President Elect, Bernie Sanders? ~ Video by Fortis Media

For the many people I've come to know in the Conservative world of American politics, we wonder if there will be people that can fill in for those that have been on the scene for so many years, even decades. Of course, you know that I'm talking about America's anchorman, Rush Limbaugh. I had actually thought about that on the Friday before Rush announced his new battle in life with cancer. There's that, and then the fact that we are all aging. And we have to ask, will there be more to come on the scene to keep on with the relentless pursuit of truth about what America stands for? We pray for that!  And I see new people coming along that seem to be an answer to our prayers.

Many of you would surely agree, Charlie Kirk would definitely be a good example of excellence at a very young age. But there is another young person that is totally impressing me. I've shared his videos before, but now, here comes one that is absolutely amazing. When you watch this video by JJ McNown, you will wonder why he hasn't been a speaker at CPAC yet!

Even after watching his videos that he has on Fortis Media, I had no idea that JJ could also do amazing voice impressions! His impression of Bernie Sanders in this video is priceless!

Watch this video, and see for yourself how special this young guy is!

VIDEO: Remembering Ronald Reagan

As an additional feature here on Blogging In Our Time 2 Escape, this blog will be including videos that have been posted on the johnny2k's America Facebook page! Videos can sometimes say more than what can be expressed in text.  Be sure to visit the archive with hundreds of videos to peruse through!

Post by Johnny2k's America.

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

*     *     *     *

Commie plot that put us in the red ~ By Diana West

In Blogging in Our Time 2 Escape, I do my best to provide you with the information in order to help you teach your children, and others, about the difference between capitalism and communism, and how one ideology promotes freedom while the other promotes tyranny. Fortunately, I have plenty of resources to lean on. Today, it is WND columnist Diana West that provides us with the information that helps to promote that goal. Along with Diana's column are several videos that I will be providing in my commentary below.

I learned in a segment on Fox and Friends with Tavis Smiley and Cornell West that since the 1960's, America has spent $16 Trillion to fight poverty, and yet, poverty has become even worse than when the government's war on poverty programs began.

What Diana West writes about in this column is important for us to know. Diana is right when she states "...how matter-of-fact we are in contemplating massive government interventions."  That statement struck me.  In this column, you will find out the reason why we've accepted the deficit spending plot, that is, if you read it closely enough.

It is important for your children and grandchildren to learn how deficit spending is destroying this country, especially when it comes to "fighting poverty." It doesn't work, nor has it ever. They aren't going to learn about this stuff at any time during their K-12 public school days, and probably not even during their days of collegiate curricula. So, it is up to you to teach them.

Diana West does an excellent job in this column to help you understand where the idea of all of this deficit spending came from. And now, I have found another video segment that supports what Diana has to say about the deficit spending.

[Diana West is the author of "The Death of the Grown-up: How America's Arrested Development Is Bringing Down Western Civilization," and blogs at dianawest.net]

*     *     *     *

Commie plot that put us in the red

DIANA WEST

By Diana West

October 06, 2011 ~ 2:51 pm Eastern

© 2011

The most amazing aspects of the accelerating American submission to the state are: 1) how matter-of-fact we are in contemplating massive government interventions, such as President Barack Obama's latest stimulus "jobs" plan, and 2) how virtually no one notices the blatant Marxist overtones. When someone does, a la "Joe the Plumber" at the end of the 2008 campaign season, he or she is mocked off the stage.

President Obama demonstrated how this is done in January 2010 when, during an unusual White House meeting with congressional Republicans about his pending health-care legislation – another massive government intervention into the private sector – he declared: "If you were to listen to the debate, and, frankly, how some of you went after this bill, you'd think this thing was some Bolshevik plot."

I remember cringing when a smattering of applause arose from the GOP ranks, as though some Republicans actually believed the president had delivered a punch line revealing the absurdity of considering "Obamacare" a government apparatus for seizing control of the lives of citizens – which it is. And that's no joke.

I wish any Republican had replied: "Not necessarily a 'plot,' sir, but a program that is indeed 'Bolshevik' in conception, design and purpose nonetheless. Government control of private sector activity, as the American people well know (or should), is aptly described as 'Bolshevik' – or Marxist, socialist, collectivist, statist and, for that matter, fascist, too. Indeed, nationalized health care was one of the first programs enacted by the Bolsheviks after they seized power in 1917."

