Fighting the Establishment of an American State Religion -- Part 3

I wrote the text below the break on September 25, 2014 but I did not publish it. I was waiting for more developments to evolve that would help make it abundantly clear how dangerous it is not to fight such developments before they are fully formed. When climate guru RFK Jr. stated he wished there was a law he could punish his opponents with, I observed that it was good he could only wish.

However developments have moved on rapidly to erase that sense of security.

Today, on episode 4 of LevinTV.com, viewers heard this:

 
This clip ends with these words:

"To use our laws to criminalize politics, to use our laws to compel a belief system, is as tyrannical as is possibly imaginable."

It is significant that people who lay claim to a higher understanding of life with their atheistic lens, routinely deny acknowledging that a religion -- a belief system -- need not center on worship of a god.

Religion: a pursuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance.

Mr. Levin almost got to the point where he sees what I see. It sounds like he's edging to fight increasingly heavy-handed government efforts to protect Climate Change belief in a way that is in violation of the 1st Amendment. That Amendment bans the establishment of a state religion. This essay is written in hopes that the constitutional lawyer in him will latch on to the idea.

For easy reference, here are links to part 1 and part 2.

Throwing the Election Part II

While smaller blogs may have speculated that the two previous elections were thrown so the Left, and even spoke of it like it should be obvious to everyone,  it really wasn't discussed by the bigger blogs. Most certainly it was never discussed seriously by the highly visible radio talkers who preferred instead to let Michael Medved deride the idea on his regularly scheduled "Conspiracy Day."

1. But beginning with the day after the 2014 elections, when McConnell immediately reversed all his campaign pledges, then many more people got pissed off. It was quite clear that the establishment was insisting that "The Opposition Party" drop all real opposition. And so GOPe has become the label to signify all the traitors of the country class' war against the ruling class.

2. And since the beginning of 2015, the GOPe has thrown so many fights by refusing to even discuss let alone force compromise with Obama, that it is hard to think of one exception.

3. Since the GOPe has proven itself complicit in agreeing with every Obama advance on destroying individual protections from expanding government, it is fair to ask "what else are they willing to throw?" and  "what else have they thrown already about which they have been left us in the dark?"

4. For those who instinctively dismiss the idea that McCain and Romney threw the last two presidential elections, they have to also dismiss the smoking guns laying all over the place. It's telling when it's hard to think of an issue that the GOPe has not thrown the fight. They and their backers, who are almost unmistakably the same as the Democrats', must WANT what Obama has "gifted" us with. This is what soft fascism looks like. And they've loads of following threatening hard fascism -- such as death for denying AGW, or lawfare attacks for saying things critical of members of the ruling class.

5. So backing up to the last two elections, the preponderance of evidence leads the reasonable man to conclude that the GOPe threw those elections.

6. Ergo they have made such a shambles of the current primary system -- including the insane choice of the Dem stronghold of Cleveland for the GOP convention -- that they have been arranging to throw the current election. No, not to Hillary. Maybe to Trump. Maybe to Cruz. Maybe to Biden. Whatever, there is hardly any chance that the ruling class does not have many options at its disposal to get the puppet to rule ala Plato's Republic cave analogy.

I know. You haven't heard anyone else tell you that Hillary won't be the Dem candidate. So does that mean I must be wrong?

So let me remind you why I say it. I wrote last year that Hillary will not serve. I even provided photographic evidence, that should greatly help you agree with me.

Primarily your reason to agree with me is how Obama has wounded her. All the State Dept leaks tied to her remain in the news and are getting stronger. Yet he could have suppressed all or most of it. Look how he suppressed all the memos tying IRS commissioner Lois Lerner to all her high crimes. You know he could for Hill, yet he didn't. So Obama dares not let her win the Presidency.

Kings and would-be kings long ago learned the hard lesson that a wounded king must be finished off.  That is even without the widespread knowledge of so many dead close Clinton associates. Vince Foster, Webb Hubbell, Jim McDougal.  When considering who to nominate, now is the time to spread this thought seriously when considering Hillary's chances of being President, and hence not even the likely Dem nominee -- you may not hear it anywhere else.


I don't know how else to say it that now is the time to back Cruz even if I retain doubts that he is really an anti-Establishment candidate -- and that is how most Americans feel even if they are unclear as to who is the Establishment. Just about all the machinations have been to keep Americans in the dark about Ted Cruz. I'm forced to conclude it is because he HAS the record of fighting all in DC. In the end I'm fighting them too. So sure of him or not, I'm stuck with him.

Throwing the Election to the Prog Advancers

[The following was revised on late on March 5, 2016 to improve clarity.]
(When you finish below, here is Part II.)

“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles."-- Sun Tzu

John McCain and Mitt Romney could have won the presidency. But neither man railed against the past of Barack Obama. And Romney also failed to rail against Obama's 4 year record,  a sure loser of a strategy given that it was Obama's record which cost the Democratic party control of the House of Representatives in the elections of 2010.

So half the voters never heard word one from the opposition candidates about the downside and risks of electing and reelecting Obama president. The majority of voters were left not knowing important details about the man who would wreak havoc on them by waging legal, economic and regulatory war on them. The larger majority were left uninformed by the very men they expected to inform them, and so they did not know their enemy.

And so America (as an idea in an historic sense) lost the last two political battles waged to fundamentally change her.

But did Americans really know themselves? More to the point, did Americans really know the character and intentions of her leaders selected to waging war against the fundamental transformers? Who would have chosen either McCain or Romney in their respective primaries knowing the kind of campaigns they would later run? Knowing more about either candidate might have better informed primary voters so that better candidates could have been considered.

I say "might have" because it's not all that clear even today that either men or the Establishment they represent really (given how that establishment has behaved these last 7 years) wanted them to do anything differently.

IOW, just as prize fighters have been known to throw fights, why not political leaders? Especially now that it well known that both party establishments work pretty much with the same lobbyists.

Furthermore, the 2014 elections that increased the GOP control of the House and won control of the Senate on the promise that "THEN WE CAN AFFECT CHANGE" has nevertheless -- disappointingly -- affected nothing in the advancement of the Prog (builders of the ruling class) agenda.  Borders more porous than ever. Obamacare funded via continuing resolutions despite promises not to. No resistance to the nomination of the radical Loretta Lynch to be AG. The list of thrown fights is endless.

Because of this Americans have come to recognize how much the GOP is hardly the opposition party we had expected it to be. Subsequently the acronym, GOPe -- GOPe(stablishment) -- has become the most common of pejorative words that express our disappointment with how the opposition isn't.

And I'm saying, if the GOPe has proven to throw fights on individual issues, why not conclude that they've been throwing the fights for the top job?

Now here is the most important graf of this short post. The GOPe still controls the banner under which Americans wage political war against her internal enemy.

So America. How much do you know yourself and know who is claiming to be your leader in the battle coming in November?

KNOW YOURSELF!

Lighter Side Look at Super Tuesday