Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Current Communist Goals
Congressional Record--Appendix, pp. A34-A35 ^

Posted on 03/17/2012 9:13:20 AM PDT by Antoninus

I know that this list has been posted on FR before--probably many times. If JR wants to take this post down as a duplicate, he is certainly free to do so. But in light of the number of brain-dead fools lurking on FR these days who take their cues on personal freedom from Larry Flynt and not from the Founding Fathers and traditional American morality, I feel it is a good time to post and discuss this list again.

While some of the goals on this list are out-of-date historically speaking, many are in the process of being accomplished right now under our very noses. On the whole, the list provides a checklist for how to undermine a nation and set it up for destruction. Perhaps it would be good if folks read down this list and reflected on how their statements and actions might be contributing to the accomplishment of our enemies' goals.

[Bold is mine]

---------------------------------------

January 10, 1963

Current Communist Goals

EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. A. S. HERLONG, JR. OF FLORIDA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Thursday, January 10, 1963

Mr. HERLONG. Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Patricia Nordman of De Land, Fla., is an ardent and articulate opponent of communism, and until recently published the De Land Courier, which she dedicated to the purpose of alerting the public to the dangers of communism in America.

At Mrs. Nordman's request, I include in the RECORD, under unanimous consent, the following "Current Communist Goals," which she identifies as an excerpt from "The Naked Communist," by Cleon Skousen:

[From "The Naked Communist," by Cleon Skousen]

CURRENT COMMUNIST GOALS

1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.

2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.

3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.

4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.

5. Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites.

6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.

7. Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N.

8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev's promise in 1955 to settle the German question by free elections under supervision of the U.N.

9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the United States has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress.

10. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the U.N.

11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces.

12. Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party.

13. Do away with all loyalty oaths.

14. Continue giving Russia access to the U.S. Patent Office.

15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.

16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.

17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks.

18. Gain control of all student newspapers.

19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.

20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policymaking positions.

21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.

22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to "eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms."

23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. "Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art."

24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press.

25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.

26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."


27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a "religious crutch."

28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state."

29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.

30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man."

31. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the "big picture." Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over.

32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture--education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.

33. Eliminate all laws or procedures which interfere with the operation of the Communist apparatus.

34. Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities.

35. Discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI.

36. Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.

37. Infiltrate and gain control of big business.

38. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat].

39. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.

40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.

41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.

42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use ["]united force["] to solve economic, political or social problems.

43. Overthrow all colonial governments before native populations are ready for self-government.

44. Internationalize the Panama Canal.

45. Repeal the Connally reservation so the United States cannot prevent the World Court from seizing jurisdiction [over domestic problems. Give the World Court jurisdiction] over nations and individuals alike.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: communist; libertarian; toxicculture; usefulidiots
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-104 next last
It is appalling to see how many useful idiots there are on Free Republic these days. It's one thing to attack a candidate like Rick Santorum for his record and his occasional less-than-conservative votes. It's another thing completely to attack him for his conservative and laudable defense of the American family. By doing this, you are joining the ranks of the amoral enemy and abetting the activities of those in news, academia, and the toxic entertainment media.
1 posted on 03/17/2012 9:13:56 AM PDT by Antoninus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

The devil’s wishlist.


2 posted on 03/17/2012 9:17:18 AM PDT by volunbeer (Keep the dope, we'll make the change in 2012!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

You are right!


3 posted on 03/17/2012 9:18:20 AM PDT by unkus (Silence Is Consent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Joe 6-pack

Hat tip to you, my friend.


4 posted on 03/17/2012 9:19:10 AM PDT by Antoninus (The less virtuous a people, the greater its need for laws.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: volunbeer

0bama’s playbook.


5 posted on 03/17/2012 9:19:25 AM PDT by The Sons of Liberty (Psalm 109:8 Let his days be few and let another take his office. - Mene, Mene, Tekel, Upharsin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

Its frightening how far they’ve gotten.

We have to fight on all fronts rather than concentrating on one or two.


6 posted on 03/17/2012 9:19:32 AM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: volunbeer

In my opinion, if the Republican party nominates Mitt Romney, goal #15 will have finally been accomplished.


