settle things and actually help those living in Gaza, that have been ignored by the anti-Israel faction on the left.

He also noted that when Israel responded to the vicious October 7th Hamas attacks, it was not genocide — as so many have tied to convince the world — but a justified counterattack.

And then, there is Zohran Kwame Mamdani, a naturalized American citizen, born in Uganda of Indian parents who moved here when he was 7 years-old. He is a member of the Democratic Party and the Democratic Socialists of America, and became the first Muslim and Asian American to serve as New York City’s Mayor.

His platform when running for the office included support for free city buses, a rent freeze in rent-stabilized housing, wanting the city to operate a grocery store in each of the five boroughs, universal child care, the construction of 200,000 new affordable housing units, a $30 minimum wage by 2030, and tax increases on corporations and on those earning above $1 million annually.

As New Yorkers gathered on Friday in observance of the 9-11 Islamic terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and another unidentified target which killed 2,977 Americans, Mamdani was there, against the wishes of many who thought he didn’t really belong there, due to his being a Muslim.

As the names of the victims were being read, many were saddened and wept. Yet, Mamdani and New York Democrat Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez were seen not paying any attention to the ceremony, but instead talking and laughing.

Abdulrahman (Abdul) Mohamed El-Sayed is an American politician who is the Democratic nominee in the 2026 US Senate election in Michigan. He is a progressive Democrat who supports Medicare for All and abolishing ICE. If elected, El-Sayed would be the first Muslim member of the U.S. Senate.

Hasan Piker is a political commentator whose rhetoric supports violence and denigrates Jewish people. He reportedly has a large number — 11.3 million — of followers, and has expressed support for designated terrorist organizations and anti-Semitic ideas. And, he recently said America deserved the 9-11 attacks, although he did retract that statement, later.

So, the Democrats and the political left have shown a substantive allegiance to even more radical ideals lately. 

Electing these people and moving the Unites States even farther from its original orientation is not a sensible move.

Is our 250-year-old constitutional republic going to survive?

August 4, 2026

Remember when Democrats and Republicans were much closer in their ideas about how to move the country forward than they are today? If so, you are probably a seasoned citizen. If not that seasoned, and you happen to remember this, you are not from Gen Z, but you may be an early Gen X.

That more productive atmosphere is not what we have today.

Many on the left — mostly the younger ones, but also some of the older ones — do not understand the nation’s system that they so eagerly aim to sabotage, turning the country into one more famously inept socialist/communist mess.

Those in the Gen Z crowd were born from 1997 to 2012. By then, we already had high-speed internet, social media, smartphones, and a society that had existed and prospered for more than 200 years. And, while the older generations — like the Silent Generation, the Boomers, etc. — had many things that even older ones didn’t have, they were able to see how things came to be, appreciate their arrival, and enjoy these steps of progress.

Watching media evolve from just radio to the black and white television, and then to color television. Impressed with the development of stereo sound. Cars with automatic transmission, and then air conditioning. Jet aircraft. The space programs. The list goes on and on.

They also learned a lot from their parents about how to behave, and in school they learned real history, and civics, teaching them how the country was developed and supposed to work.

That experience helped them appreciate the great country into which they were so fortunate to have been born.

That element is missing from the environment of these younger folks. They entered a world that was so much better than it was when the older folks were born. Having such a full and special atmosphere from birth, taking it for granted, rather than watching how those great things developed and improved along the way may be why they do not adequately appreciate their wonderful country.

Whatever the reasons for these leftists to fail to understand present-day America and properly appreciate it, they also have no idea how foolish it is to think that socialism/communism will be better, or even tolerable, once it gets fully established.

Businessman David Rubenstein offered this perspective on America: “I would say that the United States is one of roughly 220 countries in the world. And of all these countries, we’re the one where the most people want to immigrate to. We’re the one who’s built the biggest economy in the world, the greatest technology base in the world,” and “we have the greatest entrepreneurial instincts of any country in the world. And that combination of things enables this country to achieve what we’ve achieved.”

Continuing with his praise for our country, he said, “To go through your life, you have used a lot of American technology. You probably can’t get through your day without using a Google, Facebook, or Meta product, or Netflix or one of our American-made automobiles. What European company do you need to use their products to get through the day? Virtually none. And except for TikTok, Americans can get through the day without using anything invented really outside the United States. The world is very dependent on the products we’ve created.”

A major problem today is that so many of the young were denied the fundamental education of what America is, and how it was formed. Our strong, sensible values have deteriorated dramatically over recent decades, because they ceased being taught and encouraged.

How can we strengthen those values? On that topic, another prominent American, radio talk show host, attorney, and author, Hugh Hewitt, suggests that we start teaching civics again to middle school students. He thinks using a book by Wilford McClay, titled “Land of Hope” will help. Hewitt believes it “is the best single book on American history,” and thinks it should be the core curriculum.

Describing McClay’s book: “It’s warts and all, as he says. He’s objective. He’s not neutral, but he’s objective about what we’ve gotten wrong and what we’ve gotten right in the country. Let’s pour ourselves into civics as opposed to ideology. I’d like to get back to some basics about how much we have in common, not what we have to fight over.”

Our constitutional republic has survived and thrived for 250 years. The country is not perfect. No country is. But this one has set records that none other has in those 250 years. And yet, thousands, perhaps millions, of our fellow Americans are dead-set on imposing socialism/communism on us, unable to recognize our great worth, or understand the disasters that their preferred system has brought to Cuba, Venezuela and other countries.

A noteworthy incident occurred during the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia in 1787. Outside Independence Hall, Elizabeth Willing Powel asked Benjamin Franklin a question about the Convention’s conclusion: "Well, Doctor, what have we got, a Republic or a Monarchy?" Franklin replied, "A Republic, if you can keep it."