READ MORE on WND.com

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

Communism's rebirth – at our expense ~ By Barry Farber

Why, now, is Communism "OK"? One myth that flickered underneath all the horrid history about Communism was that, even though the Communist system allowed no opportunity, it likewise gave you free or very low rent. Medicine was free. Education was free. Get it? No bankruptcies. No foreclosures. No debt. When you tell an American how much was "free," he assumes it was at or near his accustomed level. If you find the "entitlements" of Communism seductive, I want to reach through your monitor and grab you by the collar and shake you. The "expense-free" Communist subject had a miserable quality of life.

But, now that the atrocities of Communism are fading from the American memory, the promises of Communism sound rather interesting in a bad American economy. All I'm promising is that Communism is the world's biggest consumer fraud.

A Communist is someone who cannot see a fat man standing beside a thin man without concluding the fat man got that way at the expense of the thin man.

If Americans ever quit hating Communism, we'll quit hating the "give-aways" first.

Barry Farber does a great job to explain what Communism should be held accountable for in the 20th Century. And, he reminds us what can happen when people forget. Honestly, I have to wonder what could possibly have shoved all of the bad memories of what Communist nations did to their people down the memory hole. The media? Educators? Government propaganda? Hope and change?

I challenge anyone to show me where Communism has ever worked. In fact, show me where any Communist country has ever gone without committing genocide in order to gain and keep power!

Thank you, Barry Farber, for writing this column! It is about time that somebody plugged the memory hole, and pulled some of the grim memories, that never should be forgotten, out of that abyss. And thank you again for reminding us that liberals are leading us to that memory hole by helping us to quit hating entitlements and class envy first.

And guess what? While we still have the freedom to write about it, now is the time to work on keeping too many people from falling into the bottomless memory hole. It could be our last chance. But, hey, I understand if you want to stay silent. We all know who's doors would be knocked down first should we be on the losing side. I'm just sayin'...

Communism's rebirth – at our expense

BARRY FARBER

By Barry Farber

June 01, 2011 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2011

The cartoon showed two 6-year-old boys sitting on a fence admiring a 5-year-old girl, nose in the air, perky and cute as a speckled puppy under a red wagon. "If I ever quit hating girls," said one of the boys, "I'm going to quit hating HER first!"

Communism is out of the closet, out on the American street under its own name and doing its best to be heard and heeded. This is the second time American Communists have been comfortable preaching, parading and plotting without hiding behind front groups shouting "Peace" and "Equality" and pretending their real name and aim is something like "Milk for Bulgarian Babies." Before World War II, being a Communist was fashionable. It made you a kind of automatic moral giant. Journalist Lincoln Steffens returned to America from the brand-new Soviet Union and declared, "I have seen the future, and it works!"

Why this, and why now? Authentic American hero Dave Bego, who defied and defeated the efforts of the all-powerful Service Employees International Union (SEIU) to bludgeon him into accepting unionization of his industrial cleaning company, Executive Management Services, sent me a literally unbelievable "picture show" of a joint SEIU and Communist Party rally in Los Angeles in which the union members carried Communist flags and the marching Communists carried union signs.

All of the joy and prestige of being a Communist vanished shortly after the Americans and British, with our Soviet allies, destroyed Nazi Germany. The true face of Communism became abruptly plain. Territory conquered by Allied troops was liberated. That conquered by the Communists was enslaved. The Berlin Blockade was a shameless Soviet abrogation of our agreements.

The Iron Curtain descended across Europe. The Nazi "knock-on-the-door" followed by the permanent disappearance of those inside, the torture chambers, the total repression of all freedoms, life sentences in the Gulag for the crime of listening to foreign broadcasts, the works – really the whole Nazi works – unfolded. It's true, opportunistic American politicians demagogued Communism for votes, but they did more service to America than those demagoguing Paul Ryan's attempt to reform entitlements today.

READ MORE at WND.com

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

A system conceived in failure ~ By Robert Ringer

This morning, I am going to try to do this post a little differently than I have in the past. Change can be good sometimes, right? First, let me me suggest that you read Robert Ringer's column in full by clicking on the link below, and then return to this page to read my analysis.

