Trump’s Fluctuating Loyalty


Justin Smith provides many legitimate reasons why Conservatives should think twice before committing to a Trump nomination for POTUS. The thing is I don’t believe Trump has become popular among Republican voters because of his ideology. The Donald has become representative of American Conservative and Independent displeasure with the business as usual politics exacted by Leftist Dems and Establishment Republicans.

I will not be voting for Donald Trump in my Oklahoma Primary. However if he did win the GOP nomination I would vote for him because he would shake up the way things operate in Washington DC. Trump will manage the Executive Branch as a CEO manages a major corporation. I have no doubts that government management will step on the toes of Leftists and Conservatives alike.

I doubt Trump will change any social issues dear to Conservatives but I suspect he will not add to the Leftist view of social issues. On money management of America’s economy I believe Trump will ignore all the utopian Leftist agendas. On the other hand it will remain to be seen if he cuts Big Government unless he views the operations of pork programs are not profitable.

I think you see my point without me competing with Justin’s thoughts which AGAIN are very legitimate concerns.

JRH 10/19/15

Please Support NCCR

********************

Trump’s Fluctuating Loyalty

By Justin O. Smith

Sent: 10/17/2015 1:37 PM

Americans must not entrust the future of these United States to Donald Trump, despite his accurate assessment concerning the illegal immigration, economic and trade deficit problems. Trump is politically confused, lacking core principled moral values and integrity; and, he is a master of corruption in U.S. politics, who has admittedly bought politicians to increase his own wealth. Trump is no friend to the U.S. Constitution, and rather than being America’s salvation, a President Trump will only serve to the greater detriment of America.

Trump’s disdain for the Bill of Rights and individual liberty is readily apparent, when one reviews his attempts to steal private property for his own use through the misuse of eminent domain. Trump colluded with New Jersey’s Casino Reinvestment Development Authority in 1994 to forcibly remove Vera Coking from her land, valued at over $1 million, and “compensate” her only $251,000; righteously, Coking beat them in court. And in 2005, Trump told Neil Cavuto (Fox News) that he fully agreed with the Supreme Court’s 2005 ‘Kelo decision’, which legitimized this sort of government-abetted theft of private property.

Although Trump attempts to equate his midnight conversion to conservatism to President Ronald Reagan leaving the Democratic Party for the GOP, Trump has changed party affiliation from Republican to Independent to Democrat and back to Republican in a matter of two decades, just in time for the Iowa caucuses. Please note, Reagan’s core values never shifted away from a strong pro-life and pro-Second Amendment position in the way Trump’s values shift much like the changing of one’s underwear from day to day, depending on his own personal agenda and who has his ear at the moment.

While Trump now says that “gun and magazine bans are a total failure” and presents himself as pro-2nd Amendment, he supported a ban on semi-automatic “assault weapons” and thirty round magazines as late as 2009 (note: A car or hammer can be an “assault weapon” too). His current acceptance of limited restrictions for gun ownership highlights his fundamentally flawed view of the 2nd Amendment, which reads “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

In 1999, Trump was interviewed by ‘Meet the Press’ when he was considering running for president, under Ross Perot’s reform Party. When asked if he would ban partial-birth abortion, he answered: “No I would not. I am pro-choice in every respect as far as it goes, but I just hate it.” And now, Trump is supposedly “pro-life”, probably in the same manner that Obama supported the Defense of Marriage Act until he did not.

Who in their right minds can wholeheartedly support Trump, when he was a Democrat, making massive donations to the likes of Nancy Pelosi, the Clintons and John Kerry and supporting the very “socialist/communist” views of that party as late as 2004 — the very “socialist/communist” views he now rails against?

Who is going to be fool enough to actually cast their vote for Trump, once they know that he supported John Kerry — a communist and islamofascist sympathizer — for president in 2004?

In 2007, Trump told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer that it “was a shame that race was lost”, as he talked about John Kerry’s and John Edward’s bid to take the White House for the Progressive Democrats. Trump elaborated with “I’m so upset that he [Kerry] blew it.”

Trump further exhibited his ignorance, his lack of reasoning and logic and his willingness to jump on the bandwagon behind any idea that appealed to his own fallacious beliefs in 2008, when he praised then Speaker Nancy Pelosi for attacking President Bush for getting the U.S. “into the war [Iraq] with lies.” Trump bought the Progressive talking points hook-line-and sinker and completely ignored the fact that even most of the Democratic Caucus, including Senator Hillary Clinton, supported President Bush’s action based on the very same intelligence — the only intelligence — that they and Bush had been given by U.S. and allied intelligence organizations.

In August 2015, Carly Fiorina, GOP presidential candidate, explained that Trump has tapped into America’s legitimate frustration, however, Fiorina concluded with this thought: “I would say this. Since he has changed his mind on amnesty, on healthcare and on abortion, I would ask, what are the principles by which he will govern?”

President Reagan’s son, Michael, recently told ‘Politifact’ that Donald Trump is the candidate who is least like Ronald Reagan. He countered Trump’s August assertion that he had a strong relationship with President Reagan by asking “exactly how many state dinners [was Trump] invited to?” Michael Reagan also suggested that Trump could not win the national election.

With Trump still giving the Clinton Foundation money in 2015, can YOU honestly say that you would trust Trump to govern the United States in an honest and constitutionally acceptable manner? Even though a President Trump may reduce the Depts. of Education and the EPA, America is quite likely to witness Big Government expand in other sectors, more crony-capitalism/corruption and an ingrained oligarchy and the further abuse of our U.S. Constitution.