Our republic has survived a civil war, two world wars, and many other challenges. Will it be able to survive this one? 

Progressive policies create disasters for the American people

December 9, 2025

Back in May the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) posted an article that addressed “Americans Killed by Illegal Aliens Driving Under the Influence.”

It named 14 Americans who are now dead, which it described as “just a handful of Americans whose lives were taken too soon at the hands of illegal aliens driving under the influence.”

Of those 14, eight were less than 20 years-old, three were 10 years-old or less, two were in their 40s and one was 70. Most of the drunk drivers were from Honduras, with others from Venezuela, and Mexico. 

Assistant DHS Secretary Tricia McLaughlin commented that “Far too many American lives have been lost because of illegal aliens driving drunk.”  “These Americans killed by drunk-driving illegal aliens should still be with us today, and we feel their absence in our schools and offices, at our dinner tables, and throughout our communities. President Trump and Secretary Noem have reopened the Victims of Immigration Crime Engagement (VOICE) office to serve all victims of illegal alien crime and their families.”

The VOICE office was opened in 2017 by the Trump administration. It is a resource for those who have been victimized by crime that is related to immigration, the article said. However, the Biden/Harris administration closed the office, leaving victims of crimes by illegal aliens without access to many support services and resources.

Worse, yet, are the number of Americans who have been murdered, with illegal aliens having been charged with the crime.

Among those victims are: 

* Laken Riley, a 22-year-old nursing student who was murdered on the University of Georgia campus, allegedly by Jose Ibarra, an illegal immigrant from Venezuela, in February 2024. 

* A 12-year-old girl named Jocelyn Nungaray killed in Houston, Texas. She was found murdered in a creek in June 2024. Two Venezuelan nationals, Johan Jose Rangel Martinez and Franklin Jose Pena Ramos, who had recently entered the U.S. illegally, have been charged with capital murder.

* Rachel Morin, who was the mother of five, was found murdered in August 2023 in Maryland. Another illegal alien, a Salvadoran national who was in the country illegally, was later arrested and charged in connection with her death.

* A Missouri police officer, 44-year-old David Lee, was killed in 2024 by Honduran Ramon A. Chavez-Rodriguez, an illegal alien. 

These are only a few of the victims. Even one death at the hands of an illegal alien is too many.

There are two problems in the horrors these Americans and their families and friends have experienced at the hands of illegal aliens in the country. First is them being here at all. Second is the ridiculous frequency with which some of these illegals have been treated with kid gloves instead of getting the punishment they so well deserve.

Going easy on criminals is an insult to their victims, and a disgusting failure of prosecutors and judges.

One example is the case of the death of 22-year-old Logan Frederico, who was brutally murdered by a criminal during a break-in at the home where she was visiting friends. Her killer had a record of 39 arrests and 25 felonies. Despite this record, and the accumulated felonies, he had spent less than 2 years in jail.

The state attorney general had assigned an accomplished death penalty litigator to this case, but the progressive district attorney called this “premature” and “reckless.”

Then there is the murder of Iryna Zaruska, a 23-year-old Ukrainian refugee who was tragically murdered in an unprovoked stabbing attack while riding a light-rail train in Charlotte, North Carolina last August. A video showing the attack was aired soon afterward.

Decarlos Brown Jr., a 34-year-old homeless man with 14 prior arrests for various offenses, including armed robbery, has been charged with first-degree murder.

Yet, despite his criminal history dating back over a decade, known mental health issues, and having forfeited bond on three occasions, a soft-on-crime judge released him back onto the streets following his most recent arrest last January, and he was able to murder an innocent woman.

Some in law enforcement positions, like prosecutors and judges, charged with prosecuting crimes and punishing criminals to protect the public, seem to think rehabilitation is a superior path to jail time.   

Over the last few years we have seen such “solutions” to crime and police work as “reimagining policing,” diverting 911 calls away from the police department, finding alternatives to arrest, prioritizing “restorative justice,” “deemphasizing” some felonies, and eliminating cash bail. 

GovFacts.com explains the sensible, traditional idea of dealing with criminals. It tells us that “punishment and retribution form the core mission. Society demands consequences when someone breaks the law. A proportional punishment acknowledges the moral weight of criminal acts and provides victims with a sense that justice has been served.”

The idea is for punishment to be so unpleasant that the perpetrator regrets his/her actions, and not do it again, and to discourage others from committing crimes.

But the progressive idea is to merely tell the criminal, “don’t do that anymore” and that will be all that is really needed. As with all “woke” ideas, these sound good, but don’t work, and in reality, are just stupid.

We need harsh punishment. Lawbreakers must pay a real price.

Could the current political divide spell the end of the U.S

May 13, 2025

Douglas Murray is a British author, political commentator, cultural critic, and journalist, and his columns have appeared in a long list of publications, including the New York Post and National Review. 

Back in 2018 he created a video in which he said that “Europe is committing suicide.” He went on to explain that there were two major causes of Europe’s impending downfall.

The first, he said, “is the mass movement of peoples into Europe.” This process had been going on for a long time, “but sped up massively in the migration crisis of 2015, when more than a million migrants poured into Europe from the Middle East, North Africa and East Asia.”

The second major cause, which he said was equally significant, was “that Europe lost faith in itself — its beliefs, its traditions and even its very legitimacy.”

Given the current state of affairs here in the United States, Murray’s comments might also describe the suicidal tendencies we have here.

Our challenges have been going on since before the date that Murray first mentioned about Europe, 2015. And, like the European experience, they have increased markedly in recent years.

Like the European countries, the U.S. has seen a tremendous influx of people from other countries. Millions came across our open borders unvetted during the Biden administration. There were some good people, looking for a better life and escaping oppression. But there were thousands, or perhaps millions, who were drug and child traffickers, murderers, rapists, robbers and terrorists.