A system conceived in failure

By Robert Ringer

Posted: September 17, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010



Fidel Castro's recent statement that communism doesn't work in Cuba anymore was a stunning admission on his part – kind of a deathbed conversion to the efficacy and morality of freedom and free markets. It was, of course, a horrific blow to the far left, particularly in the United States. Here we are, hurtling full speed toward a communist utopia in America, while Cuba, Vietnam, China and other previously hard-core communist countries are moving just as rapidly toward capitalism.

Castro Criticizes Cuba's Communist System

Video provided by FoxNewsChannel

Some may have warm and fuzzy feelings toward good ol' Fidel, kind of like a Charlie Rangel "retire-in-dignity" thing. But what about the untold numbers of Cubans who have been imprisoned, tortured and executed since Castro's takeover of Cuba in 1959? And the hundreds of thousands of Cubans who had to flee their homeland and leave most of their possessions behind?

If I were a Cuban-American who lost family members – or wealth – during Castro's reign of terror, I would be very angry right now. Fifty years of oppressing an entire nation, and now he says communism doesn't work? Sorry, Fidel, but your old-age enlightenment doesn't bring back all the lost family members and stolen wealth. Nor does it bring back the youth of those who have lived under his oppressive regime for more than 50 years.

Like other communist countries, Cuba will increasingly implement "reforms" that will move it more and more in the direction of freedom and free markets. And, as in most other communist countries that have collapsed under the weight of an unworkable system, Fidel, brother Raul and their fellow thugs will slip into the night and "retire with dignity."

This part reminded me of what my 7th grade "Social Studies" teacher, Mr. Trotter, told us many, many years ago (in the 1960's). He told us that the United States would gradually move toward Communism, or at least more government control of the economy and less freedom for the people, while the Soviet Union would move away from Communism and toward more freedom for the people, and eventually the two superpowers would meet somewhere in the middle. That was very prophetic. However, Mr. Trotter never mentioned what would happen after we met in the middle. Would the United States keep moving toward Communism?

So, where does this leave the Michael Moore, Sean Penn, Oliver Stone crowd? Embarrassed? Never. Leftists have a stand-pat response whenever they are confronted with yet another communist failure. They simply argue that Karl Marx's model has never been implemented correctly, which is why all communist countries have failed.

A nice, convenient excuse, to be sure. But the real reason why every communist regime in history has brought death, enslavement and economic disaster to its people is because communism is a political and economic system that was conceived in failure. Plain and simple, it defies human nature. People – all people – seek to better their existence, and it takes the brute force of a Joseph Stalin or Kim Jong Il to suppress that instinct.

When people are punished for producing, they simply stop producing. Within a few years after the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, conditions were so bad in Russia that Lenin was on the verge of being confronted with a counter-revolution.

"Uh, oh, now what do we do?" Lenin was wondering. "Maybe this Marxism thing isn't going to work out so well..." But, Lenin came up with a plan.

To ward it off, he invited Western capitalists to help industrialize the Soviet Union. And, sadly, many major U.S. corporations accommodated Lenin and saved him from his own communist system. (Which leads one to think of Herbert Hoover's all-too-true statement that "The only thing wrong with capitalism is capitalists.")

Dissident Alexander Solzhenitsyn, author of "The Gulag Archipelago," explained that without the help of the United States, Russia's communism would almost certainly have collapsed much sooner:

It is American trade that allows the Soviet economy to concentrate its resources on armaments and preparations for war. Remove that trade, and the Soviet economy would be obliged to feed and clothe and house the Russian people, something it has never been able to do. Let the socialists among you allow this socialist economy to prove the superiority that its ideology claims. Stop sending them goods. Let them stand on their own feet, and then see what happens.

Yeah, well, we know how it works. In capitalism, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer! At least that's what Democrats have always told me. In fact, that is what just about everybody tells me that isn't making very much money. However, Robert Ringer tells me a different story. It seems that capitalism is not all that bad for the poor broke masses, especially for those that would LIKE to be do better in life:

Where otherwise well-meaning people get off track is when they buy into the far-left rhetoric that "the poor" are exploited under capitalism. The truth, of course, is that those on the lowest rung of the economic ladder benefit more from capitalism than from any other system, for a variety of reasons.

First, every person is free to take a job at any wage available to him, and, in fact, both employment and wages normally increase in a free market.

Second, in a free society devoid of most government regulations, a person with little or no capital is able to start a business much easier, without the necessity of obtaining a license or having to comply with costly regulations that only large companies can afford.