Even though everyone learns new information throughout their lifetime, it usually only leads them to minor shifts in their core beliefs by the time they are well past their thirties, but Donald Trump has shown a pathological desire to change quite often between two most divergent political philosophies — the conservative belief of freedom under the law and the progressive belief that control is better than freedom. America does not need anyone in the White House who has shown such uncertainty in what they truly believe and hold most dear in their heart of hearts.

Aside from all of this, I cannot in good conscience vote for a person to be our U.S. President, who thinks “bigly” is a word and cannot quote a single verse from his “favorite book”, the Bible, when pressed to do so.

America needs an intelligent, knowledgeable Constitutional conservative, who will defend our religious freedom and the First Amendment, along with an equally forceful defense of the entire Bill of Rights, rather than the closet Progressive Trump and his convoluted understanding of the U.S. Constitution. America needs a man or woman, who is confident enough in their sense of righteous purpose to forcefully defend America and Her allies in the cause of Liberty — someone guided philosophically by the likes of Barry Goldwater, William F. Buckley and Ronald Reagan. America needs a patriot, who recognizes our nation’s promise and the potential for opportunity that still remains, found in conservative principles, and, they will know that “In God We Trust” gives us hope and courage and moves the entire country towards greater prosperity and success.

By Justin O. Smith

___________________

Edited by John R. Houk

© Justin O. Smith

Watch the Hypocrisy – Defend Liberty to the Death


Raleigh Cig Coupon

John R. Houk

© October 24, 2014

 

Danny Jeffrey wrote a convincing essay connecting cigarette smoking and constitutionally insured Liberty. Below is the comment I left to that essay (if indeed it posts) entitled “Seeking answers to today’s issues.” You may understand my thoughts better if you read his essay.

 

+++

 

I didn’t read all the comments Danny, but Wow! You certainly got a big response.

 

Anyway, you are one of my favorite polemicists. That said, you might be disappointed to learn that I am a non-smoker. And in my later years I have been somewhat militant about non-smoking.

 

Before you stone me you should be aware that my Grandmother whom I lived with was a lung cancer survivor twice. The second time she quite – cold turkey. I have to admit Grandma’s cold turkey was not a pleasant experience for me. Grandma was more than a bit grouchy about very simple matters. Going cold turkey affected her health in other ways. Cold turkey meant overeating to take her mind off the nicotine cravings. By her mid-70s she became a diabetic and died of a heart attack.

 

My Uncle was also a butt-hacker. When he was in his early 60s he became the unlucky recipient of lung cancer – and died 3 months later.

 

As I said my Grandmother was a smoker. Consequently my Grandfather was also a smoker. He actually smoked Camels without filters. He also quit cold turkey. Mysteriously he did not turn into a nicotine deprived monster as my Grandma did. He died in his mid-80s natural causes. I should mention he smoked from his teenage days until his early-50s when he quit cold turkey. Just guessing – it seems then he smoked nearly 40 years and was nicotine free for about 30 years.

 

My Grandmother was about 12 years older than my Grandfather and it was her 2nd marriage (Yup, she robbed the cradle). Grandma smoked Raleighs. Since I was perched in the backseat when Mom drove and Grandma sat in the front passenger seat, the cigarette smoke flowed toward the back. Yup, car sickness was a frequent issue for me. A smoke filled living room was something I learned to tolerate but never enjoyed. In the present I often wonder how I trained myself to tolerate smoke filled rooms. Now-a-days being in a room that has been smoke filled nauseates me.

 

Nonetheless there was a silver lining to Grandma’s chain smoking days. Raleighs had reward coupons. We acquired many fun things over the years because Grandma was also a compulsive coupon saver. I still have fond memories of the excellently made croquette set those coupons delivered to us. I owned that croquette set through my own children’s childhood and teen years – long after Grams went to live with Jesus.

 

Here’s some irony for you Danny. You went to Washington State to visit a Conservative friend, right? I grew up in a small college town in Central Washington that had about 10,000 people living in it when I was a kid and about 14,000 by the time I graduated and moved to Oklahoma to attend a Bible School. For a little more background the small town was roughly divided between the College students (now University) and the local townspeople. I was one of the townspeople. As you can guess the townspeople tended to lean toward Conservatism even if it was unwittingly. And the College was quite liberal especially a significant number of the students were from the Seattle side of the Cascades that roughly divides Washington State.

 

Now I say unwitting “Conservatives” because most of the townspeople (including my family) acted like Conservatives in values but voted Democrat because of the false perception that Franklin Delano Roosevelt saved America from the Depression. Yup, I was one of those Baby Boomers that had the deprivations of the Depression history drilled into my childhood. Wasted food was a corporal punishment crime and my Mom walked uphill in the snow both ways to school.

 

Conservatism for me was thus a transition from the kind of Liberal Democrats that were around in my teen days to becoming a Born Again Christian at age 20. In the transition I played with Libertarianism for a while under the influence of Ayn Rand then embracing Conservatism. The Liberal Dems in Washington State in my teen days would be described as Neocons today. Socially Center-Liberal and with a big pro-military stand to fight Communism. My last Dem Senator Hero was Henry ‘Scoop’ Jackson.

 

So much for the small town background.

 

Sooo – cigarette smoke made me nauseated as a kid and really does now as a person a couple of years away from 60. I am one of those people Danny that you would be upset with. I am very gratified that non-smoking areas has increased exponentially since my childhood days.