Over the last few decades the U.S., like Europe, has seen a gradual abandonment of its once strong history and culture.

We have seen persons in many areas forsake their solemn duties, favoring ideals that are not American ideals, and are dangerous to our future. 

Attorneys general and district attorneys refuse to prosecute many types of crimes. Mayors and municipal council members open their doors to illegal aliens, and protect them from being properly deported.

Many of the people we call educators put their professional integrity on the shelf and fail to present their students with a proper background of their country. They have done an equally bad job of teaching crucial basic concepts, like fundamental math, reading and writing. 

And many parents have likewise failed to teach their children about becoming a good American, respecting the law, the rights of others, and basic human behavior.

News organizations and journalists often see no problem with presenting “news” according to their political ideals, rather than abiding by journalistic principles.

Some medical professionals support and assist people in becoming the opposite gender, even children. And some in public education assist children in doing that, and hide that from their parents.

Members of Congress, Republican and Democrat, have recently been heard using what we used to call “cuss words” in their comments on the floor of the chambers. This sort of language, which is profane, is nearly always considered inappropriate, especially for formal settings like public appearances, media appearances, and public activities. 

And the frequency of violence in protests from groups with an ax to grind is shocking. What they are unable to achieve through persuasion with their ideas they try to achieve through force and violence.

Many of these activities are illegal, and all are certainly subversive to the established principles, values and culture of our country.

Politically, we have lost much ground. Many of us remember when Republicans and Democrats got along with each other, despite having different ideas about how to keep the country great, and even to improve it.

The current political discourse reflects the wide gulf in philosophy. One side wants to restore things while the other wants to change everything. The two sides talk to each other in sharp, cutting terms, rarely finding agreement on anything.

Roger Kimball, editor of The New Criterion, sees efforts to restore the previous state of things. He said that following the unsuccessful attempt to assassinate Donald Trump at a campaign rally last year there has been talk of restoration of the values and environment of the past. And that has picked up speed since Trump’s election and inauguration.

In a speech at Hillsdale College’s Blake Center for Faith and Freedom shortly after Trump took office in January, Kimball said, “We always hear about the ‘peaceful transfer of power’ when a new president takes office.

“The usual procedure is for the old crowd to vacate their positions while the new crowd slides in to take their places. The institutions remain inviolate. Nothing essential changes.”

But, he noted, Trump was not elected to preserve the upside-down status quo, but to make badly needed changes. Given the existing political divide as this process gets under way, there is fairly broad satisfaction on Trump’s side, but great fear and resistance on the other.

Whether the suicide that Murray talked about occurring in Europe will be the ultimate conclusion for America remains to be seen. Those who understand and appreciate the original unique design, individual freedom and other benefits of the American system are working hard to see that the shining city on the hill survives this attempted revolution.

Perspective! Critically important, but horribly out of sync!

April 8, 2025

Those seasoned citizens among us are frequently a bit dazzled by what they see going on in America today. Seeing how the younger generations are so unimpressed and displeased with the way things are, causes them to scratch their heads in disbelief.

Having grown up decades ago, when life was very, very different, we watched as technology and culture gradually evolved over many years into what is readily available today.

Some of us remember times before television, hand-held telephones, microwave ovens, and a long list of things that are commonplace today.

We had radios, but only AM stations, and they had to be plugged into the wall, or the car’s electrical system. When TV came around, it was little boxes with a black and white picture. And we got only one or maybe two stations, which we received over the airwaves by rabbitears on the TV, and later an antenna mounted on the roof. 

And remote control involved someone getting up from their chair and walking up to the TV and twisting the channel selector, adjusting the volume, or turning the set on or off. Later, color TVs and FM radio came along, and cable TV service

We had typewriters and adding machines, but not computers or calculators. Our telephones were connected to the world by wires and after a while we were able to replace the operators who placed the calls for us with the ability to dial a phone number by ourselves with a wheel device on the phone base.

Milk bottles were delivered to our front porch by delivery people. And the kids entertained themselves playing games outside like tag or hide and seek, riding their tricycles or bikes, or some sport. Or maybe they played inside with plastic bricks to build things.

Cooking was done on the electric kitchen stove, or perhaps a campfire. Our houses were heated by a coal or gas furnace, and air conditioning consisted of opening windows and turning on the fan.

Travel around town could be on foot or a bicycle, by city buses and trolleys, or by the family car if we could drive. We could listen to music performed live, but at home before the late 60s, early 70s, if it wasn’t on TV or radio, we heard it from a 78 rpm, or perhaps 33 rpm record player system that had mono sound.

As the years passed, things improved. More options became available, and life became much easier and more enjoyable.

Kids born since the 90s — Gen Z and Generation Alpha — are so lucky, compared to us. Whereas we saw these improvements come gradually over many years, these young people found all of this waiting for them when they arrived. So, all of these wonders are just normal to them. Nothing to get excited about, folks. Just dull, always-the-same stuff all the time.

An interesting perspective on this situation recently appeared online. It was written by a 26-year-old college graduate student working on her MBA. Alyssa Ahlgren was sitting in a small coffee shop trying to think of a topic to write about. 

“I scroll through my newsfeed on my phone looking at the latest headlines of presidential candidates calling for policies to ‘fix’ the so-called injustices of capitalism. I put my phone down and continued to look around,” she wrote.

Among the sights in her view were people talking amongst themselves, working on their computers, ordering food, which they got rather quickly. And then, reality dawned on her. “We live in the most privileged time in the most prosperous nation and we’ve become completely blind to it,” she wrote.

“Vehicles, food, technology, freedom to associate with whom we choose. These things are so ingrained in our American way of life we don’t give them a second thought,” she continued.

“We are so well off here in the United States that our poverty line begins 31 times above the global average. Thirty. One. Times!!!”