7 posted on 03/17/2012 9:20:20 AM PDT by Antoninus (The less virtuous a people, the greater its need for laws.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

Thank you sir. I would only qualify that where you say, “While some of the goals on this list are out-of-date historically speaking,” the reason for their obsolescence is because some of those goals have already been accomplished.


8 posted on 03/17/2012 9:26:31 AM PDT by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

“It’s another thing completely to attack him for his conservative and laudable defense of the American family. By doing this, you are joining the ranks of the amoral enemy and abetting the activities of those in news, academia, and the toxic entertainment media.”

I have seen this quite a bit lately. I don’t expect all FReepers to be christians, but to attack a candidate for being a devout christian, or a devout Jew is sick. Many of our societal problems emanate from the breakdown of the American family. We need more politicians to speak up about this, not less!


9 posted on 03/17/2012 9:35:07 AM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Raider Sam; gogogodzilla; Ozymandias Ghost; going hot; sillsfan; wastedyears; Longbow1969; ...

At least understand what you are defending and whose rhetoric you are using when you claim that a duly elected government has no right to restrict obscenity.


10 posted on 03/17/2012 9:41:04 AM PDT by Antoninus (The less virtuous a people, the greater its need for laws.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

Sorry FRiend but the majority of the GOP sold out long ago. They have been Progressive Lite for so long that most right thinking American’s don’t recognize we are the frog in the boiling pot of water.

Cultural conservatism was essential to blunt the goals of the left, but we have moved so far to the left that the defense of cultural values (even here on FR) is subject to ridicule and scorn. The replacement of God and self-reliance with government is pretty much complete on a national scale and it’s probably too late to reverse the trend.

“Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholely inadequate for the governance of any other.” - John Adams in 1798


11 posted on 03/17/2012 9:48:15 AM PDT by volunbeer (Keep the dope, we'll make the change in 2012!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

>>At least understand what you are defending and whose rhetoric you are using when you claim that a duly elected government has no right to restrict obscenity.<<

???

Is this a carry-over from the other thread about Santorum and obscenity?


12 posted on 03/17/2012 9:48:55 AM PDT by freedumb2003 (Spoiler Alert! The secret to Terra Nova: THEY ARE ALL DEAD!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: stephenjohnbanker
I have seen this quite a bit lately. I don’t expect all FReepers to be christians, but to attack a candidate for being a devout christian, or a devout Jew is sick.

They've succumbed to the left and are no longer relevant to my brand of conservatism. If they have something intelligent to say, I'll listen and consider it but they're no more conservative than Christopher Hitchens was.

In fact I can name a whole host of problems that actual conservatives of all stripes have.
13 posted on 03/17/2012 9:49:48 AM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: 21twelve; Absolutely Nobama; AFPhys; afraidfortherepublic; AmericanInTokyo; ...
Pinging the Santorum list to this. Personally, I think the media/left has once again stepped in it by trying to make Santorum the equivalent of the Taliban for daring to say he will enforce existing laws against obscenity.

50%+ of potential voters are women. How many of them would favor Santorum's position on obscenity?

The problem with the left is that they are surrounded by morbidly perverse people and don't understand that the vast majority of the people in this country do not think like they do on the subject.



Santorum for President ping. Let me know if you want on or off the list.

Top 10 Reasons why Conservatives should support Santorum

16 Reasons Why Mitt Romney Would Be a Really, Really Bad President
14 posted on 03/17/2012 9:49:57 AM PDT by Antoninus (The less virtuous a people, the greater its need for laws.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus; WmShirerAdmirer; lilycicero; MaryLou1; glock rocks; JPG; Monkey Face; RIghtwardHo; ...
+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.


15 posted on 03/17/2012 9:49:57 AM PDT by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: volunbeer
Cultural conservatism was essential to blunt the goals of the left, but we have moved so far to the left that the defense of cultural values (even here on FR) is subject to ridicule and scorn. The replacement of God and self-reliance with government is pretty much complete on a national scale and it’s probably too late to reverse the trend.