 

On the other hand leave it to you to expose the hypocrisy of my gratitude. I would be one that rails against homosexual activists and atheist activists trampling on the First Amendment Rights of Christians. I would be the one exploding because a school banned a patriotic or Christian oriented shirt but saw no problem no problem in pressing anti-Christian homosexual acceptance and teaching the ways of Allah for multicultural understanding. AND yet your point that a smoker exercise in Liberty is hampered by regulating space where free will should occur when there is no harm to others.

 

Danny I would be one telling you that each cancer stick you smoke is another coffin nail in your life. But being your 70s that argument is pretty ridiculous to make. Danny I am assuming you are lung cancer free so telling you of the dangers of smoking to your lungs does seem a bit ludicrous. It has to sound a bit like telling a fish he might drown for spending so much time in the water.

 

In your sharing I was quite amused how you segued from smoke-Liberty to Americans losing their patriotic heritage to stand for Truth, Justice and the American Way or die trying. Frankly that is how you convinced me that smoke-Liberty is as important American Liberty. The old saying that goes: “I do not agree with what you have to say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it,” (Voltaire) is becoming a lost train of thought of in America’s divisive political spectrum.

 

Danny you have convinced me of your butt-hacker Liberty to smoke and I will die to defend that right. Wait, I’m an overweight dude on a disability. Will you defend my right to be a fatso to the death?

 

Just kidding. I’ll defend your right to smoke. Probably I won’t try dying though. As you pointed out in your essay there is a good chance I will fall victim to being overweight long before the last coffin nail hits your casket.

 

Danny since I now defend your smoke-Liberty, if our paths should ever cross perhaps you might give me a heads up before you light up. I got to tell ya man, smoking really does produce a nauseating feeling for me.

 

JRH 10/24/14

Please Support NCCR

In Support of Conservative Principles and Biblical Christianity


Ben Franklin praising Christian Morality quote

 

John R. Houk

© August 15, 2014

 

I have been having a discussion with a commenter on my NCCR blog. I had posted that discussion in portion under the title, “So who’s Full of Baloney?” As you can expect that discussion has continued in the comment section at the NCCR blog. We have both entered the realm of antagonism once in a while but for the most part the discussion has been civil. I have always assumed Bryan the commenter was a Leftist due to his way Left of Center defense. In his last comment he said he was neither a Leftist nor a Right Winger but read info and made his own decisions. I will probably get into trouble by trying to find a place on the political spectrum for a guy that puts up a stiff defense for Left Wing principle yet considers himself neither Left nor Right on that spectrum. So I won’t.

 

Anyway, Bryan posted a rather lengthy comment to a comment I made knocking a previous Bryan comment. Bryan’s most recent comment is an impressive evenhanded response to my comment. I am going to do you – the reader – a small disservice by not posting Bryan’s last comment. Bryan’s comment was posted on August 5th so I am a bit behind the curve in actually responding. As you read my most recent response you may feel the need to go to Bryan’s comment to read exactly what I am responding to. HERE is the link to Bryan’s most recent comment as of this post if you choose to read.

 

Thus begins my response:

 

Bryan I appreciate the civility of this last comment. The only thing I can get behind 100% is the concept of the Free Choice and the 1st Amendment. As you can guess there are some nuances that I can never agree with.

 

Leftists, Atheists and perhaps centrists that interpret the 1st Amendment as the Freedom from religion in the sense of Christian Morality is flawed. And you can realize why from our exchanges. On the other hand I absolutely support one practicing any faith that does not run contrary to the American-style of the rule of law and I absolutely support a non-religious life if so chosen. What I cannot support is for Leftists, Atheists, Centrists or non-Christian faiths forcing the practice of Christianity out of the public forum. That was never the Original Intent of the Constitution. Rather the Original Intent was to make the rule of Law to not force anyone practice a particular form of Christianity and I’ll accept by extension to not force anyone to practice any form of religion or atheism. However, unconstitutional Separation of Church and State enthusiasts force Christians NOT to practice their faith quite forcefully under the false that practicing faith forces the non-faithful to practice a religion or ideology that is against another’s faith or lack thereof.

 

The Original Intent of the First Amendment was to offer anyone to practice their faith even in a public forum without restrictions than with restrictive prohibitions. The government is not endorsing any religion because the public forum allows one to freely practice like-minded religious principles. After all there is a certain universality on the foundations of Christian between all the Denominations of Protestants (incidentally the Original thinking of the Founding Fathers), Roman Catholics and Eastern Rite Christianity. Hence a prayer by a football team or a city council will probably have more broad agreement than hostile disagreement. If an atheist chooses not to pray – so be it. If a non-Christian in attendance wishes to pray according their own faith – so be it. Don’t force a culture in which Christians cannot pray just because taxpayer money might be paying for a Public School Football team or Field or pays for the meeting room of a City Council et al. That is breaking religious freedom more than the fallacy of allowing prayer establishes a national Church. The 1st Amendment prohibits the government from establishing a national Church (Original Intent) and by extension any national religion.

 

The case for or against abortion is argued as a woman’s free choice with their own body or against the personal life of the unborn baby in a woman’s womb. For a Biblical Christian calling an unborn baby a body extension with philosophically sanitized word of “fetus” is just smoke and mirrors to people of faith.

 

The increasing (and unfortunate) success of homosexual activists changing the minds of a huge chunk of American voters does not make the homosexual lifestyle any more acceptable to Biblical Christians. Yet homosexual activists have successfully used the legal system to force Biblical Christians to make wedding cakes for same-sex weddings, restricted Biblical Christian clubs or associations in Public Schools or Public Colleges from forming while allowing homosexual clubs and associations to prosper. This is a restriction of 1st Amendment religious freedom to accommodate a fairly recent acceptance of homosexuality. Indeed a Biblical Christian is now vilified as a bigot for demanding their religious freedom on a campus while a homosexual club or association gleefully mocks the Biblical Christians because they are restricted and the homosexuals freely practice a lifestyle Biblical Christians find abhorrent.

