The Biden Regime Has Made Us All Enemies of the State

 

J.B. Shurk at American Thinker (cross-posted at NOQ Report) starts off:

How can you tell we're slipping under the yoke of totalitarianism?  The New York Times has declared that the word "freedom" is merely an "anti-government slogan," and the Biden regime refuses to condemn Cuba's communist police state, even as it "disappears" Cuban dissidents during live video feeds.  I don't know how much clearer the State and its "news" propagandists can be.  If "freedom" is a dirty little word as meaningless as "hope and change," then everything upon which the United States of America has been built is dead, and if the Obama-Biden cabal running the White House find common cause with the same Castro-Guevara mass murderers who have tortured and summarily executed innocent Cubans in the name of "revolution" for sixty years, then the federal government cannot be trusted.  

This isn't a surprise to anyone paying attention.  Two months ago, the U.S. State Department draped embassies around the world with Black Lives Matter flags, and today BLM has pledged its allegiance to the communist Cuban regime while blaming the U.S. for Cuba's island prison of poverty, violence, and repression.  There has never been any doubt that BLM is a Marxist organization intent on destroying American freedoms, yet Democrats, corporate boards, and even Mitt Romney have sung its praises for years.  Hanging those insidious BLM flags on American consulates overseas was tantamount to hanging the hammer and sickle over the stars and stripes.  Their meaning was self-evident: the U.S. is under new Marxist management.  Still, too many corporate sellouts and political backstabbers honored BLM as some sort of paragon for civil rights, even as its members routinely engage in arson, larceny, intimidation, and murder.  

Now that BLM has made its allegiance to America's communist enemies abundantly clear, will any of those corporate or political invertebrates walk back their support for BLM's pro-Castro movement?  Surely not.  They've chosen a side; they're totalitarian appeasers now, giving aid and comfort to those who wish America harm.  Is that too harsh?  Is it unfair to accuse American companies and politicians of casting their lot with the intellectual heirs of Stalin and Mao?  A man should be judged by his deeds, not his words, but as far as I can see, none of these pro-BLM sycophants has done or said anything while the Biden administration embraces Cuba's police state tactics here at home.  Their inaction speaks volumes.  

. . .

Read the full article here.  So we are current with what we are up against . . .

# # #

Steyn on the GOP: “A Useless Political Party”

 

Mark Steyn weighed in on this insane election cycle, censorship in the media, the “useless political party,” and more.  He begins:

If anybody is around to write history in a generation or two, October 14th 2020 will go down as the first day of a new Year Zero. Yesterday, with less than three weeks to go in a national election in a settled democratic society with an ostensibly free press, the woke billionaires of the social media cartel decided to freeze and/or cancel the Twitter/Facebook accounts of the President's press secretary, the Trump campaign, Republican Senate candidates and Republican House members.

So America is now formally a one-party state, at least as far as fair access to media platforms is concerned. 

He ran an image of what looks to me like an old mimeograph machine.

Mark concludes:

What's next? And by "next" I mean Wednesday November 4th. Look for more woke pressure on website registrars and banks and credit card companies to cease doing business with Breitbart and Daily Caller and, well, me:

A couple of years back I used a phrase, not entirely in jest, on one of our Clubland Q&As with reference to the death of the big, messy, sprawling, decentralized internet of the turn of the century that I miss so much since it was replaced by a tyranny of ever more doctrinaire and capricious thought commissars. And I said that one day we'll be disseminating SteynOnline via the last rusting Xerox machine in the woods. Well, the day of the last rusting photocopier in the woods is heading towards us very fast.

Eight years ago conservatives blew $1 billion trying to drag Mitt Romney across the finish line so that he could become president and spend the next four years screwing us over. Imagine what that billion dollars could've done starting an alternative to PayPal or Facebook...

If Lindsey Graham and Martha McSally and the Republican Senate survive on November 3rd, so be it. But those of us who've expended our energies dragging this useless political party across the finish line every two years need to get serious about redeploying our fast depleting resources into fighting on the turf that matters. We are well past the eleventh hour.

Mark’s full column is here.  And I wonder if any in Congress – or on the state and local levels -- are able to move the GOP party back to core conservative values.  President Trump is one man, and he’s been up against both parties in the swamp that is DC.