She notes that virtually no one in America is poor by global standards. And the fact that someone can place an order online one day, and receive it the next day does not impress so many of us. “Oh, that’s just normal. No big deal,” they think.

And then, the real trouble is brought to light. “Our unappreciation is evident as the popularity of socialist policies among my generation continues to grow.” She references New York Democrat Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez as commenting that the entire millennial generation, which is a very large electorate, has never even seen prosperity in America. 

They live it, daily, but haven’t noticed how good they have it. And they look to socialism to turn the best country they could ever live in into another Venezuela.

The current protests further highlight how little so many Americans actually know about America and its priniciples.

History instructs us how every great nation eventually collapsed, or killed itself. America appears to be on that track. We have failed to teach so many people about life and their country. And unless dramatic changes are made, America will become just one more memory, and a sad chapter in history.

“Our democracy” works well as it was designed. Leave it alone!

October 29, 2024

The liberal faction in America has an annoying tendency to want to change everything that gets in the way of its drive for total control of the country that will last forever. 

This tendency includes such radical actions as packing the Supreme Court with liberal justices who will essentially ignore the basis for our laws and Constitution and ignore existing laws and the terms of the Constitution and substitute their political preferences, without going through required processes to make such changes.

They also would like to abolish the Senate filibuster that has played such an important part in preventing bad measures from getting easily passed in that body. 

The filibuster promotes compromise and protects the minority party’s voice and function. It also protects purposeful debate, which is the intended purpose of the Senate. And it provides a safeguard against political extremism and corporate influence.

And they want to abolish the Electoral College. Criticism of this element of the government includes that it is not a mechanism of direct democracy, or as a voice of the people, since it replaces the popular vote result with a different process. But the United States of America is not, and has never been a direct democracy. It is also called a weapon of slavery. But that has been effectively proven wrong. 

The Founders deliberately created the Electoral College as a mechanism of federalism. Federalism recognizes the states as important elements of the nation with a degree of control over what does and does not happen.

“Doing away with the Electoral College would breach our fidelity to the spirit of the Constitution, a document expressly written to thwart the excesses of majoritarianism,” in the opinion of John Samples, Vice President of the Cato Institute.

“First, we must keep in mind the likely effects of direct popular election of the president,” Samples wrote. “We would probably see elections dominated by the most populous regions of the country or by several large metropolitan areas.”

“Second, the Electoral College makes sure that the states count in presidential elections. As such, it is an important part of our federalist system — a system worth preserving. Historically, federalism is central to our grand constitutional effort to restrain power,” he wrote, “but even in our own time we have found that devolving power to the states leads to important policy innovations,” such as welfare reform.

Another opinion on the Electoral College’s importance comes from Allen Guelzo and James Hulme in, of all places, The Washington Post. “Abolishing the electoral college now might satisfy an irritated yearning for direct democracy, but it would also mean dismantling federalism. After that, there would be no sense in having a Senate (which, after all, represents the interests of the states), and further along, no sense even in having states, except as administrative departments of the central government. 

“Those who wish to abolish the electoral college ought to go the distance, and do away with the entire federal system and perhaps even retire the Constitution, since the federalism it was designed to embody would have disappeared.”

By the way, replacing the Constitution is a goal of more than a few of the political left in the country.

“Without the electoral college, there would be no effective brake on the number of ‘viable’ presidential candidates,” Guelzo and Hulme add. “Abolish it, and it would not be difficult to imagine a scenario where, in a field of a dozen micro-candidates, the ‘winner’ only needs 10 percent of the vote, and represents less than 5 percent of the electorate. And presidents elected with smaller and smaller pluralities will only aggravate the sense that an elected president is governing without a real electoral mandate.”

The number of people who do not understand the function of the Electoral College and its value to the nation is shockingly enormous. It has provided a high degree of stability in our presidential elections, and therefore must be left alone.

Guelzo and Hulme added that while the Electoral College appears to be an inefficient process to many, “the Founders were not interested in efficiency; they were interested in securing ‘the blessings of liberty.’ The Electoral College is, in the end, not a bad device for securing that.”

Recently, there has been much attention focused on and many references to “our democracy.” And there is so much finger-pointing at former President Donald Trump, and other Republicans and conservatives, accusing them of trying to harm or destroy the democracy. 

What is truly interesting, however, is how determined the liberal Democrats and Marxists are to dismantle our democratic processes piece by piece. A bright future for them is a country which they will control in perpetuity.

The references listed earlier — stacking the Supreme Court, ending the Senate filibuster, and abolishing the Electoral College — as well as making the District of Columbia and some US territories into states, are nothing more than mechanisms to alter our democratic republic, with its guarantees of personal freedom and high degree of state independence, and turn it into a direct democracy.

Converting our current very successful system into one where government has absolute control is not an improvement for the people. Only for some people.

A Harris administration will move the country down the wrong road

August 13, 2024

The following is said to have been written in 1954 and attributed to a former judge from California named Keith M. Alber, who at the time was 85 years-old. In the piece, Alber wrote that he was a law student, and in a political science class there was a half-page outline in a textbook on “a few steps to overturn a democracy.”

The steps he mentioned are: Divide the nation philosophically; Foment racial strife; Cause distrust of police authority; Swarm the nation’s borders indiscriminately and unconstitutionally; Engender the military strength to weaken it; Overburden citizens with more unfair taxation; Encourage civil rioting and discourage accountability for all crime; Control all balloting; Control all media.

“What was printed in 1954 as a possible diabolic nightmare has become an emerging reality,” he wrote. “I hope that Americans will unite enough to pen a good finish.”

This article was found on Facebook, posted by several people. And that is all that is needed for the Democrats, socialists and Marxists to automatically write off the ideas expressed in the article, saying that because of its origin, it’s useless.