It's never too late. As long as there is life, there is hope. God will provide.
16 posted on 03/17/2012 9:53:09 AM PDT by Antoninus (The less virtuous a people, the greater its need for laws.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

If theRepublican Party has their way,Romney will be the nominee.


17 posted on 03/17/2012 9:54:15 AM PDT by sport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus
"As long as there is life, there is hope."

If that's not a direct quote, it's a very close paraphrase from one of James Herriott's books :-) I just don't recall which one at the moment.

18 posted on 03/17/2012 10:02:41 AM PDT by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus; cripplecreek

“The problem with the left is that they are surrounded by morbidly perverse people and don’t understand that the vast majority of the people in this country do not think like they do on the subject.”

Of course. They live in NYC, or Hollywood, and only talk to their own kind. The real values of most Americans is lost on them.


19 posted on 03/17/2012 10:07:49 AM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: sport
If theRepublican Party has their way,Romney will be the nominee.

There is still time to make sure they don't have their way.
20 posted on 03/17/2012 10:09:28 AM PDT by Antoninus (The less virtuous a people, the greater its need for laws.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

Very good post/reminder. Thanks.

DEPOPULATE socialists/totalitarians from the body politic. C’mon November!


21 posted on 03/17/2012 10:14:18 AM PDT by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stephenjohnbanker

We need to stop allowing the separation of social and fiscal conservatism. In reality, one cannot exist without the other and labeling them as separate is nothing more than an attempt to divide.

I challenge anyone to show me a fiscal only conservative or a social only conservative. No such animal exists.


22 posted on 03/17/2012 10:14:26 AM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

Thank you for the post.  It was extremely hard for me to read it.  I had to pause a few times just to cope with the vivid remembrance of 30 years living under socialist/communist regime. 

This is exactly how they think, how they act, up until they destroy you, enslave you, and at the end steal your soul, too.

I noticed for a long time that this is coming to America and unfortunately most people in America seems to be to ignorant to believe it.  If the advance of socialism, communism and fascism is not stopped very soon, then the suffering of  people will be huge, included those useful idiots who advocated for leftist ideology. 

23 posted on 03/17/2012 10:20:13 AM PDT by OneHun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
We need to stop allowing the separation of social and fiscal conservatism. In reality, one cannot exist without the other and labeling them as separate is nothing more than an attempt to divide.

Exactly. I am both a fiscal and social conservative.

I challenge anyone to show me a fiscal only conservative or a social only conservative. No such animal exists.


I have never found one of those animals either. When a candidate runs as one (like Arlen Specter, for example), you quickly find out that when the chips are down, they are not fiscal conservatives either.
24 posted on 03/17/2012 10:20:40 AM PDT by Antoninus (The less virtuous a people, the greater its need for laws.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

“I challenge anyone to show me a fiscal only conservative or a social only conservative. No such animal exists.”

Correct!

Good post!


25 posted on 03/17/2012 10:34:07 AM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

See post number 3. Santorum had nothing to do with the thread but some can’t resist a chance to take a swing at a Christian.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2860360/posts


26 posted on 03/17/2012 10:38:35 AM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
See post number 3. Santorum had nothing to do with the thread but some can’t resist a chance to take a swing at a Christian.

That particular poster is one who I've flagged as a closet Romney supporter who is using Newt for cover.
27 posted on 03/17/2012 10:47:48 AM PDT by Antoninus (The less virtuous a people, the greater its need for laws.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

Santo is a Union Stooge as is Willard Romney and don’t be fooled.. Barak Obama is too as well..

What do Santo, WIllard and BArry have in common?... UNIONS!!!!.
The House of Cards is stacked against old Newtie..
He is the ONLY one that threatens and is able to blow on this house of cards..

NO Newt.. Obama WINS... he will BBQ especially Santo and Willard too..
Newt is fighting the Obama Juggernaut AND the Republican Party.. and even Ron Paul..

NO Newt... the Obamaoid WINS.. (like 2008)
Willard is the NEW Juan McLaim.. and Santo is the NEW Sissy Graham..


28 posted on 03/17/2012 10:50:31 AM PDT by hosepipe (This propaganda has been edited to include some fully orbed hyperbole...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

Thank you for posting this, Antoninus.