# # #

Culture wars, Uniparty, and Deep Values research

artwork from Conservative Treehouse

  

A few days after the election, the William A. Jacobson (Legal Insurrection blog) interviewed "Deep Values" researcher Anne Sorock, since she predicted a Trump candidacy and a Trump win before he even rode down the escalator. Her comments intersect in many places with the Conservative Treehouse’s ongoing exposure of “the Uniparty” and why Trump’s candidacy was an alternative. He was unique in offering the potential to destroy the unholy alliances between the donor class, the political class, and corporate media. Some extracts from the interview appear below:

WAJ [William A. Jacobson]: When I asked you who you supported at CPAC 2015, what made you not just respond, “Trump,” but insist upon it when no one else thought he would run much less win?

Anne: I remember that day we spoke at CPAC. The giddy atmosphere of insiders and wannabe-insiders  was almost ominous. I had been working at The Frontier Lab on mapping disaffiliation by conservatives from using the term “Republican” to describe themselves. These conservatives had had enough after 2012, being told to get in line and vote for Romney, and then the RNC Autopsy report came out basically as a rubber stamp to keep pursuing the same tired strategies.

Those aware of the Autopsy felt it simply confirmed what the Romney debacle had already shown them – that the GOP and its parasites were incapable of reforming themselves. The only answer was an outsider to blow it all up.

. . .

At the time, I was following these threads about conservatism:

The desire for a concrete way to demonstrate the action of “standing up for your beliefs”

Concern that they had been enabling “bad behavior” of the GOP in the same way that a parent enables a child. A taste of empowerment that had come from interaction with the Tea Party movement, but yearning for more.

WAJ: What about this outsider aspect?

Anne: That was the functional part — being an outsider would allow him to do what previous candidates, and all candidates being considered, were incapable of. And that was absolutely reject the king-makers at CPAC and in DC in general.

There was so much anger I had been cataloging at those in charge. There was a seething sense of being disrespected by those in charge. One of the insights from my research at the time was that when people were asked to “choose the lesser of two evils,” they were basically dropping like flies from the Republican label. They might vote that way, but they resented it even more each time. They were looking for an anti-hero.

. . .

WAJ: So why didn’t all the others predict Trump, especially in the consultant/market research community?

Anne: Polling about the economy, jobs, national security, etc., might reveal superficial insights, even move the needle a few important points, but it failed in one major respect. They were asking about issues that are, at best, the outgrowths of their deeper concerns, but not explanatory or helpful in making predictions. What you don’t know about, you can’t ask about.

WAJ: What should we understand about the Americans who supported Trump that we still continue to miss?

Anne: They may care about all these conservative issues too, but they recognize that the enemy is within the gates. Our culture is what’s being eroded. Small government may be the mechanism to restore much of our country’s greatness but it isn’t the emotion, the value, that drives our country’s unique role in the world.

Read the rest here.

# # #

Progressive culture and the 2012 election

At National Review Online (“Double-Minded Republicans”), Andrew McCarthy has sobering words about why conservatives need to get out the conservative vote:

After a first term that has been historically abysmal, President Obama stands a good chance of being reelected. How can that be?

Here is the blunt explanation: We have lost a third of the country and, as if that weren’t bad enough, Republicans act as if it were two-thirds.

The lost third cannot be recovered overnight. For now, it is gone. You cannot cede the campus and the culture to the progressive, post-American Left for two generations and expect a different outcome. So even if Obama is the second coming of Jimmy Carter — and he has actually been much more effective, and therefore much worse — it is unreasonable to expect a Reagan-style landslide, and would be even if we had Reagan. The people coming of age in our country today have been reared very differently from those who were just beginning to take the wheel in the early 1980s. They have marinated in an unapologetically progressive system that prizes group discipline and narrative over free will and critical thought.

. . .

The third of the country we’ve lost may seem like a decided minority. Progressives do not need more than that, though, to run the show, not today. They proved that at their own convention this week, with the laughable platform-amendment episode.

. . .

Obama’s base, that lost third of the country, may not be as enthralled as they were in 2008. But they are committed, utterly convinced about who the villains are, and prepared to be as chameleon as it takes to reel in, from the culture they dominate, the additional 15 percent or so needed to push their guy across the finish line. That’s how what should be a landslide for his opponent becomes a squeaker.

Tea Party Patriots need to stay focused on ANY wobbly voters, those who may fall in the "enthusiasm gap,” and those even thinking about a third party candidate, in this election countdown.