Tag Archives: Extremists

Why the Tea Party is Centrist & Leftists are Extremists

The popular image of the tea party spread by opinion-molders is that it is a right-wing extremist movement within the Republican party. Actually, it is a coalition of American conservatives supportive of Constitutionally limited government near the center of two extremes: anarchy and totalitarianism. Unbeknownst to those who swim in the heady currents of cultural marxism, American leftists  are the extremists, since there is no ideological barrier to totalitarianism in their mindset.

“Right-winger” is a slur reflexively hurled by socialists and progressives at any party, movement, faction, or individual that opposes the left-wing agenda. The smear tactic is intended to confuse those who support the traditionally American tenets of liberty, limited government, and individual rights with European fascists and ultra-nationalists.

The terms “right-wing” and “left-wing” are derived from the French Revolution; nationalists who supported the Ancien Regime (monarchy, or “Old Regime”), the church, and the aristocracy sat in the right-wing of the French assembly, while radical democrats, whose egalitarian ideals implied a leveling of institutional, traditional, political, and economic barriers to absolute freedom sat in the “left-wing.”

In European history, those who supported the maintenance of the monarchical and aristocratic  status quo were conservatives. These conservatives’ preferences for maintaining the spoils of privilege must still be distinguished from the philosophy of Edmund Burke, who was a proponent of incremental reform.

Both kinds of European conservatives, statist and Burkean, must be distinguished still from American conservatives, whose adherence to tradition springs from a deep-seated belief in the truth of the country’s founding principles, which are a reflection of the inherently non-conservative Enlightenment.

It is the appreciation of conflicting interests in a free society that led to the innovations of the Constitution; divided powers and checks and balances were designed to safeguard people against abuses by either an absolutist ruler, or a tyrannical majority seeking to despoil its prey of property, life, or freedom. The requirement of legislation by majority, and the stipulation that changing the Constitution demands a super-majority, were but two safeguards. One of the most important barriers to oppression is the Bill of Rights, which are individual rights that must not be violated by tyrants of any variety.

The numerous precautions against the concentration of power in the United States, combined with clear principles for the administration of the republic, provided America with stable and predictable rules that gave men the psychological security to feel safeguarded from both government tyranny and the predatory behavior of hostile interests. This arrangement established a framework for a vibrant “civil society,” and the prosperous economic order of free market capitalism. These “spontaneous orders” are not conservative in nature, but allow for “progress” in specifically designated terms, such as technological improvements, or enhancement of human understanding.

These spontaneous orders are also not overly chaotic in nature, as “progressives” tend to misapprehend out of their inner craving to control other human beings. Men and women by their very nature are self-interested, though with flashes of altruistic behavior. Systematically coerced altruism, on the other hand, is unsustainable because it is a misunderstanding of human nature, and therefore not conducive to political order, long-term human happiness, or the prosperity of human beings. In other words, altruism is not a sound animating principle for government.

Those who hold that the tea party movement is “extremist” have the false conception that virtuous men can be placed in government and they can lead a “compassionate “government that will give people everything their hearts’ desire. But they fail miserably to account for the historical track record of consolidated governmental authority, which is always justified by appeal to lofty sentiments. The American government must inevitably disappoint and frustrate progressives, because it is designed to spur men to manage themselves and become productive members of society.

Progressives who believe that free market capitalism is naturally chaotic or heartless do not appreciate that it is in reality ordered by the drive of men to better their own lives. This is not the same as anarchy: the wants and desires of men are naturally limited by economic scarcity as reflected in a pricing system. The wages of labor, just as the prices of goods and services, are also set by the market. Those who develop sought-after skills, prosper; those who do not, are less prosperous. Thus American government is designed for those who value liberty and opportunity over the illusion of security provided by a powerful government. The drive for a paternalistic form of security undermines the political and economic order of safe-guarded liberty, on which only a long-term form of security, from tyranny and from predatory interests, is conceivably possible.