 

The one complaint you have that indicts me is my attitude toward Islam. I have a huge problem with Islam as a religion and Muslims that support Salafist (i.e. purest) Islam or even Muslims that might consider themselves moderate yet support Islamic terrorist like Hamas that are dedicated to killing Jews, Christians and Americans. I actually sway back and forth between Dajjal’s solution for Muslims who hate and the Christian principles of forgiveness and mercy. It depends on the Muslim atrocity, the Muslim self-justification or the Muslim lie of the day versus how much time I have spent in meditation in the Holy Scriptures. This inner struggle between ending Muslim hate and the patience of Jesus is constant. Perhaps you can be the conscience of the day once in a while that isn’t quite antagonistic.

 

Bryan I am certain I probably did not respond to all your concerns but I have run out of gas. I think you get the idea of my frustration with Leftist, Atheist and Centrist complainers of the practice of Free Market principles and Biblical Christianity. I am also certain your principles are no more tolerant of my Biblical Christian Conservative ideology than I would be with yours.

 

JRH 8/15/14

Please Support NCCR

Transforming to Conservatism with an Illumination of Heresy


Proud to be everything Leftists Hate

John R. Houk

© August 8, 2014

 

Years ago when I became a Born Again Christian I began the ironic evolution (ironic because since being Born Again I am not a huge fan of Darwinian Evolution) of moving from a Center-Left Liberal to a downright Christian Right Conservative. And honestly there are quite a few Neoconservative ideas in which I have an affinity.

 

I began with this micro-bio of my faith because I read a fascinating article from the Acton Institute with the theme of heretics and heresy. I first became aware of the Acton Institute back in the days of the disillusionment I began having with the Democratic Party. Just think, back in the early 1980’s the Dems were not even close to being as anti-Christian as they have become under the direction of President Barack Hussein Obama. One of the last good Dems was still in the Senate – Henry (Scoop) Jackson – in Washington State where I grew up in Eastern Washington.

 

Senator Jackson was quite Liberal on most domestic issues (I am a bit uncertain social issues such as abortion and gay marriage). On the other hand before terms like Neoconservatism and American Exceptionalism was a political cause, Jackson was quite supportive of a strong military to confront Marxist expansionism embodied by the then Soviet Union. Jackson believed in supporting Western-style democracy in foreign governments to confront the totalitarianism that was the spread of the disease of Communism.

 

After abandoning the Dems I was not politically transformed enough to be a Republican. Hence in 1980 I did not vote for Ronald Reagan. Actually I don’t even remember the name of the Candidate I voted for in 1980 except it was the Libertarian Party’s candidate for POTUS. I voted Libertarian because of my disgust for Carter and my distrust Reagan (at the time) as a button pushing warmonger. It is in these Libertarian days that I found the writings of Lord John Acton, Ayn Rand (See Also HERE and HERE) and Ludwig von Mises. Libertarians promoted these people as pioneers of Libertarianism. Although my insight today is these guys though definitely espoused much of the Libertarian ideals, none of them would call themselves Libertarian in today’s sense of social Liberalism and Free Market Conservatism as expressed in this thought:

 

Libertarianism is the view that each person has the right to live his life in any way he chooses so long as he respects the equal rights of others. Libertarians defend each person’s right to life, liberty, and property-rights that people have naturally, before governments are created. In the libertarian view, all human relationships should be voluntary; the only actions that should be forbidden by law are those that involve the initiation of force against those who have not themselves used force-actions like murder, rape, robbery, kidnapping, and fraud. (Quote from Libertarianism: A Primer by David Boaz; Found at – What is Libertarian? Written for Institute of Humane Studies at George Mason University)

 

This train of thought sounded like a great compromise between the exploitive ravages of Left Wing Liberalism and the part of Conservatism I was not ready embrace, viz. a super military with the ability to threaten the people of Independent nations that live under a different political paradigm in which Americans are acquainted. Today I view the latter as naïve wishful thinking that people can just get along. The former sounded great from a Liberty point of view yet I came to realize Social Libertarianism did not comply with the Biblical view of God Almighty.

 

This social view hypocritically viewed the rights of female individuals trump the rights of unborn human beings in a woman’s womb. This social view deceptively justifies immoral living as acceptable as long as it doesn’t cause physical harm to another person. This is deceptive because if the Creator says it is wrong that means there is harm to the inner man (or inner person to feminists and Liberals) of an individual both in person and to those unwittingly exposed to immorality from another. And so, I abandoned Libertarianism.

 

I have found that the Acton Institute (actually founded in 1990) named after Lord John Acton promotes Conservative economics and Godly morality.

 

And hence I return to the fascinating article from the Acton Institute entitled, “Heretics and Heresies, New and Old”. Here Hunter Baker brilliantly demonstrates that a heretic can be something other than merely deviating from the orthodox principles of a particular faith.

 

JRH 8/8/14

Please Support NCCR

******************************

Heretics and Heresies, New and Old

 

By Hunter Baker

August 6, 2014

Acton Institute

 

You may not have realized it, but Tony Dungy is a heretic.  Does the former football player, coach and now TV analyst hold beliefs that are considered heretical by his fellow Christians?  No.  But his recent doubts about Michael Sam as an NFL player (you’ll recall Sam as the All American college athlete who has publicly announced that he’s gay), caused Dungy to be viewed as a heretic by members of another sect that is gaining adherents at a rapid pace.  They are more sure of themselves than ever.  Where once they pleaded for tolerance, now they sense that they are gaining the upper hand.  “There can be no tolerance for ideas that are wrong,” they explain.  And they are thinking it might be time to exercise new power.