Third, free-market capitalism keeps prices down, which allows a low-income person to buy things he would not be able to afford in a government-controlled economy.

Fourth, the more profitable a company is, the more it is able to invest in expansion of its business, which results in more employment, higher wages, more products being produced and lower prices – all of which are good for low-income people.

That all seems to makes sense, doesn't it? Of course it makes sense, because it is the way things actually work in economics, despite what some pinhead college professor may have told you. But, unfortunately, some people are harder to convince of the truth. Let's take a look from a different angle:

As a country moves toward socialism (which Karl Marx defined as a transitional stage between capitalism and communism), the only way government can prevent producers from revolting is through the use of force. That is why all socialist/communist revolutions and evolutions end in enslavement and bloodshed.

We see it now in Greece, where the spoiled masses are, in effect, saying to the government: "We don't give a damn if you don't have enough money to pay our entitlements. We want them anyway!"

Right now, the United States is a "mixed-economy" country – i.e., part socialist and part capitalist. But it is now moving rapidly toward more and more government control of both the economy and people's lives.

If Fidel Castro has decided that Communism isn't working in Cuba, do you now see why it is so important for us to move America in a different direction? If Mr. Trotter, the teacher I mentioned above, had realized that America and the Soviet Union were going to end up like each other at some point in time, could he have also believed that America would eventually keep on going toward Communism? Or, did Mr. Trotter hope and pray that America would eventually wake up and realize the direction we were heading wasn't where we would want to go?

It's possible, if that is the case, that America IS waking up. That seems to be what the Tea Party Movement is all about. And not only are we waking up, many people are bothering to get up and do something about it. And you can, too, if you should choose to stay free. We have a chance to get this country back on the right path in just a few weeks. We have the most important election ever facing us coming along on November 2, 2010. It is time to pay close attention to who is on the ballot. It is time to pay attention to the candidates' character. It is time to understand where they stand on the issues. It is time to believe that you can make a difference, and change the direction this country is going, with your vote, and if possible, your assistance with campaigns and/or educating the voters.

You need to make a choice, while you still have the freedom to choose. Just sayin'...

If Americans do not hold the next Congress' feet to the fire and demand that the government get out of people's lives and out of the economy – if they allow the progressives in the Republican Party to co-opt the new tea-party members in the House and Senate – it will surely [b]ring down the curtain on the last best hope of mankind.

Perhaps Don Meredith, of Monday Night Football fame, was prescient when he sang, "Turn out the lights, the party's over." Just the thought of Meredith being remembered as the Nostradamus of our time would be enough to make Howard Cosell turn over in his grave.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

No more Uncle Sam ~ By Barbara Simpson

Barbara Simpson cuts right to the chase, no beating around the bush. She tells us about the freedoms we will lose with ObamaCare (both for our own health care AND education), and that Obama is just getting started, because he now knows that he can push through anything he wants to do. Congress, and maybe even that other branch of government, the courts, won't stop him.

Interesting, isn't it, that the very liberals who scream and demonstrate for the "right to choose" have foisted on the entire country a law that takes away our right to choose when it comes to our basic medical care – our ultimate choice of lifestyle, residence, food choices, style of living, the doctor or dentist we prefer, the care we need and want, the kind of treatment, and ultimately the way we will spend our latter years and how we will live out our lives and die.

Those choices are gone under the Obama medical plan.

And they've only just gotten started.

By Barbara Simpson

Posted: March 29, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

I keep thinking – or perhaps I should say, hoping – that it's all a bad dream and soon I'll wake up and things will be back to the usual "normal."

Then again, reality sets in and I realize two things.

First, what's happening in and to my country isn't a bad dream and I'm not sleeping.

Second, I doubt the usual "normal" will be back any time soon. There are those who are more morose/pessimistic about it and say the American experiment is over.

I'm not sure I would go that far – yet – but we're on thin ice.

I do believe that to get this country back on course and in line with the Constitution, it will take time and a massive, focused effort to get our freedoms back.

Pretend it's a battle for freedom.

No, don't pretend, because that is exactly what it is.

With the election of Barack Obama and his gang of political henchmen in the White House, aided and abetted by the likes of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi and their acolytes in Congress, it is difficult, if not impossible at this point, for anyone who disagrees with their socialist/Marxist philosophy to even have their voices heard.

They are convinced they know what's best for everyone and they have the mandate to get it done, regardless of any opposition.