But the ideas expressed are worth considering, because even Vice President Kamala Harris and New York Democrat Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez sometimes make sense.

Is our nation philosophically, politically divided? Absolutely. Are we witnessing racial strife where all white people are considered oppressors? No question. Do some people distrust police authority so much that they want to defund them? Yep. Are our borders indiscriminately and unconstitutionally being opened up to whoever wants to cross them, including criminals, drug traffickers and child traffickers? Unquestionably.

Has our military been weakened by considerations of gender, equity and inclusion instead of merit? Yes! Are taxes an unfair burden on many/most Americans? Yes. Have we seen a frightening increase of civil rioting with those involved in the riots not being held to account? No question! Are important ballots much less secure than in the past because of mailed ballots, unguarded submission bins and other factors? Yes. Is the news media primarily the spokesperson for one political side? Yes.

So, is it a matter of an actual effort to transform America that we are seeing? Or is it merely a matter of people holding ideas that are at odds with our founding principles? Actually, it is both.

Harris criticizes Donald Trump’s campaign to “make America great again” as going backward, and wants to move “forward.” But Trump wants to restore the much better country we had before the Biden/Harris administration came along. We had energy independence, hardly any inflation and prices were much lower, a much more secure border, a world with fewer international conflicts, a lower tax burden, etc.

But despite her recent politically motivated flip-flops, Harris is trying to move even further toward a socialist/Marxist nation that features the things she has embraced for decades.

Her past and present positions include these: As San Francisco district attorney in 2004 she declined to seek the death penalty for a gang member who had killed a police officer. In 2014, as state attorney general she supported the idea that the death penalty was unconstitutional.

Harris was one of the first Democrats to support Senator Bernie Sanders' 2017 Medicare for All bill to provide government-run medical insurance for every American, doing away with private health insurance.

She supports the radical Green New Deal and introduced a climate equity bill. She opposed fracking and has called for federal legal action against the fossil fuel industry. And, she has outlined a climate plan for net-zero CO2 emissions by 2045.

As a presidential candidate she promised to use executive action to enact stricter gun control. She has supported more regulation of gun manufacturers, mandatory background checks, tightening loopholes and a ban on “assault weapons.” She said she was open to the idea of a mandatory buyback, compelling owners of “assault weapons” to forfeit them.

Harris has pledged to offer a path to citizenship to the millions of undocumented immigrants living in the US, supported decriminalizing border crossings by illegal aliens, and wants to provide taxpayer-funded healthcare for those crossing the US border illegally.

Further, she has drawn parallels between the Ku Klux Klan and the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, which is responsible for securing the borders.

Her pick for running mate, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, in championing gun control, compared available weapons to those he carried in combat. He didn’t do combat. He signed into law a bill that allows abortion up to the moment of birth. In 2023, Walz signed into law the Trans Refuge Act, making Minnesota a refuge for children to flee to so they can be chemically or physically mutilated. 

More and more, the dystopian world of George Orwell’s classic novel “Nineteen Eighty-Four” is developing in the United States of America. And the brilliant work of our Founders to look at the world’s nations under government control and create a system that puts the people in charge is being abandoned. Why? Because some do not understand their country, and are falling victim to others who do understand it, but think they can do better with one of the other systems. 

America’s future is threatened by those who want to change everything

April 9, 2024

The future of the United States of America may be less secure than at any time since its inception. The country that has provided so much for so long, and has set a standard that no other country in the world has ever matched, is now seen by a large faction as no longer good enough.

What made America so great? Many things. A tripartite government with no single branch more powerful than the others. Each branch has the ability to respond to the actions of the other branches in our system of checks and balances. 

We don’t have a ruler; no king/queen, emperor or czar. Our leaders are our employees — they work for us! And the President, Vice President and members of Congress are selected at the ballot box by the eligible voters, who choose from candidates that they have participated in choosing. Judges and Supreme Court Justices are nominated by the President and approved by the Congress, and others are simply hired as employees.

Our system provides vast amounts of personal freedom, with a Bill of Rights that guarantees us the freedom for important things, like speech, the press, religion, peaceable assembly, redress of grievances, security in our homes, fairness in legal matters, national defense.

So long as what we do does not violate a constitutional principal or sensible laws, we may do as we please. We can buy whatever house, car, appliances, clothing, entertainment, or personal items we choose.

Our Constitution provided the greatest degree of personal freedom in the history of human beings, but it is being replaced by restrictions on virtually every conceivable area of life. This is not new, of course, but has taken a dose of amphetamines in recent years.

Personal freedom, once a hallmark of the nation, is seen by this dissatisfied faction as a threat to the future. And the secret to a positive future in the mind of these people is a life that is much more controlled, with the bureaucracy having much more authority over the people.

Many restrictions exist on what we can and cannot do with our property, what kinds of things we can and cannot purchase. We are told there are legitimate reasons for these limitations. that is true, up to a point. But the number of federal, state and local regulations is huge, and cumbersome.

And many of the regulations are made by unelected bureaucrats, and are not approved by Congress, but nonetheless have the force of law.

The Code of Federal Regulation has 50 subsections where the government has seen fit to issue regulations that control what we can do, and how it must be done. One example of this was discussed by the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) on its website.

A NAM survey last summer found that “U.S. manufacturers’ concerns over federal regulations have reached a six-year high as nearly 100 new major regulations — from 30 federal agencies and offices — threaten jobs and investment.”

Ohio Manufacturers’ Association President Ryan Augsburger noted that “In the next year, the Biden administration plans to issue even more regulations — approximately 3,200, including about 280 ‘major rules’ and 1,326 ‘significant rules.’”