 

Whether the issue is the HHS mandate regarding the provision of contraceptive products or new attitudes regarding same-sex romance and marriage, the group holding what might be called “progressive” attitudes has demonstrated a willingness to push those who disagree into conforming.  The Christian florist or baker must be brought to heel.  Maybe even sent away for sensitivity training.  When the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a narrow decision in favor of Hobby Lobby, the secular-progressives howled as though some peasant had failed to remove his hat in the presence of the king.

 

The issue hasn’t always been sex or bioethics.  If we look back into the 20th century, we can see the Soviets persecuting heretics of a different kind.  In Russia, the heresy was the idea that the state should be limited or that people should be able to determine their own economic destiny.  Some heretics even thought (gasp!) that citizens should be allowed to own property. While they were at it, of course, the Soviets, and the Bolsheviks before them, launched a massive persecution of Christians that heaped up martyrs by the millions.

 

China under Chairman Mao had heretics, too.  These were people who had doubts about The Great Leap Forward and other plans set forth by the great leader who declared that “China has stood up!”  Some of the heretics were people like college professors who had to be humbled by being sent out into the rural areas to perform farm labor.  Others forgot to place pictures of Mao in their homes in prominent positions.  During the Cultural Revolution, packs of enthusiastic teens beat such people, including their once esteemed elders, with belt buckles for a lack of proper revolutionary attitude.  As of this summer, I think a few members of our own revolutionary vanguard may have wanted to take belts off and start swinging at the proprietors of a certain craft store.

 

The tragic thing is that we all seem to have a tendency to want to marginalize and hound the heretics among us. Deng Xiaoping was sent to a re-education camp by Mao Zedong for his incorrect thinking.  You might think he would, in turn, be an advocate for greater freedom of expression.  But who authored the outcome at Tiananmen Square?  It was none other than Chairman Deng.

 

I am sorry to say that Christians, who are rapidly becoming the heretics of this age as they were in others, are far from innocent in this regard.  They were persecuted terribly as an unacceptable cult in the Roman Empire.  When they finally gained acceptance, it was a great deliverance for them.  Official tolerance brought freedom.  Eventually, there was power.  While the first Christian emperor, Constantine, was not a great coercer of others, some of his successors were.  And we all know that the experience of the church in the west includes acts of savagery in war and the torment of heretics in times of peace.  Sometimes repression is due to a desire to retain power, but all too often we are willing to commit crimes against others because we want to bring the millennium.  According to this view, Paradise won’t overtake us unless a few committed people are willing to do whatever it takes (perhaps by any means necessary) to get the job done.

 

It is one thing to pursue visions of moral and spiritual excellence in a positive fashion.  We should feel free to exchange ideas and to persuade one another of the correctness of our views.  That is the process by which we attempt to discover truth.  But there is a human factor that turns healthy debate toward coercion.  It is the penchant we have for finding disagreement and disconfirmation unpleasant and unsettling.  We don’t like to hear that others hold a different view.  Our understandings of the world are precious to us.  It can be especially exciting to have some new view that seems to be enlightened in comparison to the retrograde mindsets of others.  We don’t appreciate it when these knuckle-draggers don’t get with the program.

 

But the temptation is always there to finish the process of converting the group with a little intimidation here, some official marginalization there, and the loss of privileges.  Maybe those people shouldn’t be able to run a school or have an important job or participate in the community in a variety of ways.  Brendan Eich, another new heretic who co-founded Firefox and was evicted from his own organization, can tell you all about it.

 

_____________________________

Transforming to Conservatism with an Illumination of Heresy

John R. Houk

© August 8, 2014

___________________________

Heretics and Heresies, New and Old

 

© 2014 Acton Institute

 

Acton Institute Core Principles

Integrating Judeo-Christian Truths with Free Market Principles

 

1)     Dignity of the Person

 

2)     Social Nature of the Person

 

3)     Importance of Social Institutions

 

4)     Human Action

 

5)     Sin

 

6)     Rule of Law and the Subsidiary Role of Government

 

7)     Creation of Wealth

 

8)     Economic Liberty

 

9)     Economic Value

 

10) Priority of Culture

 

Dignity of the Person – The human person, created in the image of God, is individually unique, rational, the subject of moral agency, and a co-creator. Accordingly, he possesses intrinsic value and dignity, implying certain rights and duties both for himself and other persons. These truths about the dignity of the human person are known through revelation, but they are also discernible through reason.

 

Social Nature of the Person – Although persons find ultimate fulfillment only in communion with God, one essential aspect of the development of persons is our social nature and capacity to act for disinterested ends. The person is fulfilled by interacting with other persons and by participating in moral goods. There are READ THE REST

 

Obama and Leftist Minions Fear Bachmann


USA-CAMPAIGN/BACHMANN

John R. Houk

© March 26, 2013

 

When Michele Bachmann entered the nomination race for the 2012 GOP race for President I supported her. Bachmann is a Tea Party Conservative and a Social Conservative with a strong Christian foundation. Regardless of Leftist Dems, a Left oriented MSM and Establishment Republicans being against her Bachmann survived the smearing of a Presidential campaign and a huge push to defeat her as a Congresswoman.