The spectacle on C-Span of the laughably labeled "debate" on health care could have been mistaken for a Monte Python skit except for two things.

It wasn't funny, and those people were playing for keeps.

It was deadly serious and a perfect example of what one-party, despotic rule is like. And that's just the beginning.

Obama relishes his growing power and believes it's his mission to keep barreling ahead with all those "changes" he alluded to during the presidential campaign.

He never really got specific. Obama used the "hope and change" mantra to delude the American people into thinking that only good things would come from his election to power. The main change Democrats wanted was for Bush and his administration to be gone. They believed that anything after that would be good and OK.

The blame for all complaints about the country and the state of politics was placed squarely on the shoulders of George W. Bush. Campaign rhetoric emphasized that if George were out of the political picture, all good would flow to everyone. Obama supporters read into the words whatever they wanted, leaving Obama with a wide open door to do whatever he wants. He is doing just that.

His policies are extreme left and rooted in his Marxist beliefs. The change he is instigating will literally change the face of this country. The massive takeover of the private sector in so many areas of commerce and life is just beginning.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

Obama czar's shocking communist connections

This column by Aaron Klein supports my belief that global warming hysteria is a major part of the plan to form a Communist New Word Order. Just sayin'...

Edited publication whose founders allegedly fed secrets to Soviet Union

"[Soviet politician and security chief Lavrentiy] Beria said we should think how to use Oppenheimer, Szilard and others around them in the peace campaign against nuclear armament. Disarmament and the inability to impose nuclear blackmail would deprive the United States of its advantage," wrote Sudoplatov.


Sudoplatov said his spymasters knew the lobby efforts of the Bulletin editors would be a "crucial factor in establishing the new world order after the war, and we took advantage of this."

By Aaron Klein

Posted: March 03, 2010 ~ 9:07 pm Eastern

© 2010 WorldNetDaily

John Holdren, President Obama's "science czar," served on the board of editors of a magazine whose personnel were accused of providing vital nuclear information that helped the Soviet Union build an atom bomb.

The magazine, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, has a long history of employing socialist and communist sympathizers, including during the time of Holdren's employment in 1984, reports the New Zeal blog.

Holdren is assistant to the president for science and technology, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, and co-chairman of the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology.

The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists began publishing regularly in 1945, when it was founded by former physicists from the Manhattan Project, which developed the first atomic bomb.

Two of the magazine's founding sponsors, Leo Szilard and Robert Oppenheimer, were accused of passing information from the Manhattan Project to the Soviets. Both were also key initiators of the Manhattan Project.

In 1994, Pavel Sudoplatov, a former major-general in Soviet intelligence, named Szilard and Oppenheimer as key sources of crucial atomic information to the Soviet Union.

"The most vital information for developing the first Soviet atomic bomb came from scientists engaged in the Manhattan Project to build the American atomic bomb – Robert Oppenheimer, Enrico Fermi and Leo Szilard," wrote Sudoplatov.

Sudoplatov wrote the Soviet Union "received reports on the progress of the Manhattan Project from Oppenheimer and his friends in oral form, through comments and asides, and from documents transferred through clandestine methods with their full knowledge that the information they were sharing would be passed on."

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

2 quick ways to lower health-care costs ~ By Henry Lamb

From WorldNetDaily

By Henry Lamb Posted: October 03, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 To anti-capitalists, "profit" is a dirty word. Karl Marx hated profit, which he considered to be "surplus value from the exploited proletariat." Despite the spectacular collapse of the Soviet Union, a nation constructed on Marx's theory, there are still people who think "profit" is a dirty word. Many of these people are in Washington, D.C. Sen. John Rockefeller issued a statement claiming that "… insurance companies are awash in profits." In reality, the health insurance industry stands 35th among Fortune magazine's profitability rankings, with an average profit of 2.2 percent. Sen. Chuck Schumer doesn't think much of profit, either. He has proposed fees (taxes) that will extract $75 billion from private insurance companies over the next decade. Since taxes, or fees, are a cost of doing business that is simply passed along to the consumer, Schumer's idea is nothing more than an indirect tax that individuals will have to pay. But by applying the tax to insurance companies, Obama's promise not to increase taxes for people earning less than $250,000 can go unchallenged. It is clear that Rockefeller, Schumer and the majority of Democrats want to reduce the cost of health care by squeezing profit out of the health insurance industry. This, of course, would kill the health insurance industry and leave the task of providing health-care services up to the government. This is the ultimate goal. Whether it's called "public option," "co-op exchange," or "single-payer," the goal is the same: Get rid of the profit private companies earn, and let government provide the service. [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