Augsburger wrote that “More than 63 percent of manufacturers are spending more than 2,000 hours per year complying with federal regulations, diverting resources that would otherwise go towards employee compensation, new hires and additional investment in U.S. facilities,” citing the NAM’s Q2 2023 Manufacturers’ Outlook Survey.

He then listed examples of the cost of these burdensome regulations:

** The Environmental Protection Agency’s proposed particulate matter rule, which is expected to cost “up to $197.4 billion in U.S. economic activity and endanger as many as 973,900 current U.S. jobs”;

** The Securities and Exchange Commission’s proposed climate-disclosure requirement, which the NAM recently advocated against in testimony before the House; and

** The Federal Trade Commission’s proposal to ban noncompete agreements, which 70 percent of manufacturers use to safeguard their intellectual property.

Negative consequences such as these are not limited to manufacturing; they occur in virtually every area of work.

Our government is too big, too controlling and spends too much. Our national debt is $34.6 trillion. That comes to just under $103,000 for every person in the country.

Is it possible that this large faction of Americans desiring to impose restrictions on our freedoms actually has a plan for a better country in mind? Well, yes, they have a plan. But it is not a plan to make America better. 

Their plan is for a larger, more restrictive government, and much less personal freedom for the people. It is very much opposed to the concept that our Founders had in mind, and for which they created our governmental system. They and their plan are un-American and anti-American.

This continued degradation of the brilliant system we inherited must be reversed, or before much longer America as it was designed will no longer exist. Our freedoms must be restored and protected. And our government must be returned to its intended limited status.

What is our country? A constitutional republic, if we can keep it!

February 6, 2024

As has been noted here before, the United States of America is a unique and very special country. While it is based upon democratic principles, it is not a pure democracy. It is a constitutional republic.

What’s the difference? In a pure democracy, 50% + one person can decide what happens to the 50% less one person. In a democracy, two wolves can decide to have the lamb for dinner, without the lamb having anything to say about it.

If America was a pure democracy, our elections would be decided by those living in New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, and a few other large cities. There would be no point in voting if you live in places that think differently.

Scottish history professor Alexander Tyler, who taught at the University of Edinburgh, said this about democracies back about the time the United States adopted its constitution in the late 1700s: “A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government.” This comment was based upon history.

“A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury,” he said. “From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.”

Another piece of history is that the average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been only about 200 years.

The rather short history of pure democracies and great civilizations drove our Founders to develop a system that could outlast the previous civilizations. Therefore, they created our constitution establishing the United States of America as a constitutional republic, not a democracy.

Despite this great work, there are Americans today working their hearts out to change our system to one like those with short lives, and making the life of the unique United States much shorter than if we stick to the Founder’s plan.

Former President Ronald Reagan once said about our country, “Freedom is a fragile thing and is never more than one generation away from extinction.”

“It is not ours by inheritance, it must be fought for and defended constantly by each generation, for it comes only once to a people,” he said. “Those who have known freedom and then lost it have never known it again.”

Some 50 years ago, former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, speaking to an audience about the way the British Labour party wanted to do things, said: “You want to keep more of the money you earn? I’m afraid that’s very selfish. We shall want to tax that away. 

“You want to own shares in your firm? We can’t have that. The state has to own your firm. 

“You want to choose where to send your children to school? That’s very divisive. You’ll send your child where we tell you. 

“The trouble with Labour is that they’re just not at home with freedom. Socialists don’t like ordinary people choosing. For they might not choose socialism.”

In an interview, she said of the idea of the government controlling everything: “You know when the state does everything for you, it will soon take everything from you. You will then have no basis for personal freedom, political freedom, nor economic freedom. 

“The state must never substitute for personal responsibility. I know that we’ll only get the kind of country, the kind of prosperity, the kind of standards that I wish to see if everyone says ‘it’s my job to do my best. It’s my job to try to lend a hand to others and not to say, oh, I’m not going to do that, that’s for the state.’

“What sort of society do you think we’d have if you have people saying that it’s the state’s job to find a job. It’s the state’s job to house me. It’s the state’s job to look after my family? Freedom is inseparable from personal responsibility. You know there’s a famous quote from George Bernard Shaw … ‘Freedom incurs responsibility. That’s why many men fear it.’”

Ideas like packing the Supreme Court with liberal justices that change, rather than follow the intent of our laws and Constitution; doing away with the Electoral College; making Washington, DC a state; allowing millions of illegal aliens to come into the country at will, giving them benefits, and perhaps citizenship or voting privileges; putting into effect soft-on-crime policies that encourage rather than discourage criminal activity; allowing rules with the force of law to be made by unelected bureaucrats, giving government broader authority to control our lives; parents being labeled “terrorists” for protecting their children from indoctrination; not protecting free speech in online forums, are leading us down a deadly path.

The America of the Founders can last many more years. But we have to not only resist further changes to the way America works, but seriously work to restore those original qualities that have been eaten away by those wishing for more state power, and less personal freedom.

Democrats are still in support of soft-on-crime laws and policies

March 7, 2023

The Left’s movement toward soft-on-crime policies and laws continues. And this time the foolishness occurred in the Nation’s Capital. 

As reported by the New York Post, the District of Columbia Council “passed its Revised Criminal Code Act over Mayor Muriel Bowser’s veto [recently], a late but very welcome Christmas present for offenders ranging from petty crooks to carjackers and rapists. The new law guts mandatory-minimum sentencing and eliminates ‘three strikes’ provisions. Repeat offenders will have a lot less jail time to worry about from now on.”

In addition to the DC Mayor, this law drew a lot of negative comment. Among the critics was House Committee on Oversight and Accountability Chairman James Comer (R-Ky) who delivered remarks on the House floor in support of House Joint Resolution 26, which disapproves of the District of Columbia’s Revised Criminal Code Act of 2022.