29 posted on 03/17/2012 10:55:21 AM PDT by llmc1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus
More and more, I am thinking that social conservatism is conservatism.

It's been pointed out by a lot of people here that the decline in moral values and the family is the reason that we are in so much of an economic and fiscal mess. But it's not just limited to "fiscal" issues, and also extends to the other leg of Reagan's stool--national defense. If a country becomes weak and decadent, it's not going to defend itself, and it will fold when it encounters hardship. Besides, is a society like that worth defending anyway?

30 posted on 03/17/2012 10:59:54 AM PDT by WPaCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

Our national faith brought many blessings from God and our prosperity has helped to spread the Gospel to the far corners of the globe. Our moral people, missions work, and our alliance with Israel were fundamental to these blessings.

One must question if we are still a Godly nation when you watch TV or examine our culture. There is a growing disdain for Israel in our nation - not just our politicians. There is a growing disdain for God and his laws in our nation - not just our politicians. We live in a nation where our fellow citizens increasingly worship materialism and darkness.

It takes wealth to support foreign missions and a military. We are squandering our wealth on the progressive agenda and weakening our engine of prosperity with an out of control government. With our spriraling national debt and decreased income it will be difficult to sustain our military and foreign missions. Our nation grows weary of overseas entanglements with Afghanistan and Iraq. That lessens the likelihood that we will come to the defense of Israel - the little nation that dominates the bible and the news.

I share your faith. However, in a biblical sense I think it’s difficult to disagree with what I wrote above. I don’t say that in despair. We must keep our faith in God and not politicians because the direction of our nation is determined by the sum of it’s parts. You and I are in the minority, but we know how the story of this world will end and the next begin.

I appreciate your optimism and support your desire to get our nation back on track. We talk about big issues here on FR and our nation faces huge problems. However, I believe the biggest problem our nation faces is in the heart of individuals and that can’t be changed by government or politicians.


31 posted on 03/17/2012 11:05:31 AM PDT by volunbeer (Keep the dope, we'll make the change in 2012!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: WPaCon
More and more, I am thinking that social conservatism is conservatism.

Agreed. A sound economy on its most basic level is predicated upon being able to trust your trading partners. When your country is full of dishonest, immoral scoundrels, that basic trust is not taken for granted anymore. And such a toxin is deadly not only in business but in every human relationship.

The crisis in this country is at heart a spiritual and moral crisis and Santorum and Gingrich are the only two who actually get that. That's why I hope they team up.
32 posted on 03/17/2012 11:07:41 AM PDT by Antoninus (The less virtuous a people, the greater its need for laws.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: volunbeer
I share your faith. However, in a biblical sense I think it’s difficult to disagree with what I wrote above. I don’t say that in despair. We must keep our faith in God and not politicians because the direction of our nation is determined by the sum of it’s parts. You and I are in the minority, but we know how the story of this world will end and the next begin.

Agreed. I fully understand that politics won't save my soul. However, I have a very long view of history and still believe in the fundamental goodness of the American people--particularly those who reside more than 100 miles from either coast.
33 posted on 03/17/2012 11:11:17 AM PDT by Antoninus (The less virtuous a people, the greater its need for laws.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: OneHun

@ Post 23

Outstanding!. Those who lived under communism/fascism comprehend how evil it really is. Those who study the world understand that we are moving towards the same ideology of statism.

We would be wise to heed your words. Thank you.


34 posted on 03/17/2012 11:15:27 AM PDT by volunbeer (Keep the dope, we'll make the change in 2012!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek; Antoninus

“Pastor “Little Ricky” and other nasty names.....sad.


35 posted on 03/17/2012 11:23:22 AM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: OneHun

I know several people that lived under communist rule, and every one of them see us slipping into it, day by day, and they are mortified!


36 posted on 03/17/2012 11:32:46 AM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: volunbeer
thank you, for the (timely/reminder) list.

37 posted on 03/17/2012 11:33:49 AM PDT by skinkinthegrass (Simple: Kill the terrorists, Protect (all) the borders, ridicule all the (surviving) Liberals :^)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

I think that a lot of the discounting of the necessity of Christianity to society is due to the revisionist and misinterpreted history that is presented to most of us.