Tea party members do not desire to rule their political opposition or otherwise impose their will on their fellow citizens. Instead, they want to restore the nation to its Constitutional foundations, establish fiscal responsibility in government, re-establish the free market economic principles that allowed the majority of the nation to prosper, and renew the virtue in individuals to see on another as ends in themselves, and not as means to some political end.

Ultimately, the Constitution, the embodiment of those founding principles that tea party movement adherers cherish most, is specifically designed to protect American citizens from political threats arising from both the right and the left. Leftists, on the other hand, are for complete state control of economy, society, and the government, making them the true extremists.

Shocking Similarities Concealed

In a televised address to parliament, President Bashar Assad said foreign-backed terrorists and extremists were to blame for the massacres going on in Syria. Despite suspicions expressed by the UN that Assad’s forces are responsible for the Houla massacre, Assad denied it. Syrian opposition condemned his comments as lies.

Assad described protestors as paid killers, ridiculing freedom demonstrators as people not truly looking for reform. The opposition is seeking reform in a country where expressing dissent often leads directly to arrest and torture. They contend that Assad has offered nothing but cosmetic changes.

A revolt that began as peaceful protests can now only be described as an armed insurgency. This can be attributed to the harsh government crackdown that led protestors to take up arms in self-defense.

Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, barack obama and many other “progressive” politicians have called the Tea Party “teabaggers”, “racists”, “astroturf”, “Nazis” ” and “extremists” on multiple occasions. The Department of Homeland Security issued a report that described the Tea Party as “right-wing extremists” and “insurgents”, expressing concerns that “Right-wing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize veterans in order to boost their violent capacities.”

“Violent capacities”?

How much longer will it be before members of Tea Parties are called “paid killers”?

Hasn’t that already happened? Such a description was more than quite heavily inferred by multiple “progressive” politicians and virtually every member of the “progressive” Party Pravda after a nut job who was working solo shot Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Dee “Gabby” Giffords on January 8, 2011.

How soon will members of the “progressive” Democratic Party say that Tea Party members are “not truly looking for reform”?

David Axlerod, obama’s 2012 re-election campaign chief, claimed that the Tea Party “reign of terror” blocked immigration reform. Tea Party efforts to stop “progressive” Democrats from cramming unwanted “healthcare reform” down America’s throat are viewed by “progressives” and their media spokes-tools as “not truly looking for reform”.

How much longer will it take for the United States to become a country where expressing dissent can lead directly to arrest and torture?

According to former FBI agent Larry Grathwohl, Bill Ayers’ Weather Underground Central Committee meant to cause the collapse of the United States government. Ayers and his group would deal with resistant Americans by “establishing re-education centers in the south-west”. Those who refused to convert to Communism, would be “eliminated”. As in: concentration camps would be used to kill 25 million Americans.


Politico’s Ben Smith reported: “In 1995, State Senator Alice Palmer introduced her chosen successor, Barack Obama, to a few of the district’s influential liberals at the home of two well known figures on the local left: William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn”.

The Tea Party movement began as a peaceful protest against big government, reckless government spending, high taxes and oppressive regulations. The Tea Party’s Contract From America expressed principles held by its members. The most basic being that “Our moral, political, and economic liberties are inherent, not granted by our government.”

The principles of the Tea Party were clearly expressed in the Contract:

Protect the Constitution, reject Cap & Trade, demand a balanced budget, enact fundamental tax reform, restore fiscal responsibility and Constitutionally limited government in Washington DC, end runaway government spending, defund, repeal and replace government-run health care, pass an ‘all-of-the-above’ energy policy, stop the pork, and stop the tax hikes.

That sounds like people who are truly looking for reform. Just not the type of reform being insisted upon by members of the institutionalized “progressive” left.

Only those dedicated to the overthrow of the United States government would consider a stand for protecting the Constitution, rejecting the UN backed Cap and Trade agenda, demanding a balanced budget, et al “extreme” in their views.