 

From the recent emails I am receiving from her campaign Bachmann perceives the relentless anti-Conservative/anti-Christian Dems are coming after her again in her 2014 reelection campaign.

 

The investigation against Bachmann is the political motivated agenda to discredit or embarrass Rep. Bachmann to make her a more plausible target for Leftist money to defeat her in 2014. Check this out:

 

Congressional ethics investigators are pursuing allegations of financial impropriety in U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann’s 2012 presidential campaign, according to several attorneys and former staffers involved in the case.

 

 

A spokesman for Bachmann’s congressional office suggested that the disclosure of the new ethics review, though it originates with staffers in her own campaign, was engineered by political adversaries.

 

“Unfortunately, the disclosure of the existence of this review is a predictable and politically motivated attack by Congresswoman Bachmann’s political adversaries in an attempt to disparage her reputation as a top target of the DCCC [Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee] and Democratic Super PACs,” said Bachmann spokesman Dan Kotman. “They are willing to do or say anything in an attempt to defeat her in 2014.”

 

William McGinley, a top GOP Washington attorney representing Bachmann’s campaign in the new inquiry and before the FEC, said, “There are no allegations that the congresswoman engaged in any wrongdoing.” He added that “We … are confident that at the end of their review the OCE board will conclude that Congresswoman Bachmann did not do anything inappropriate.” (Michele Bachmann under congressional ethics investigation; by KEVIN DIAZ , Star Tribune; Updated: March 25, 2013 – 11:26 PM – READ THE REST)

 

Below is one of those emails imploring for your support on a national basis rather than just her District constituents in Minnesota.

 

JRH 3/26/13

Please Support NCCR

**********************************

It’s starting

 

Sent by Michele Bachmann

Sent: 3/22/2013 1:35 PM

 

John — It’s starting.

The Democrats, with the help and dollars from major liberal organizations like the DCCC are gearing up to spend millions to defeat me.

You see, they are already telling reporters I am on the top of their list and I need your immediate help to fight back.

John, the fact that the Democrat’s are gearing up so early before next year’s election is not good news. They will raise and spend millions to defeat me, and I won’t be able to fight back without your help.

I sent you the below email on Tuesday, and I need to know I have your support.

The Democrat’s are watching our campaign like hawks, and your actions today to support my campaign will show them our strength and unity.

You know that I will always stand up and fight for our shared conservative values, but in order to continue to be your voice in Washington, I need the strongest campaign war chest and grassroots network as possible. That’s why I need your URGENT support today!

Please read my email below and let me know I can depend on your support with a personal contribution for $35, $70, $100, $250, $500 or more to Bachmann for Congress today.

Thank you and God bless.

-Michele

Sent from my iPhone


Begin forwarded message:

From: Michele Bachmann
Date: March 20, 2013 10:52:26 AM CDT
Subject: It’s starting

 

John,

The national Democrats would love nothing more than to see me lose — and they have already decided to pull out all the stops to make that happen.

In fact just yesterday, Roll Call — a Capitol Hill political publication — is hinting that the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) is telling reporters that I’m on the top of their list for defeat. (The DCCC is Nancy Pelosi’s campaign slush fund.)

You see, the DCCC has already identified my district and campaign as one they are targeting for defeat in 2014. And you can bet they will have the resources to go all out. In 2012 alone, the DCCC raised and spent more than $184 million dollars to defeat Republicans.

And, in addition to working overtime to defeat our campaign, they have willing accomplices in the liberal media to continue their dirty work by misrepresenting and misleading voters all over the national airwaves.

John, I need your help to fight back.

I cannot do this without you. Our campaign is entirely funded by the donations of my supporters and close friends like yourself.

Won’t you please make an instant online contribution of $25, $50, $100 or more right now so I can fight back against the liberals in the national media and at the DCCC?

You see, the DCCC has it all wrong. They think that if they can defeat me, they will have defeated our values. But, our campaign isn’t about me- it’s about US. It’s about restoring our government and economy, protecting our shared constitutional conservative values, eliminating the wasteful spending in Washington, and ensuring our conservative voice is heard.

We cannot let the DCCC undo all of the great work we have done in the past. The actions we take today will determine our future.

If the national Democrats and the liberal media are going to start campaigning against me this early — then you and I must start this early as well.

And that’s exactly why I’m writing you today.

You have been a loyal supporter and friend, but your continued support has never been more important. The ultra-liberals at the DCCC are now openly targeting my race, and we need to fight back.

The fastest way to join our campaign is by making an online donation.

Thank you for standing with me at the outset of what promises to be an exciting year.

Sincerely,

 

Michele Bachmann

PS. I need your urgent support. The fact that the DCCC is working this early to defeat our campaign, proves that they will pull out all the stops this election cycle. We must work hard today to prove we are going to fight back with everything we have. Please follow this link to show your support and make your most generous contribution of $25, $50, $100 or more today. Thanks.

_________________________

Obama and Leftist Minions Fear Bachmann

John R. Houk

© March 26, 2013

________________________

It’s starting

 

Paid for by Bachmann for Congress

 

Not produced at government expense. Contributions to Bachmann for Congress are not tax deductible for federal income tax purposes.

 

 

Americans – Never Give up Your Optimism


Relentness Optimism

John R. Houk

© September 9, 2012

 

Danny Jeffrey is an insightful awesome writer. I just happen to once in awhile disagree on minor points. Jeffrey believes the USA is a catastrophe waiting to happen no matter who wins the Office of President on the first Tuesday in November 2012. AND Jeffrey offers some very legitimate reasons America’s imminent collapse as a nation.