Because of this distorted history, most people that think our advanced civilization was built by the Enlightenment and its principles. Instead, it was really built by Christianity.


38 posted on 03/17/2012 11:39:40 AM PDT by WPaCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus
> At least understand what you are defending and whose rhetoric you are using when you claim that a duly elected government has no right to restrict obscenity.

You are welcome to your opinion, which appears to be that you want the federal government to regulate personal morality.

I disagree -- I believe that if any government can legitimately claim that power, it is the State or Local government, not the federal.

Your attempt to smear everyone who does not subscribe to your personal code of what is and is not "obscene" with the label "Communist" is unappreciated by those of us who believe that the Constitution was written to establish a limited federal government with certain enumerated powers and very strict limits.

The Constitutional powers of the federal government are found in the Constitution, not your personal moral code. I do not find "regulate personal morality at the federal level" anywhere in the Constitution.

That power belongs at the State and Local levels. That was my underlying point in my earlier comments on the Santorum thread (2860230).

I will respectfully ask you to withdraw your unjustified smear, at least as it applies to me, now. Thank you.

39 posted on 03/17/2012 11:41:19 AM PDT by dayglored (Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: volunbeer

"We would be wise to heed your words. Thank you."

Thank you.  I will keep on spreading the word.  I did that as soon I stepped (legally) on American soil , and will do it ‘till my last breath. 

40 posted on 03/17/2012 11:48:26 AM PDT by OneHun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

“At least understand what you are defending and whose rhetoric you are using when you claim that a duly elected government has no right to restrict obscenity.”
__________________

Maybe you misread my post. I said nothing of the kind. I said is was an Commonwealth’s/State’s Attorney issue NOT a presidential issue.


41 posted on 03/17/2012 11:51:07 AM PDT by Ozymandias Ghost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

If Obama wins, then we can officially change the name of our country from the United States of America to the Communist State of Obama. His administration just announced that in Obamacare every person signed up will be contributing $12 yearly to fund abortions - if all Americans are forced to buy in he would be taking about 3 billion dollars out of our pockets and funding “free” abortions (not to mention the “free” sterilizations and condemns). And, as Newt has openly said, Obama has declared war on the Catholic Church, all Christian Churches who still have a conscience and all American citizens who value their freedom: no more inevitable rights endowed to us by our Creator (like life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness), oh no! It’s Communism like China and Russia, but the crazy thing is people are voting for it.

God help us! And, please God, Santorum/Newt for President/VP (or vice versa)!


42 posted on 03/17/2012 12:02:46 PM PDT by koinonia ("Thou art bought with the blood of God... Be the companion of Christ." -St. Ephraim)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus
That whole list is the lib wish list as well. The dems are using the alinsky rules to foist the list you present on the US.

The libs are masters of obfuscation, misdirection, and most importantly, the power of the introduction of division into the conversation.

Pornography is bad, for numerous reasons stated here and elsewhere, and I agree with all of them.

It is not however on the front burner, nor will it's fix help slow down or reverse the swirl in the toilet bowel we are all riding in.

To the extent that the media can throw Rick off message, they will succeed in stripping votes away, resulting in their complete success this November.

As righteous as a candidate can be, and as far to the right as possible makes for a good person to vote for, but he will need more than the votes of all conservatives to displace Obama.

This whole porn debate, as well as the contraception debate, is no more than a play to get him off message, and strip away votes from people who vote based on top of fold headlines and soundbites.

Unfortunately, that is the majority of the voting block.

Maybe you disagree, but that does not make it any less so.

It is the current playbook, refined over the last few decades, and will happen again this November as long as they can keep him off message.

43 posted on 03/17/2012 12:33:07 PM PDT by going hot (Happiness is a momma deuce)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: stephenjohnbanker
".....every one of them see us slipping into it, day by day, and they are mortified!"

Yes, those people understand the meaning of the powerful sentence from The Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” 

I can see why the statist, left wing dictatorial types hate this sentence.  Saying out in public something like this, back then, I would have ended up in prison accused of treason, or contra revolutionary activity.

