One more...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XuE_DXrt2Js
"He will bring us goodness and light"
but we have to listen to Him first.
"He will bring us goodness and light"
but we have to listen to Him first.
Trump’s Trajectory
As for Trump, his nationalism has carried the day, for now, yet he isn’t most properly analogized to Pat Buchanan. Rather, his election is historic for yet another reason: As I pointed out in January, Trump was our first “European-conservative” American presidential candidate. Unlike Buchanan and much like Marine Le Pen or Nigel Farage, Trump is indifferent to quite liberal on social issues, and he accepts the statist status quo. He simply rejects internationalism. And in this he is, like it or not, a man for our time. In “Liberalism and Conservatism: The Engine and Caboose of the Train to Perdition” (The New American, November 7, 2016), I pointed out that a given time’s conservatives merely reflect the previous times’ liberals, as the political spectrum continually moves “left.” And as we follow in Europe’s footsteps — with secularization, declining morality, and burgeoning government — and as our people begin to resemble the Old World’s worldview-wise, so do our leaders.
There is a lesson here. Just as a nation may get the government it deserves, reformers can only reform rightly insofar as they morally are well-formed. The hit the establishment took November 8 was uplifting, and we should wish President-elect Trump great success in advancing his aims, insofar as they’re constitutional. We should also hope he truly will trump the establishment. Yet we must remember that he is only one man; it’s the movement that matters. Whatever Trump attempts, we can and should augment (or correct) it by neutralizing establishment schemes with nullification, which Thomas Jefferson called the “rightful remedy” for all federal usurpation. Moreover, we should dismiss judicial supremacy as the extra-constitutional power it is, for to accept it, as Jefferson warned, would make our Constitution a “suicide pact.” In addition, we can elect members of Congress who understand their constitutional powers — for example, those allowing them to rein in the judiciary — and aren’t reluctant to exercise them; as it stands now, congressmen opt to let unelected (and unaccountable) judges “settle” contentious issues rather than do so themselves, alienate part of the electorate, and give opponents ammunition for campaign-time political ads. This, of course, leads to distorted government. For how can there be the founder-envisioned balance of power among the three branches if one branch neglects to exercise its powers? If Congress refuses its turn at the wheel, it should be no surprise when the presidency and courts steer us toward an abyss.
Yet national suicide will still be our lot without one crucial ingredient. We can talk about constitutionalism till we’re blue in the face, but our second president, John Adams, told us in no uncertain terms, “Avarice, ambition, revenge and licentiousness would break the strongest cords of our Constitution, as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” Does “moral and religious” describe us today? Adherence to a set of rules (the Constitution, for instance) requires a sense of honor in the people. Furthermore, it requires a belief that rules can have a basis in more than just man’s preference. As to this, I’ve often mentioned Barna Group research indicating that a staggering 83 percent of teenagers in 2002 (adults today) said that “morals” were relative; in other words, they don’t believe in the most important, most fundamental rules of all — God’s laws — which are what morals reflect. Of course, if even what we call right and wrong were relative (which essentially means they don’t exist), why would we consider constitutional dictates and prohibitions anything but relative? Another way of saying this is: Why then would we consider the Constitution anything but a “living document”?
Moreover, if right and wrong were just a matter of “perspective,” what could be objectively wrong with violating any set of rules? And if we accept the relativistic Protagorean notion that “Man is the measure of all things,” which would include laws, then it’s no surprise when we start to become a land of men and not laws. This is why philosophy matters: Get “First Things” wrong, and what flows from them will be no better.
An apocryphal saying tells us, “America is great because she is good, and if America ever ceases to be good, she will cease to be great.” You may or may not consider a battle to have been won on November 8, but the moral and spiritual battle for the soul of America is waged every single day. And making America great again requires making her good again. Take care of that, and the elections — and the establishment’s disestablishment — take care of themselves.
Yeah, this thread is starting off as I hoped, shining the spotlight on your obsession with Trump.
You should gain tons of new viewers and at the same time make an indelible impression on the Duke. Syndicated columnist Selwyn Duke. Maybe I'll check out some of his work to see if he thinks like you.
Trump is Winning, he can't stop Winning. Your lame attacks are way too late and wholly ineffective. You're so fixated on sex that you can't see what's really happening in America.I was going to comment in Patrick Jane's thread entitled
'I am Donald Trump's biggest fan in the whooooole wide world!', but I see that after two posts he closed the thread.
3 of the supposed 'accomplishments' that Donald Trump has done as President (according to Patrick Jane) are these:
A new executive order to boost apprenticeships.
A move to boost computer sciences in Education Department programs.
Prioritizing women-owned businesses for some $500 million in SBA l
2 of them sound like areas that government shouldn't be involved in and left to the free enterprise system to promote and the 3rd (the Dept. of Education) is unconstitutional.
Is your President a socialist Patrick, and if so, why do you embrace socialism?
Trump is Winning, he can't stop Winning. Your lame attacks are way too late and wholly ineffective. You're so fixated on sex that you can't see what's really happening in America.
I trust Trump.
...you know Trump is the hottest topic in our lifetime.
Wasn't the media and the republican party interested in doing this for a long time? Connie, they need to go back to family values to stop a tsunami.Yes, the Republicrat President who (as shown in the article by SMUT peddler/pedophile embracer Hugh Hefner) has turned the once pro traditional family values Republican Party into a Party that both embraces sexual perversion or looks the other way when their President embraces it, is most definitely a "hot topic" Patrick.
Wasn't the media and the republican party interested in doing this for a long time? Connie, they need to go back to family values to stop a tsunami.
Yeah, his "case" was thrown out in case you're not up to speed..
and why would he wait until after the election to take a polygraph while arguing that he lost due to voter fraud anyway?