“There is a crime crisis in Americans’ capital city,” he began. “According to the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department, carjackings in the District have increased by 76 percent compared to this time last year. Total property crime is up 24 percent. And homicides are up 17 percent. In fact, D.C. is currently on track to have the most homicides since 1995,” Comer said.

“But the radical D.C. Council has enacted legislation that will turn this crime crisis into a catastrophe. The D.C. Council’s progressive soft-on-crime legislation eliminates almost all of the mandatory minimum sentencing requirements for violent crimes while drastically reducing the maximum penalties allowable to the courts.

“These changes embolden criminals to run rampant throughout the District of Columbia. The Act also grants the right to jury trial to now include most misdemeanor offenses,” which he said would “overload an already crowded D.C. court system.”

“All Americans should feel safe in their capital city. But they don’t because of D.C. Democrats’ leniency toward criminals at the expense of Americans’ safety,” the Chairman said.

Commenting on sex criminals getting out of jail after serving only part of their sentences, Denise Krepp, an advisory neighborhood commissioner, told local station WUSA9 that, “I don’t think the DC Council should be helping rapists get out of prison early. It’s crazy.”

However, in a surprise move, President Joe Biden agreed with the Republican-led House and the DC Mayor, and disagreed with the DC Council and Democrats in Congress.

As reported by CNN, Biden’s position against the Council’s law “set off howls of objections from progressives and DC residents, who said the president is letting Congress step on the ability of Washington’s citizens to govern themselves.”

“Rep. Pramila Jayapal, a Washington Democrat, is ‘deeply disappointed’ in Biden’s decision,” the CNN story said.

“This is simple: the District of Columbia must be allowed to govern itself. Democrats’ commitment to home rule should apply regardless of the substance of the local legislation,” Jayapal said in a statement to the network. “This is why the Congressional Progressive Caucus and its members have endorsed D.C. statehood, with every CPC member cosponsoring D.C. Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton’s bill in the 117th Congress. Statehood is the only way to protect the 700,000 residents of the District from this kind of interference, we will continue to champion this cause.”

In response to criticism from Jayapal and others, Biden tweeted: “I support D.C. Statehood and home-rule – but I don’t support some of the changes D.C. Council put forward over the Mayor’s objections – such as lowering penalties for carjackings. If the Senate votes to overturn what D.C. Council did – I’ll sign it.”

In addition to easing up on criminals and criminal activity, the Democrats are yet again trying to make changes in the country’s fundamental structure. Packing the Supreme Court, doing away with the Electoral College, and bringing more liberal areas into the country as states are all on the list of how to gain permanent power over the country.

The District of Columbia is not a state for a reason. A good reason. As History.com explains, “The U.S. Constitution (Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17) instructed that the seat of government be a ‘District (not exceeding ten miles square)’ over which Congress would ‘exercise exclusive legislation.’ James Madison spelled out the reason for the arrangement, explaining that maintaining an isolated district would prevent any state from holding too much power by being home to the national government.”

The situation in the District of Columbia is not new. So, if residents feel that strongly about governing themselves, they are free to move to a city in a state where that is the way things are done. There are places not far from DC where that situation exists.

But Madison’s very sensible and non-partisan strategy is getting in the way of the Democrat’s plan to rule forever.

By way of its design, our government works for the people, not the other way around. The people elect the President, Vice President and members of the Congress, and their taxes pay government employees. The Constitution guides the government and its elected and non-elected employees on how the country must be operated.

This system has worked with little alteration for over two hundred years. Democrats should leave it alone and learn to live within the existing system, the freest and most sensible system ever.

One political party is working very hard to change America

November 8, 2022

Candidate Joe Biden claimed all through the campaign that he would unite the country and that he would be president for all of America. Uniting the country at this time in its history, when it is so heavily divided, is a tall task. But that’s what he said he would do. And given his decades in political office, he surely knew that what he was promising was a very, very, very difficult task.

So how is he doing after nearly two years into his first, and hopefully last, term? Let us take a look at some of the Unifier-in-Chief’s comments.

“Equality and democracy are under assault,” Biden charged in one speech. Trump and his supporters are a menace to our system of government, its international standing, and our very way of life, because they “promote authoritarian leaders and they fan the flames of political violence.” They “are determined to take this country backwards,” he said.

Biden charged in a prime-time address that the “extreme ideology” of Donald Trump and his supporters “threatens the very foundation of our republic.”

“MAGA Republicans are semi-fascists,” he said. Interestingly, fascism is a product of the Left, the far Left, around the world, not the Right. 

Benito Mussolini was an Italian politician and journalist who founded and led the National Fascist Party. Mussolini defined fascism as: “Everything in the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state.” Centralized state power. There are private entities in fascists states, but they are subordinate to the power of the centralized state. This does not sound like Republicans.

Biden also stressed the need to “stand up against” political violence, saying, “we don’t settle our differences in America with a riot … or a hammer,” alluding to the attack on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s husband, Paul.

Remember the violence following the killing of George Floyd in cities across the nation, with burning government buildings, and other things? That violence was not done by Republicans, and those in positions of authority, mayors and governors, who sat back and watched it happen were also not Republicans.

He condemned Republicans who deny the results of the 2020 election, saying “American democracy is under attack” because Trump believes the election was stolen. But, so did Hillary Clinton, of the 2016 election that she lost. And Stacey Abrams of the gubernatorial election in Georgia, which she lost, and never conceded. By the way, both women are Democrats.

Biden was pandering to a mostly black audience when he said they are going to “put y’all back in chains.” And, “you ain’t black” if you weren’t going to vote for him.

“We’re at a serious moment in our nation’s history. The MAGA Republicans don’t just threaten our personal rights and economic security. They are a threat to our very democracy,” Biden said. "They refuse to accept the will of the people. They embrace — embrace — political violence. They don’t believe in democracy. This is why, in this moment, those of you who love this country, Democrats, independents, main-stream Republicans — we must be stronger, more determined and more committed to saving America, than the MAGA Republicans are to destroying America.”

