The saddest and most frustrating part of this election is not the “quality of the candidates.”
It’s that voters hardly know – thanks to our clueless and subversive media culture – that in November we are doing no less than choosing a country, not only for our children and grandchildren but possibly for all future generations.
Hard to believe, I know. But if we lose freedom here in America, who will rescue us from the grip of socialism as we did other nations in the last century?
Voters – especially women voters – are now being heavily pressured to consider Donald Trump as an unthinkable choice for president. Yes, his “hot mic” comments from over a decade ago were unthinkable, but for many crucial reasons his candidacy is not.
Ironically, the media culture – the primary voice that has corrupted American morals over many decades – is suddenly the loudest voice to condemn Trump. A culture, I should add, that was happy to pronounce Bill Clinton’s impeachment as “just about sex.”
Now they’re calling on Americans to reject a presidential candidate due to the kind of talk we’ve been hearing from them all our lives, from bitches-and-whores “Gangsta Rap” to sexually corrupting “youth movies” to the outright perverse comedy you see regularly on shows like “Saturday Night Live.”
They call it “entertainment,” but as I explained recently on WND, those who make up the larger mass media culture comprise a key force in this election – and they know it.
This hypocrisy will reign supreme on Nov. 8 if we allow it. What Donald Trump said is repugnant – but not “irredeemable,” to use Secretary Clinton’s word about the millions of Americans she calls “deplorable.”
In fact, we can “redeem it” as the price to pay for repossessing our country from the grip of 100 years of progressive contempt for our constitutional republic. We can redeem it on Nov. 8 just as a hopefully victorious Donald Trump will redeem it by his actions in office. If not, there will be a much worse price to pay.
As a longtime Reagan Democrat who has written and broadcast about the PC secular takeover of my party, I can say without a doubt that a vote for Hillary Clinton will be a vote against America.
“My dream is a hemispheric common market,” Hillary told Brazilian bankers after the 2012 election, “with open trade and open borders”
She doesn’t say these things publicly, of course. We know her true thoughts only from those hacked emails being released. But it’s no surprise there’s a global push to increasingly adjust our laws in favor of a new economic order that leaves everyday Americans behind. Hillary Clinton is asking to lead this country – now we know where.
Last summer, the British people rejected the faceless regulators of the European Union and claimed their independence. They voted to leave the EU rather than remain and suffer a loss of sovereignty. Our choice is only slightly different. We need to leave Hillary Clinton’s dream behind and vote to remain America!
Behind the smiles
However, because we don’t really understand people who think like Hillary, we have trouble grasping that the “smooth politician” smiling at us through the TV screen may have (as Clinton said in one of those emails) both “a public and a private position.” So she can talk to us about patriotism while actually planning for “open borders” and a “hemispheric common market.”
That’s what most people call “two-faced.” The question is, where does this attitude come from – this thinking that political leaders can “legitimately” deal away the people they’re supposed to serve?
Actually, President Ronald Reagan himself revealed exactly how these people think.
His explanation came in the famous 1983 “Evil Empire” speech. Ironically, Reagan’s condemnation of the Soviet Union as “evil” was not the most important thing he said in that speech. Reagan talked about the threat within our own borders posed by people who have a different vision for America.
With all the praise Reagan receives these days from liberals, you’ll never hear any of them talk about this quote. Now listen to the great man himself, and let history’s warning guide your vote in November:
I want you to know that this administration is motivated by a political philosophy that sees the greatness of America in you, her people, and in your families, churches, neighborhoods, communities – the institutions that foster and nourish values like concern for others and respect for the rule of law under God.
Now, I don’t have to tell you that this puts us in opposition to, or at least out of step with, a prevailing attitude of many who have turned to a modern-day secularism, discarding the tried and time-tested values upon which our very civilization is based.
No matter how well intentioned, their value system is radically different from that of most Americans. And while they proclaim that they’re freeing us from superstitions of the past, they’ve taken upon themselves the job of superintending us by government rule and regulation.
Stop and think about that last sentence: We are living it.
Voters who realize this continue to stand with Trump despite his troubles. We’re in the midst of what I called in a July 2000 WND column a “cold civil war.” Americans are looking for a general to lead us not a babysitter to soothe us – all the more true when you consider the state of the world. Mr. Trump knows this, which helps explain how he handled the second debate.
Right now we are living a loss of freedom at the hands of people who think like “two-position” Hillary Clinton. And it will only get worse until we vote against their vision of a borderless, open-immigration society superintended by the regulators of a “common market.”
Donald Trump’s ugly “open mic” words from a decade ago don’t change today’s political, economic and global reality. What matters is where Mr. Trump will lead this country as compared to Secretary Clinton’s “open borders dream.”
Ignoring the heated attacks still to come will be difficult, but try nevertheless to hear Donald Trump’s heart over the next few weeks, especially in the final debate. And then make your own decision. But understand that when it comes to decisions about your future, Hillary Clinton has already made hers.
Atheist and “secular Christian” elites were very busy gnawing at the foundation of American society going back far into the 19th century, but what Reagan called “modern-day secularism” gained power more recently – in two main ways.
