Left-Wing Ideology Now Rules Supreme In America

News flash for conservatives, Christians, libertarians or anyone in America who embraces traditional values, the rule of law, common sense, basic math, a more secure nation or politicians who put you and your family first: You have lost or are losing across the board. Period.

With the re-election of Barack Obama — and he and his campaign should be congratulated for not only running a winning campaign but, more importantly, for also exploiting the weaknesses created by the nanny-state — there is now no more mystery or doubt. Liberal ideology rules supreme in our country and to say otherwise, is to deny the facts.

This winning liberal ideology — or theology to many on the far left — has been aided, abetted, guided and shaped by many in the mainstream media who now openly turn their backs on ethics, professionalism and character in favor of evangelizing for their new faith.

Be it the major networks, the cable networks or most of the top newspapers in the country, all now have highly influential personnel who have deliberately cast aside morality for liberal victory at any price.

Unfortunately, much worse than that, many of these same media personalities and outlets have added character assassination of conservatives or conservative viewpoints to their rhetorical arsenals.

The most egregious and recent example of this being when the editorial writers for the Washington Post gleefully smeared almost 100 Republican House members with the charge of racism. In their jumping-the-shark attack titled, "The GOP's Bizarre Attack On Susan Rice," the Washington Post wondered:

"Could it be, as members of the Congressional Black Caucus are charging, that the signatories of the letter are targeting Ms. Rice because she is an African-American woman? The signatories deny that, and we can't know their hearts.

"What we do know is that more than 80 of the signatories are white males, and nearly half are from states of the former Confederacy. You'd think that before launching their broadside, members of Congress would have taken care not to propagate any falsehoods of their own."

Amazingly, the Republican leadership just took this false and obscene charge on the chin. Rather than taking to the airwaves to demand an apology from the Post and rounding up a good legal team to sue for defamation, the GOP leaders went silent.

Of course, this would be the same leadership that threatens the few conservatives in the House with expulsion from committee assignments if they don't tow the "water down our principles" line, so their ducking an issue of integrity may be understandable.

In and of itself, that's yet another glaring example of why the liberals now control the megaphone of America and rule supreme. All too often, conservatives, Christians and anyone who espouses traditional values will simply wring their hands and say "what are we to do" when their beliefs are attacked or eradicated.

The polar-opposite of that being the reaction from the far left when they feel threatened. Be it gay marriage, the unsustainable and economy-destroying benefits for public-employees, "global warming," ObamaCare, extending unemployment benefits to infinity, open borders, legalizing drugs or a host of other issues, many on the far left will fight tooth and nail to defend that which is dear to them.

They will march, they will boycott, they will harass, they will cyber-attack, they will be relentless. And finally, they will intimidate many politicians and corporations into complete capitulation.

As to why those who believe in traditional values and the rule of law don't fight back, it's because everywhere they turn, they see the battle lost.

The media? The far left controls it. Entertainment? The far left controls it. Education from pre-school to post-graduate? The far left controls it. Music? The far left controls it. Pulitzer and Nobel prizes? The far left controls them. The unions? The far left controls them. Historians? The far left are the historians.

Somewhere along the way, conservatives and all who believe in traditional values ceded every single bully-pulpit to the far left. The evidence is clear:

The far left has won, and its power grab and influence continues unabated. Now what?

You don’t seem able to explain the Continental Congress defining widows in 1780 and 1794 and so on.

For examples of acts granting pensions to officers’ widows only, see: Act of
June 7, 1794, ch. 52 § 1, 1 Stat. 390 (awarding a five-year half-pay pension to
widows of commissioned officers killed in the line of duty); Act of Mar. 14, 1798,
ch. 15, 1 Stat. 540 (extending the 1794 Act’s widows’ pension to the widows of
“commissioned officers of the troops of the United States, and of the militia” killed
in the line of duty); Act of Mar. 16, 1802, ch. 9, § 15, 2 Stat. 132, 135 (providing a
five-year half-pay pension to the widows of commissioned officers of the United
States killed in the line of duty); Act of April 12, 1808, ch. 43, §5, 2 Stat. 481, 483
(extending the Act of 1802 widows’ pension provision to the regiments raised
pursuant to this statute); Act of Jan. 2, 1812, ch. 11, § 4, 2 Stat. 670, 670 (extending
the Act of 1802 widows’ pension provision to troops raised pursuant to this statute);
Act of Jan 11, 1812, ch. 14, § 15, 2 Stat. XXX (providing five-year half-pay pensions
to widows of “any commissioned officer in the military establishment of the United
States” killed in the line of duty); Act of Jan. 20, 1813, ch. 10, § 1, 2 Stat. 790, 790-
91 (providing five-year half-pay pensions to widows of “officer[s] of the navy or
marines [who] shall be killed or die, by reason of a wound received in the line of his
duty”); Act of Jan. 29, 1813, ch. 16, § 1, 2 Stat. 794, 794 (providing five-year halfpay pensions to widows of commissioned officers of the military establishment of the
United States killed in the line of duty); Act of Aug. 2, 1813, ch. 40, § 1, 3 Stat. 73,
73-74 (providing five-year half-pay pensions to the widows of “commissioned
officer[s] of the militia, or of any volunteer corps” killed while in “actual service of
the United States”); Act of Mar. 3, 1815, ch 79, § 1, 2 Stat. 224, 224 (extending the
Act of 1802 widows’ pension provision to troops raised pursuant to this statute).
There were occasional departures from this trend. In 1802, two years after the naval
vessels Insurgent and Pickering were lost in a storm during the undeclared war with
France, Congress awarded pensions to the widows and orphans of “officers, seamen,
and marines” who died on board, thus reaching the widows of men of all ranks, not
just those of officers. Act of Apr. 29, 1802, ch. 33, 1 Stat. 170. And in 1812,
widows of “officers and soldiers, of the volunteers or militia” killed in encounters
with “hostile Indians” were awarded a five-year pension. Act of Apr. 10, 1812, ch.
54, § 2, 2 Stat. 704. A report of the Committee of Claims produced in 1836 confirms
that the Act of April 10, 1812 was “the first act that granted half pay to the widows
and orphans of non-commissioned officers and soldiers, being volunteer or militia,”
adding that the act was “retrospective in its operations.” H.Rep. 415, 34th Cong., 1st
Sess. 3 (Mar. 3, 1836).
44 The legislative debates concerning subsidies for widows of soldiers evidence
a pronounced concern for family equality. See Collins, supra note 17, at 1795-1801.

But we need to return to this thread. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3029024/posts

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.