The similarities between what’s happening now in Syria and plans envisioned for America by the institutionalized “progressive” left are both shocking and real. Why are those similarities being concealed by America’s fabled Fourth Estate? The only logical conclusion is that the views held by the “mainstream media” are sympathetic to those of the institutionalized “progressive” left. They are on the same team.

If violence does break out in the United States, it will be due to a harsh government crackdown leading to peaceful protestors having to take up arms in self-defense. God Bless the genius of America’s Founders and their insightful, forward thinking ratification of the Second Amendment. For they knew first hand that of which Tyrants are made.


"We Shall Never Forget 9/11: The Kids’ Book of Freedom" – Education or Hate?

We are just days away from the 10th anniversary of the day that changed America.

September 11, 2001, started off bright and beautiful for America, just as any other day. However, before the day really got started good, that bright and beautiful day turned into a very dark day.

Two thousand, eight hundred and nineteen people lost their lives that day. (The official figure as of 9/5/02): 2,819)

As each year passes, as a nation, we risk the very distinct possibility of losing the significance this day had on our nation. If you were not old enough to realize what was happening on that day, and the months that followed, you have a very different understanding of how it changed this nation.

For those who were old enough to realize the reality of what we saw on our televisions, there is no way time can erase the emotions that were experienced when those planes flew into the World Trade Center, Pentagon, and crashed in the Shanksville, Pennsylvania field.

We’ve all heard the quote by poet and philosopher George Santayana:

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

For those who do remember the past, the importance of educating those who do not remember the past is vital! Though they cannot remember, if we do not teach them what happened, we have no hope for the future.

Wayne Bell is someone who understands the importance of educating our children about the reality of what happened that fateful September morning almost ten years ago.

Mr. Bell is the publisher of Really Big Coloring Books, Inc., in St. Louis, Missouri. He has created a unique way to teach older children about the terrorist attacks on our nation with a coloring novel. It’s not just a coloring book, and it is not meant for younger children. Mr. Bell says the coloring novel is for children about the age of 9 to 11-years-old.

“We Shall Never Forget 9/11: The Kids’ Book of Freedom,” is a memorial tribute. Mr. Bell says:

“It is an informational piece to help educate children on events on 9/11. [It is] a simplistic, honest tool.”

Mr. Bell goes on to say that the novel is a “12-hour narrative of the events that happened on the day that forever changed America.” Kids can color pictures of the twin towers, President George W. Bush, Americans mourning the attacks, and other significant images depicting that day.

It’s hard to believe that an educational book could cause so much controversy, especially when it is something so important, but that is indeed what Mr. Bell is facing with his coloring novel.

It should not come as a surprise to anyone that in our day and age where political correctness outweighs the facts so often, there are many people who do not want reality to be presented.

In fact, Dawud Walid, the Michigan representative for CAIR (the Council on American Islamic Relations), calls the novel “disgusting.”

“We Shall Never Forget 9/11: The Kids’ Book of Freedom,” refers to the jihadists as “freedom-hating radical Islamic Muslim extremists.” Mr. Walid is not happy with the fact that almost all of the mentions of Muslims also have the words “terrorist” or “extremist.”  He feels that by only portraying the extremist side of the Muslim religion, a disservice is being done to all Muslim Americans who were impacted by 9-11. Mr. Walid says:

“Little kids who pick up this book can have their perceptions colored by those images … it instills bias in young minds. Muslim mothers lost sons too.”

Mr. Walid also argues that the information and pictures in the novel are incorrect. One instance he says is incorrect is that Osama Bin Laden “wasn’t hiding behind a wife when he was shot.”

However, Mr. Bell disagrees, saying the book is an “honest depiction.” He went on to say:

“The truth is the truth. It’s unfortunate that they were all Muslim and that’s the part people want to erase … I don’t know what else you can call them.”

Mr. Bell appeared on Fox & Friends this morning. The full interview can be seen here:



Purchase “We Shall Never Forget 9/11: The Kids’ Book of Freedom

“These acts shutter steel but they
cannot dent the steel of American resolve.”
President George W. Bush



911 By The Numbers