America: Past, Present and Future...Part II ~ By Glenn Beck

By Glenn Beck July 28, 2009 - 13:30 ET Dear family and friends, Yesterday I shared my thoughts on the challenges and threats facing America as I see them. What I’m going to share today are some examples from history of countries, including our own, which faced similar challenges (to greater or lesser degrees) and how those countries faired while confronting those challenges. I wanted to look at history because too many people call into the radio show or send an email after watching the television show and tell me “not too worry” about America because we’ve faced worse hardships before and have not only overcome them but have emerged stronger. I understand the American spirit. I understand that we are the country that took on the Nazis, Fascist Italy and Imperial Japan and won. I understand that we stood toe-to-toe with the Soviet Union over 40 years and defeated them in the Cold War. I know that we are a country of fighters and that Americans are capable of conquering any challenge—but the belief that great things happen to America just because we’re America—that’s just plain wrong. Thrift, hard-work, sacrifice by our parents, grandparents and their mothers and fathers went hand-in-hand with the thrift, hard-work and sacrifice we collectively made as a country—that’s what produced unparalleled strength and success. Today, we face difficult times. We stand at cross-roads as a country. Where we eventually end up will be determined by the decisions each of us makes today and in the weeks and months ahead. Great countries don’t collapse, they transform. [Emphasis mine] The Soviet Union in 1991 didn’t disappear after its political and economic model collapsed, it transformed and is still transforming. Weimar Germany’s government collapsed as did its economy but Germany continued—at first down the national socialist path—and now as a democracy. [CONTINUE READING]

RELATED STORY: Where America stands today ~ By Glenn Beck

Universal health care: Evil in camouflage ~ By Erik Rush

By Erik Rush Posted: June 18, 2009 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 When I was a child and young adult, the chief archetype of evil in the world was the Soviet Union. The communist regime controlled every aspect of its citizens' lives; their rulers had plenty, while workers – to whom they appealed in order to gain control – lived in poverty, suffering from diseases that developed nations had long since eradicated and disinfecting their tap water with bleach to make it potable. As students, my schoolmates and I saw the photos of bread lines, heard the testimony of escaped dissidents and retreated to the school basement once a month to rehearse being dry-roasted by Soviet ICBMs. A few asserted that our fear of the USSR was all the result of propaganda; even during the time I was growing up, one could find clusters of people in universities and coffee shops in places like Berkeley and Greenwich Village who argued that Marxism really was the way to go. All of that Russophobia was just rubbish; Russia, Eastern Europe and Cuba really functioned far more equitably and efficiently than the United States, and what America needed was that model of government. While a lot of those people were very free with their speech on those campuses and in the coffee shops, in the real world they tended to keep to themselves. The reason for this was a very valid concern that failure to do so would result in some of their teeth being knocked down their throats. Tired of keeping quiet about increasing government control? Express yourself with the magnetic message: "No Hope in Socialism" It bears mentioning that these are the sort of folks with whom our current president associated during his formative years, and well into adulthood. As time went on, these closet communists got bolder. As some of them came of age, they insinuated themselves into positions of influence – the press, education and government, for example. It is by design that a majority of Americans are unaware of the horrors and injustices inherent to nations that adopted Marxism. Due to the growing influence of these operatives, the younger a person is, the more ignorant of the facts they tend to be. They also don't understand the nature of evil, because our increasingly relativist society refuses to acknowledge the very concept. Evil people – such as those who captained the USSR for 70 years – crave control over their fellows for the sheer satisfaction of having that control. They derive pleasure from squeezing others in the grasp of their will. There's no reason to it, so attempting to ascribe logic to the desire for such power is foolishness. [CONTINUE READING]

Digg this story

Can Uncle Sam ever let go? - By Patrick Buchanan

NATO has been irrelevant for two decades, since its raison d'etre – to keep the Red Army from driving to the Rhine – disappeared. Yet Obama is headed to Brussels to celebrate France's return and the 60th birthday of the alliance. But why is NATO still soldiering on? It seems the United States can't bear giving up its role as Defender of the West. read more | digg story