This is an especially interesting comment, as it is the Democrats who want to destroy America by stacking or eliminating the Supreme Court; eliminating the Electoral College, the Constitutional method of electing the President; eliminating the Senate filibuster that protects the rights of the minority party. It is the Democrats who are working to achieve a federal takeover of presidential elections, now controlled by the states.

And, by the way, America is not a democracy. It is a republic that operates under democratic principles. No doubt that Biden would prefer a pure democracy, so that once Democrats gained control, they could change the government to guarantee their continued control.

Furthermore, Republicans are, by their opposition to the Left’s radical plans, working to protect and save our country as designed, our “democracy,” not destroy it.

Biden’s administration ignored the response to a leaked Supreme Court draft opinion that corrected an error in the decades-old Roe v. Wade decision. He initially refused to condemn the leak of the draft opinion or protesters’ illegal targeting of constitutionally conservative justices’ homes. And, House Democrats stalled a recent bill to provide police protection to justices’ families.

Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot — a Democrat — tweeted after the leak: “To my friends in the LGBTQ+ community — the Supreme Court is coming for us next. This moment has to be a call to arms.” Then, there’s Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer’s, also a Democrat, warning in March 2020 about high-court abortion rulings: “I want to tell you, Gorsuch. I want to tell you, Kavanaugh. You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price.” 

In the last two years under Democrat — “progressive” — control, America has lost its energy independence, is suffering under the highest inflation in 40 years, has seen historic increases in crime and the coddling of criminals, and dangerous and deadly levels of illegal immigration at the uncontrolled southern border.

If everyone votes for Republicans in this election, our country will not be harmed, because it is the Democrats whose agenda is to fundamentally change the United States of America.

What is wrong with America? The Left wants to dramatically change it!

October 25, 2022

Those among us who grew up when people learned about their country’s real history, agreed with its sensible principles, and appreciated its fundamental freedoms are very uncomfortable today. 

We watch as our traditions are being ignored or actively discarded, resulting in deconstructing what is generally regarded as the most free and successful form of government yet designed.

Mark Levin is a lawyer, former president of the Landmark Legal Foundation, and a conservative author, broadcaster and commentator. He discussed many things that are wrong with America today in a speech recently. 

“We don’t want to change the Constitution. We want to uphold the Constitution. They’re changing the Constitution. These people don’t even believe in the Constitution. 

“They don’t even believe in American history. They’ve destroyed Madison’s home. They’ve destroyed Jefferson’s home.

“They’re destroying our colleges and universities. They’re destroying our public schools. They’ve destroyed the southern border. They’re destroying our currency and our economy. They’re destroying our military; they’ve destroyed police forces across the country.

“We don’t need lectures from them about us destroying anything. We are the ones that want to uplift this country and believe in this country.”

“They” are the political Left. The Left is responsible for most of our current problems.

Our federal government as it was designed is virtually unrecognizable today. Under federalism, the system upon which the United States of America was formed, there is a balance between the federal government and the states. The federal government has certain authority given to it by the U.S. Constitution, and states have authority in areas not given to the federal government. The result was a limited federal government.

But the federal government has grown well beyond its intended size and scope. And the result is a gargantuan bureaucracy that costs a fortune to operate, and has produced bountiful regulations that so often interfere with the freedom our system was designed to insure.

Why should the federal government be telling people in the states what they can or cannot do with their property? Why should the federal government have any authority over how states and localities educate their children? Why should the federal government, control what businesses across the country pay their employees?

Why do elected officials continue to grow the size and influence of the federal government, increasing the need for higher taxes, and encroaching on the personal freedom of their constituents? Why is the Department of Justice paying any attention to parents in local school districts who attended board of education meetings to object to what is going on in their schools, and labeling them “domestic terrorists” for wanting to protect their children, which is their primary duty?

And why is one group of non-violent people facing large teams of armed federal agents confronting them to arrest them for non-violent crimes, while other groups are peacefully arrested for the same sort of crimes?

The political Left has a very different outlook on life in America. Since excellence in so many things is so critically important, why do they think it is better that good jobs or rewards be delivered to all ethnicities and genders equally, rather than all people having an equal chance to earn these things through performance and merit?

Since the best way to make good decisions is to be aware of the different possibilities that exist, why are ideas that liberals do not agree with being censored from being read or heard to the benefit of everyone? Why promote the ending of an unwanted pregnancy up to, and even beyond the minute of birth, rather than encouraging and assisting in the prevention of pregnancy, or suggesting adoption of the baby? 

Why do those in positions of authority in education or who teach in our public schools think it is okay to diverge from the approved curriculum and/or covertly insert controversial and often-dangerous social concepts into classwork?

Why is it suddenly necessary to change things that have worked to our benefit as a country for more than two centuries by trying to do things like packing or doing away with the Supreme Court, eliminating the Senate filibuster, or eliminating the Electoral College? Why do Democrats in the federal government not insist on a secure southern border that is able to prevent deadly drugs, child and sex traffickers, criminals and other illegal aliens from coming into the country so easily?

Meanwhile, President Joe Biden, who ended America’s energy dominance, now uses our Strategic Petroleum Reserve — which is intended to be used to provide fuel during real emergencies, not to lower Biden’s price increases by a few cents for a few days — to attract voters to Democrats in the mid-term election two weeks from now.

If America does not very soon reject these subversive efforts and return to the tried and true traditional values upon which it was established, it will be only a relatively short time before we will be kneeling to and obeying the Communist Chinese, or a cabal of Chinese, Russians, Iranians and North Koreans, all of whom are working hard to take us down.