44 posted on 03/17/2012 12:34:51 PM PDT by OneHun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: dayglored
I will respectfully ask you to withdraw your unjustified smear, at least as it applies to me, now. Thank you.

Do you agree that the federal government has the power to regulate interstate commerce and the airwaves? If so, then the federal government has the legitimate power to regulate internet pornography.
45 posted on 03/17/2012 12:40:46 PM PDT by Antoninus (The less virtuous a people, the greater its need for laws.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Ozymandias Ghost
Maybe you misread my post. I said nothing of the kind. I said is was an Commonwealth’s/State’s Attorney issue NOT a presidential issue.

Do you think the president should simply not enforce anti-obscenity laws already on the books as Obama has done? All Santorum is saying is that he will enforce them. And I think he's absolutely right to say so. God bless him for speaking his mind and not being a pandering wuss.
46 posted on 03/17/2012 12:43:22 PM PDT by Antoninus (The less virtuous a people, the greater its need for laws.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: volunbeer
"I believe the biggest problem our nation faces is in the heart of individuals and that can’t be changed by government or politicians."

I have repeatedly told people over the years that is precisely what I believe Franklin meant when he said, "A republic, if you can keep it."

Franklin knew that where individuals could not restrain themselves or their own behavior, governments would be asked, if not begged to restrain them, and more than happy to oblige.

47 posted on 03/17/2012 12:45:08 PM PDT by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: narses; Antoninus; OneHun

William Lind wrote an article 12 years ago called the origins of political correctness that showa how far down this of communism and especially marxism we already are.

Here are some excerpts...
http://www.academia.org/the-origins-of-political-correctness/

The totalitarian nature of Political Correctness is revealed nowhere more clearly than on college campuses, many of which at this point are small ivy covered North Koreas, where the student or faculty member who dares to cross any of the lines set up by the gender feminist or the homosexual-rights activists, or the local black or Hispanic group, or any of the other sainted “victims” groups that PC revolves around, quickly find themselves in judicial trouble. Within the small legal system of the college, they face formal charges – some star-chamber proceeding – and punishment. That is a little look into the future that Political Correctness intends for the nation as a whole.

the cultural Marxism of Political Correctness, like economic Marxism, has a single factor explanation of history. Economic Marxism says that all of history is determined by ownership of means of production. Cultural Marxism, or Political Correctness, says that all history is determined by power, by which groups defined in terms of race, sex, etc., have power over which other groups. Nothing else matters. All literature, indeed, is about that. Everything in the past is about that one thing.

Third, just as in classical economic Marxism certain groups, i.e. workers and peasants, are a priori good, and other groups, i.e., the bourgeoisie and capital owners, are evil. In the cultural Marxism of Political Correctness certain groups are good – feminist women, (only feminist women, non-feminist women are deemed not to exist) blacks, Hispanics, homosexuals. These groups are determined to be “victims,” and therefore automatically good regardless of what any of them do. Similarly, white males are determined automatically to be evil, thereby becoming the equivalent of the bourgeoisie in economic Marxism.

Fourth, both economic and cultural Marxism rely on expropriation. When the classical Marxists, the communists, took over a country like Russia, they expropriated the bourgeoisie, they took away their property. Similarly, when the cultural Marxists take over a university campus, they expropriate through things like quotas for admissions. When a white student with superior qualifications is denied admittance to a college in favor of a black or Hispanic who isn’t as well qualified, the white student is expropriated. And indeed, affirmative action, in our whole society today, is a system of expropriation. White owned companies don’t get a contract because the contract is reserved for a company owned by, say, Hispanics or women. So expropriation is a principle tool for both forms of Marxism.

And finally, both have a method of analysis that automatically gives the answers they want. For the classical Marxist, it’s Marxist economics. For the cultural Marxist, it’s deconstruction. Deconstruction essentially takes any text, removes all meaning from it and re-inserts any meaning desired. So we find, for example, that all of Shakespeare is about the suppression of women, or the Bible is really about race and gender. All of these texts simply become grist for the mill, which proves that “all history is about which groups have power over which other groups.” So the parallels are very evident between the classical Marxism that we’re familiar with in the old Soviet Union and the cultural Marxism that we see today as Political Correctness.