First was the outrageous judicial power grab in 1947 when the Supreme Court, without any real precedent, declared our government to be secular, which moved America away from our Judeo-Christian roots. About 15 years later, prayer was taken out of our public schools. After that, America’s laws protecting the free exercise of religion continued to deteriorate at a rapid pace.
Second, over time the popular media culture fully adopted this secular faith as its primary worldview. It was not required to – it chose to.
Why? Because although the culture served a religious people, behind the scenes the dominant view in Hollywood and elsewhere in the two-faced media was secular. On television, most religious programing was isolated on Sunday morning, which left the rest of the week dominated by supposedly neutral, non-religious programming.
Over time their neutrality became hostility and the cold civil war started heating up (becoming explosive when my party adopted the same view). One reporter I interviewed told me that journalists who attend church are not trusted by their editors and aren’t assigned serious stories.
Now ask yourself: What happens when a nation’s laws and culture become hostile to that nation’s religious beliefs?
Of course, it undermines the public’s faith, especially considering the government’s influence over the young at all levels of education. But being simply “against faith” isn’t ultimately satisfying. There has to be an alternative – another vision for how to live life, how to understand politics and the social order.
The state as God
Remember, to those “modern-day secularists,” the idea of “one nation under God” was “superstition.” Yes, the Declaration of Independence said our rights come from a Creator God. That was fine for church – or your personal “religious views” – but how could this old document relate to the new atheist American order where the state is the giver of rights and the definer of morality? So America’s defining document was quietly rejected by the elite.
Once the Constitution was separated from the Declaration of Independence, its authorizing document and source of stability, and once this change was accepted by a secular media culture, then the rest was easy – despite, of course, the annoying pushback from talk radio and Fox News, which explains why they are so hated.
The Constitution (the last defense against transforming America) now became a “living document,” which the secular statists could bend one way or the other “for the good of the people” – in keeping with their atheistic/secular worldview.
Now here’s a key question: How does all this translate into an open-border, global economic “dream” that stops putting America first?
Here’s the simple answer. Once a government becomes atheistic, it follows the logic accepted over a century ago by the atheist communists: God is the state and the state is God.
OK, that’s easy to understand. After all, there has to be a definer of right and wrong, and if that’s no longer the God of the Bible or “Nature’s God” as it was for most of our history, then some other alternative has to be found – the secular God-State.
By the way, if you don’t think the Bible was the source of America’s faith, consider Abraham Lincoln’s Second Inaugural address as chiseled on the Lincoln Memorial. This legendary Civil War president defined Americans as a people who “read the same Bible” and “worship the same God.”
No, this country never required an individual faith of its citizens, but instead a common political faith that accepted the source of our rights as coming from something higher than government – and therefore protecting all of us from federal abuse of power.
Giving America away
If you are a younger American, that Lincoln quote alone will give you a hint at what’s been stolen from you.
But now imagine you are “the thief.” What do you do as a member of the secular elite with a country of mostly Christian people who “read the same Bible” and “worship the same God”?
You no longer believe in God, but you do understand from your secular perspective the simple logic of monotheism – one single source of goodwill, knowledge and power. You look around the world at all the many continually warring nations and you come to a big realization.
If the state is God, and if the world is made up of many states, then the only solution that will lead to peace is a “secular monotheism” that requires all those little gods to become one true God.
Yes, a global order is hard to establish, but what a righteous vision for all those well-meaning secular elites. Everyone working together in one common social/political/economic structure for the good of mankind – whether ending war forever or eliminating all poverty from the face of the earth or stopping the seas from rising by ending “climate change” – utopian global government becomes the ultimate definer of right and wrong and the guarantor of peace and prosperity!
Of course, this requires all governments to submit to some kind of united common market with all the necessary centralized regulators, as they have in the European Union.
Enter the “Hillary Clintons” of the world with their “public and private positions” – one face to soothe Americans who want to hold on to their under-God “superstitions,” and another face for the secular cognoscenti who are happy to take on the job of establishing world peace – including social, environmental and economic justice – as long as they are in control.
Don’t call it conspiracy. Think of it as a secular consensus on “the right thing to do.” It’s how they get secular corporations on board who only want to stay ahead of the curve. They are all just following the irresistible logic of atheism/secularism:
First, if there is no active, involved and personal God, then the state must take his place. “No matter how well intentioned,” said Reagan, “their value system is radically different from that of most Americans.”
And second, the only way to prevent a lot of squabbling gods (as in the paganism of ancient Greece and Rome) is to accept a new secular monotheistic order by absorbing, over time, each nation’s sovereignty for the sake of a “higher good.”
Again, Reagan: “And while they proclaim that they’re freeing us from superstitions of the past, they’ve taken upon themselves the job of superintending us by government rule and regulation.”
If we as voters allow our judgment to be clouded by anger or frustration at Donald Trump’s real flaws (possessed also by previous presidents), we will be making a dangerous emotional decision – rather than a sober one that creates the real future we want for our children and grandchildren. I’m asking you, as a Christian and as a Democrat, to vote to remain America.
The only “unthinkable choice” is Hillary Clinton.