 

In Jeffrey’s recent essay entitled “The Coming Collapse” I would be in the category that I find optimism for America if Republican Romney defeats Democrat Socialist Obama.

 

I am willing to be cautiously optimistic by taking Mitt Romney’s word for being Conservative on Social Issues and a fiscal Conservative regarding the size of domestic government.

 

If Jeffrey is correct and Romney will act as an über “Progressive” in the Office of President I am still not willing to view America’s collapse. I place my optimism in the American voter to do away with Republicans as the major opposition Party to the now fringe Leftist Democratic Party.

 

There is a political infrastructure in place that can emerge as a National Political Party. That political infrastructure is the as yet still fractured Tea Party organizations that Leftists love to vilify as racist bigots. We Americans that believe in the political experiment the Founding Fathers initiated know that is mere lying Leftist propaganda that is evident from the lying speeches made at the recent Democratic Nation Convention.

 

If Romney is a liar rather than a new believer in Conservative principles and/or the Tea Party fails to unite, I fear Jeffrey’s prediction will indeed manifest. America is the last great hope for freedom worldwide; however the Tea Party could be the last great hope for American Constitutionalism as envisioned by the Founding Fathers.

 

Barring my optimism, the America as we know it will collapse into political chaos ripe for despotism or America’s Second Revolutionary War for Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness under God nature’s Creator.

 

JRH 9/9/12

Please Support NCCR

******************************

The Coming Collapse

 

By Danny Jeffrey

September 6, 2012

Freedom Ring 1776

 

The United States is on the verge of collapse and a descent into bloody civil war, and so few are even aware of the danger we face. Many gullible Americans still cling to our old optimism that we will  get it right in the next election, but 2012 is going to be the year that will finally crush those beliefs and usher in a chaos such as free Americans have never dreamed possible.

I used to write in an effort to wake my fellow countrymen to the approaching danger and prepare them for events to come. My tactics have changed as those events are now imminent and any who have not already realized the obvious are lost, and I shall waste no more precious time on them. It is my intentions to address only those who will be involved in the conflict to come, and in the birth of the Second American Republic. Any who do not fall into that category are of no interest to me. As Dennis Miller so eloquently phrased it: “I want to help the helpless, but I don’t give a rat’s ass about the clueless.”

Today I look upon this nation as I would a house still standing after years of termite abuse. America and that house have long since been destroyed with only a corrupted visible shell still standing. All that once made them magnificent has already been eaten away by their enemies. They both still stand but behind the facade, which is no more than a lingering illusion, all that once made them strong have suffered the abuse of an unrelenting attack by unseen enemies within.

The owner of that house, resting comfortably in his recliner is aware that termites have infiltrated his home but he is blissfully unaware of just how much damage has been done. Occasionally he sees a little more evidence of unwelcome guest and plans to have the pest control people eliminate the problem in the Spring of next year.

The American people are just as ignorant as he, and they too plan to correct the problem when they “vote em out” in the next election. That home owner and the voters of this nation are about to get a rude awakening, for both have waited far too long and events have passed the point of no return. The house, though freshly painted and looking fairly well for its age, has been effectively destroyed from within, and with the next heavy rain or snow storm it will collapse with a mighty whisper around the owner’s head.

So too will America, only its demise will be triggered by a great financial collapse, multiple attacks from Islamic terrorists, a burning dementia in the streets of America, or a declaration of martial law by the American dictator. The ruin of America will not simply be a mighty whisper. It will be an Earth shaking roar that will echo through the pages of history. and only history will tell if our fall leads to a second republic or heralds a nonstop slide into yet another dark age for mankind.

Ronald Reagan once referred to America as “the last best hope for mankind” and for a brief eight years it was, but Reagan is no more, and the same can now be said for the nation he rebuilt. It has fallen into a degenerate state of moral decay called Progressivism, and it is being overrun by a form of lawfare imposed by our leaders who have sold out to the massive wealth of the oil producing nations of Islam..

Hope is a strange word. Reagan gave it a reality that was uniquely American, Obama used it as a weapon to entice the gullible, now those unwilling to face the truth are continuing to hope for a better country while allowed only a choice between a Marxist and a Progressive. My advice to the wise … Hope not! Don’t waste time in wishful thinking and money supporting politicians who have already betrayed you. Prepare for the final days of a once great nation, do what must be done to survive the ordeal. and then live on to build a new Republic; not a Democracy … A Republic.

For those who have never beheld the horrors of war, you have much to learn, and the more you learn now the better are your odds of remaining alive when chaos walks among us. The first thing you must do is stop thinking that “Right is Might!”, or that “Good will always prevail.” That is pure nonsense! Napoleon said it best with his remark “God is on the side of the biggest batallions.” Another thing to get out of your head is “I hope I never have to …” (You fill in the blank). Your survival and the rebirth of America depends on adopting the attitude of “I will do whatever must be done!”

One other issue that should be dropped into the nearest dust bin is “Hold the moral high ground.” At the moment it is the right thing to do, but there is NO moral high ground in combat, and there is no such thing as a fair fight. There are only the quick, and the dead. That is why one of the best military tactics is an ambush.

What inspired this essay is a video posted by an internet friend that reminded me of how unprepared most Americans really are for what lies ahead, and a large part of that unpreparedness is based on our code of right and wrong, for our enemies do not share in our beliefs, and if we fight them under our terms we will lose.  Another weakness we have is that part of our enemies will be Islamic terrorists. They speak our language. Few of us speak theirs.

This is the video I mentioned and it well illustrates the problem of us not comprehending their speech. It is less than a minute long and well worth watching. It is complete with subtitles that indicate the Muslim children are chanting Obama’s praises as he will destroy the Great Satan, America. It is also a hoax. These children have been taught the Qur’an all day and now are repeating their memorized lesson back to their teacher. They are not speaking of Obama, nor are they speaking of The Great Satan of America. This video is no more than a scare tactic and it most assuredly has found many victims.

I truly hope that none who read this will continue the hoax by passing this on as being the truth. Americans are already the victims of widespread disinformation, perpetrated by both our government and our media. We need no more lies and half truths from fellow citizens.

You have all heard the phrase “Know thine enemy”. That is one of our greatest weaknesses. George Bush the Younger seriously misled America with his now famous pronouncement that Islam is a Religion of Peace. Islam and the wretched Qur’an have given birth to the greatest evil ever spawned upon the face of the Earth. Bush also told us to relax and go shopping, when he should have told us to dig in and be prepared to repel the enemy. He was seriously misled by his adviser Grover Norquist, advocate of Islam.

We were seriously misled by Bush, and walked right into the baited trap known as Barack Hussein Obama, and he is not misled. He knows full well what he is doing and his goal, and the goal of those he serves, is to strengthen Islam and reduce America to the status of a third world Islamic state.

The election of 2012 will be a defining moment in American history. If Obama wins then America and Israel will both soon feel the wrath of Islam and the forces of the New World Order. In the unlikely event he loses, be prepared for riots, looting, burning of our cities, and the onslaught of terrorist attacks. Romney will, if elected, change the direction of the attack on America but the attack will continue. He is not a servant of Islam, as is Obama, but he is a hard core Progressive and he serves the dictates of those who have brought America down these many years.

Suggested Reading…

Conservatives On The Brink Of Extinction

We Are Not Doomed

Republican Party…Rest In Peace

Confrontation…Soon To Be

___________________________

Americans – Never Give up Your Optimism

John R. Houk

© September 9, 2012

___________________________

The Coming Collapse

 

About Danny Jeffrey:

 

I’m sixty seven and since Ronald Reagan left office I have watched my country slowly deteriorate as freedoms are lost and the value of our currency dwindles. This has been a slow but steady decline until Barrack Obama entered the White House. I will not refer to this man as President. That is a job that deserves respect and he has earned none at all. I am convinced that were it not for the Tea Party stirring up the public we would now be living under a total dictatorship. He seeks only power and has no loyalty at all to the United States, and as long as he is in office I shall write to any who will read and speak of what he is and what he is doing to this country.

Are Social Relativists Conservatives?


Ann Coulter - Homocon

 

John R. Houk

© August 12, 2011

 

I am a huge Ann Coulter fan. I find it humorous the she slices and dices Liberals with her Conservative voice. I was very disappointed a while back when Coulter accepted to be the key note speaker at a GOProud conference. GOProud asserts it is a Conservative/Republican crowd. The problem I have with GOProud is their focus is the ungodly social value of homosexuality.

 

If I had any doubts earlier about Coulter’s Conservatism I have none now. Coulter is joining GOProud’s Board of Advisors. This indicates that Coulter definitely is not a Social Conservative values kind of gal. I was pointed toward a WND article in which Coulter defends the identity of normal of homosexual Conservatives.

 

“…I speak to a lot of groups and do not endorse them. I speak at Harvard and I certainly don’t endorse their views. I’ve spoken to Democratic groups and liberal Republican groups that loooove abortion. The main thing I do is speak on college campuses, which is about the equivalent of speaking at an al-Qaida conference. I’m sure I agree with GOProud more than I do with at least half of my college audiences. But in any event, giving a speech is not an endorsement of every position held by the people I’m speaking to.”

 

 

She said, “If you’re born gay, why would you be liberal? Are you born liberal? Gays are a demographic group that have one of the highest incomes in America, they are victims of crimes. The Muslims don’t think too highly of them. So, you know, basically the entire Republican platform is fighting the same causes any sane gay person should care about, and the entire Democratic platform is sucking up to soccer moms and women who want abortions.

 

“What do you care about that for, gay person. Abortion isn’t at the top of your list, I’m guessing. And, by the way, as soon as liberals find a gay gene, guess who’s going to get aborted? So I think all gays who are born gay are overwhelmingly conservative, maybe apolitical. And all those angry gays, causing trouble for everybody, I don’t even think they were born gay. I think they just are angry at their fathers,” she said.

 

If you are a Social Conservative Christian Right kind of person as I am, you have to see these Coulter quotes are a contradiction to Conservative-Family values. As a good Capitalist Conservative Coulter points out that many homosexuals are in the upper economic bracket of America. Capitalism is good but Capitalism without moral principle will ultimately end Capitalism. “Ending Capitalism” may sound like sweeping hyperbole; however it is Christian morality that made America good. Diluting Christian morality with Secular Humanist Moral Relativity will end America’s goodness. Even though I enjoy Coulter’s slicing political humor at Leftist’s expense, I am going to have to rethink my support for her.

 

Ann Coulter is definitely not a trend setter among Conservatives validating homosexuality as a normal lifestyle. Another WND article dated January 2011 lists a handful of Conservatives that are a part of the GOProud advisory board:

 

Andrew Breitbart

 

Margaret Hoover

 

Grover Norquist

 

Tammy Bruce (Bruce has been a homosexual before any Conservative credentials. She has thought of herself as a Democrat probably because of Social Liberalism.)

 

JRH 8/12/11 (Hat Tip: Western Journalism)