But the parallels are not accidents. The parallels did not come from nothing. The fact of the matter is that Political Correctness has a history, a history that is much longer than many people are aware of outside a small group of academics who have studied this. And the history goes back, as I said, to World War I, as do so many of the pathologies that are today bringing our society, and indeed our culture, down.

Marxist theory said that when the general European war came (as it did come in Europe in 1914), the working class throughout Europe would rise up and overthrow their governments – the bourgeois governments – because the workers had more in common with each other across the national boundaries than they had in common with the bourgeoisie and the ruling class in their own country. Well, 1914 came and it didn’t happen. Throughout Europe, workers rallied to their flag and happily marched off to fight each other. The Kaiser shook hands with the leaders of the Marxist Social Democratic Party in Germany and said there are no parties now, there are only Germans. And this happened in every country in Europe. So something was wrong.

Marxists knew by definition it couldn’t be the theory. In 1917, they finally got a Marxist coup in Russia and it looked like the theory was working, but it stalled again. It didn’t spread and when attempts were made to spread immediately after the war, with the Spartacist uprising in Berlin, with the Bela Kun government in Hungary, with the Munich Soviet, the workers didn’t support them.

So the Marxists’ had a problem. And two Marxist theorists went to work on it: Antonio Gramsci in Italy and Georg Lukacs in Hungary. Gramsci said the workers will never see their true class interests, as defined by Marxism, until they are freed from Western culture, and particularly from the Christian religion – that they are blinded by culture and religion to their true class interests. Lukacs, who was considered the most brilliant Marxist theorist since Marx himself, said in 1919, “Who will save us from Western Civilization?” He also theorized that the great obstacle to the creation of a Marxist paradise was the culture: Western civilization itself


48 posted on 03/17/2012 12:53:18 PM PDT by stfassisi ((The greatest gift God gives us is that of overcoming self"-St Francis Assisi)))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: hosepipe

Unions aren’t an issue for federal government to deal with except when the union is one of federal employees. The states themselves does a far better job of deciding union issues.

Just this week in Michigan our governor signed a bill making it illegal for grad students to unionize and another bill ending automatic dues deductions for school employees and teachers.

Thank God we didn’t have to rely on the feds for those.


49 posted on 03/17/2012 12:58:47 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus
> Do you agree that the federal government has the power to regulate interstate commerce and the airwaves? If so, then the federal government has the legitimate power to regulate internet pornography.
The Commerce Clause is an enumerated power listed in the United States Constitution (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3). The clause states that the United States Congress shall have power "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes." - Wikipedia
The interstate commerce clause has been stretched and abused to cover all manner of federal government over-reach -- and threads since FreeRepublic's beginning have bemoaned that fact. If you choose to defend that over-reach and abuse, I won't attempt to argue with you on that point, since our positions are probably pretty entrenched, and neither of us is likely to persuade the other. I suggest we "agree to disagree" on that. Though I think we both -can- agree that Mr. Santorum, should he become President, is charged with enforcing the laws made by Congress, not those of his own moral code.

I'm content with the existing laws against obscenity, and have no desire to see them expanded at the federal level. The argument about better federal enforcement is just talk, until such time as Mr. Santorum gets into office and finds out what he can and can't actually accomplish.

On the point of the airwaves, I take it then that you wish to give the federal government, which is currently controlled by the most egregiously anti-American, socialist, amoral administration in living memory if not ever in our history, the power to shut down FreeRepublic and other internet sources of opposition to that administration, on the basis that the content is objectionable according to what the federal government deems acceptable.

I disagree. And I daresay that the founder of FreeRepublic might disagree as well. Neither he nor I willingly grant the federal government enough power that they can suppress our speech just because they don't like it. You might be willing to do so, and it's your right to argue that position and wish for that sort of government censorship. But like the old proverb says, be very careful of what you wish for, lest you get it.

50 posted on 03/17/2012 1:16:57 PM PDT by dayglored (Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-104 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson