Will Republicans pick up a U.S. Senate Seat in Delaware? Kevin Wade thinks so!

Kevin Wade

Kevin Wade, Republican primary candidate for the U.S. Senate in Delaware.

With the primary races over and growing attention at the local, state and national levels will be on Tuesday, November 4, 2014. The real battle nationally is in the U.S. Senate. Millions will be poured into races to retain or obtain control of that body.

However, there is one key Republican U.S. Senate primary remaining – in Delaware.

On September 9th, 2014 the Republican primary for the U.S. Senate will be held in “The First State.” This race will take on greater interest as the Delaware primary approaches. Kevin Wade, a self-made business man, believes he can take and put the Delaware U.S. Senate seat solidly in the “R” column.

Historically the Delaware U.S. Senate seat is won with approximately 150,000 total votes. The race in November will likely hinge on about 8,000 voters changing their voting pattern on the General Election Day. It is projected that the Republican turnout will be 10% higher and 10% lower for the Democrats. That leaves 8,000 voters to be convinced to swing  this U.S. Senate Republican on November 4th.

This is the seat formerly held by now Vice President Joe Biden. That alone must have Delaware Republicans energized.

According to Wade, “It is all in reach. I don’t understand the fascination with ‘big state’ races at the national level. My vote in the U.S. Senate would count as much as California’s U.S. Senator. The yield on a donor dollar and volunteer hour is so much higher in this small voting universe in Delaware.”

Kevin Wade on the Two Americas:

Recently Wade was at the Gaza Frontier with Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) soldiers. Wade notes, “No civilian was closer. I am a trusted friend and have trusted friends there. Because of this trust, senior IDF officers closed their eyes to my presence in the forward area. The soldiers I met were returning from house-to-house fighting inside Gaza. Others were going across the fence line to enter combat. It was and remains a tough fight. To be clear I was not in combat; just nearby. One explosion was so close I felt the blast wave and my ears rang.”

“The soldiers asked me to break bread with them at their late night mess. Another night I was invited to join their prayer circle for the traditional Soldiers Prayer before they entered combat. I went to Israel, when under attack by Hamas rockets, to form a personal impression. On my last night in Israel I was invited to be a guest on I24 TV, Israel’s “CNN” for a live worldwide broadcast about the conditions there. Thirty minutes later I was face down in a roadside ditch due to another rocket attack. I saw the two rockets rise up with a fiery tail from a field to my right,” recalls Wade.

Watch this short video of Wade’s visit to Israel:

To learn more about Kevin Wade visit WadeforUSSenate.com.

Is the Tea Party Dead and More MSM Lies

I have been engaged in a series of interviews, radio/TV discussing the topic, “Is The Tea Party Dead?” Because I am black, every interview has begun with me being asked my take on Ferguson before discussing the Tea Party.

Talk about the excrement hitting the fan; liberal interviewers are outraged when I say blacks are not routinely shot by police and that the MSM is promoting a deplorable, divisive and irresponsible false narrative.

One radio interviewer laughed at me saying she was looking at stats on her computer screen which proved otherwise. During another radio interview the host cited stats that say one hundred thousand people are shot by police every year in America. Bill O’Reilly stated the true FBI stats. Out of 12 million arrests only 400 fatal shootings; many justified.

Clearly, the Left is using lies to spread their despicable evil lie that blacks are targeted and murdered by police. I am struck by the liberal interviewer’s passion behind spreading their lie. They act as if their belief is as true as there is a sun in the sky. The liberal media’s attitude is, of course the police murder black males. The media will slap around anyone who states otherwise.

The MSM’s shameful coverage of Ferguson is as criminal as yelling fire in a crowded theater. Remember the outbreak of black flash mob attacks on whites? No one in the MSM is talking about the “Knock Out Game” also known as “polar-bear hunting”. Mostly black youths bet whether or not they can knock out an unsuspecting innocent white person with one powerful punch; women, seniors and more.

My God, what is wrong with these people in the MSM? Furthering the socialist/progressive agenda and bolstering Democrat voter registration and turnout has trumped all sense of decency and morality. If dividing Americans along racial lines and selling millions of black youths the lie that whitey (Republicans, Conservatives and police) are out to get them will further the Left’s cause, the Left says so be it. This truly is spiritual wickedness in high places.

After several rounds of verbally beating me up side the head, realizing they can not force me to agree with their claim that cops are shooting blacks at will, the liberal interviewers move on to gleefully proclaiming the death of the Tea Party.

They cite how numerous Tea Party candidates have been defeated in primaries by GOP establishment candidates. As chairman of The Conservative Campaign Committee, my team, my wife and I have been boots on the ground in Mississippi, Tennessee and other Senate races. We are away from home so much that upon our return, Sammy our greyhound only gives me an acknowledging glance and retires to his bed. I think the pet sitter has conspired to steal Sammy’s affection from me. But, that’s another story.

In every Senate race, we (CCC) have witnessed the intense involvement, commitment and enthusiasm of the local Tea Party groups in support of our candidates. Every race has been a David vs Goliath scenario; highly qualified grassroots funded Tea Party conservative candidates vs deep pocketed GOP establishment and big business funded and MSM supported Democrat-Lite GOP primary candidates.

brat-winsWhile Dave Brat’s stone, launched from his Tea Party slingshot struck and defeated his GOP Goliath, we have lost several races. Our most recent disappointing loss is Joe Miller’s run for U.S. Senate, Alaska. Several great patriots in our Tea Party family came together to endorse Joe; Sarah Palin, Mark Levin, Dr. Dobson of Focus on the Family, Conservative Campaign Committee and others.

I point out to interviewers that the Tea Party is more fired up than ever; more sophisticated, schooling and honing conservative candidates to perform well on the big stage. Several Tea Party groups have targeted various aspects of the electoral process which include addressing rampant voter fraud. Other TP groups have focused on reaching out to and educating low info voters. My patriot brother, Michael Holler (Mr. Constitution) has been passionately educating and spreading the gospel of the Constitution for several years via his book, “The Constitution Made Easy” and lecture tours.

No, the Tea Party is not dead, nor will it ever die as long as there are those of us who love, God, family and country.

Without a doubt, we in the Tea Party have a very high mountain to climb. With all due respect, I say that is Okay. Our cause is just and God is on our side. We have lost battles, but the war is far from over. Our mission each day is to wake up every morning with faith and hope in our hearts which empowers us to faithfully continue fighting the good fight for that which we know is right. Faithfulness is the key to our victory.

We at Conservative Campaign Committee are planning our next mission. That’s what I’m talkin’ about!

How did Charlie Crist, Nan Rich and Rick Scott respond to the Catholic Bishops candidate questionnaire?

The Florida Conference of Catholic Bishops is the nonpartisan public policy voice of the Catholic Church in the sunshine state. The Florida Conference has released its Candidate Questionnaire Project responses from those running for Governor, U.S. Congress and the state legislature.

The deadline for primary candidate responses was Tuesday, July 29, 2014 for the Primary Election and is Tuesday, October 7, 2014 for the General Election. How did Charlie Crist, Nan Rich and Rick Scott respond to the Catholic Bishops?

Charlie Crist did not respond. However, Nan Rich and Rick Scott did provide responses with comments. It is useful to understand where these candidates stand on issues of importance to the Catholic Church in Florida as public policy has had and will have great impact on the Catholic Church and its institutions.

Here are the replies from Nan Rich and Rick Scott to the questions asked by the Florida Conference of Catholic Bishops:


ABORTION WAITING PERIOD: Requiring a 24-hour waiting period before obtaining an abortion?


Candidate Comments: I oppose requirements that impose mandatory, medically unnecessary delays on women before they can access reproductive health services.



COVERING THE UNINSURED: Using federal and state funds to decrease the percentage of uninsured Floridians by at least 50 percent?




Candidate Comments: With the historic reforms we made, our Medicaid system is better off today than it was before we took office. We received a waiver from the federal government to make our system more accessible and affordable to low income people who most need access to high quality medical care. 

Some states have chosen to spend MILLIONS of taxpayer money to grow their Medicaid program even more, however I have consistently said that Florida would only expand Medicaid if it did NOT cost taxpayers. It would be wrong to make promises to provide care that the state could ultimately not afford or sustain.

EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION: Restoring funding for the Voluntary Prekindergarten Education Program (VPK) by increasing the per-pupil scholarship amounts to the 2009-2010 school year levels?





FREEDOM TO SERVE: Allowing individuals and organizations the freedom to serve the public in accord with moral or religious beliefs concerning the sanctity of life and marriage?


Candidate Comments: I don’t believe employers should be able to impose their religious beliefs on their employees.



JUVENILE INDICTMENT MINIMUM: Establishing a minimum age at which a child can be tried as an adult?




Candidate Comments: I believe the law should allow for discretion depending on the severity of the crime.

PARENTAL EMPOWERMENT: Allowing parents to designate an approved percentage of the State’s per-pupil funding for each school-age child that can go toward tutoring, dual enrollment, prepaid college, virtual schooling, and nonpublic school tuition?




Candidate Comments: I believe parents know what’s best for their child’s education. I continue to support school choice, so that all of Florida’s children have a greater opportunity for a quality education that best meets their needs. Specifically I support the John McKay scholarship program for our students with disabilities and our Florida tax credit scholarship program that provides funding for scholarships to eligible children of families that have limited resources.

UNANIMOUS JURY FOR A DEATH SENTENCE: After unanimously determining guilt, requiring a unanimous jury recommendation to sentence someone to death rather than the current 7-5 simple majority?





WAGE THEFT RESOLUTION: Preserving the opportunity for local governments to establish mechanisms to resolve wage theft disputes?




Candidate Comments: It is appropriate for local governments to establish, if they see fit, the mechanisms for resolving wage theft disputes. However, I remain open to supporting efforts to streamline the procedures so that employers throughout the state are not subject to a patchwork of varying regulations – which would create additional financial burdens for job creators

To view all responses received by the Florida Conference of Catholic Bishops Candidate Questionnaire Project go here.

A picture is worth a thousand words!

In 1911 New York Journal editor Arthur Brisbane while discussing journalism and publicity said, “Use a picture. It’s worth a thousand words.” That has morphed into the now commonly used phrase “a picture is worth a thousand words.” So it is with politics.

Early voting has begun in Florida. In Sarasota County at least two of the three races, and perhaps all three, for school board will be determined on August 26, 2014. To win the primary one of the candidates must receive 50% plus one vote.

The picture below tells you who the local union, Sarasota Classified/Teachers Association, is backing.

scta school board candidates

For a larger view click on the image.

If one picture is not enough to convince you where Brown, Goodwin and Marsh stand on issues then here is another picture worth a thousand words. It is the early voting ballot put out by the Sarasota County Democrat Party:

democrat party of sarasota 2014 primary

For a larger view click on the image.

To learn more about Brown, Goodwin and Marsh read these articles:

Any questions?

Where is the National Republican Congressional Committee in Maryland’s District 6 race?

Harriet Brinker, a Facebook friend, shared with me the below letter from Dan Bongino, Republican Candidate for the U.S. Congress in Maryland 6th District. I had the opportunity to meet Dan at the 2012 Republican National Convention in Tampa, FL. I interviewed him on the radio and got to know the man up close and personal. He is the real deal.

I just pulled over about 2 hours into a trip to Allegheny County to write this. I think it’s time.

Have you heard of the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC)? They exist to allegedly help Republican candidates get elected to congress. Do you know that it’s been months since my victory in the Republican primary in Maryland and I haven’t heard a peep from either them or the RNC?

Do these establishmentarians think it’s easy running as a Republican in deep-blue Maryland? Do they think that after years of having OUR party nearly taken over by cronyists, interventionists, purveyors of bad policies like TARP and grotesque levels of government spending, that outsiders like me have it easy?

I can barely knock on an Independent’s or a non-white-male-voter’s door without being thrown off their porch. Do you feel that you’ve mastered the message and it’s really people like me who are the problem? Who do you think is fighting this battle? It’s certainly not you. We’re the ones at the doors, where it matters.

What’s your reason for ignoring me, and the many others fighting for this magical country’s tomorrows? Do I not fit into your box? Is it my youth, my message, or is it that I haven’t firmly planted my lips on your rear-end?

I’m a Republican because I believe liberty matters and we should not surrender OUR party to cronyists and connected-insiders. We built this house and you don’t get to burglarize it and keep the spoils. If elected Democrats want to monopolize unlimited government and evaporating liberty then go join them in their house but stay out of ours.

Finally, thanks to the grassroots who have accepted me as one of their own, despite my recent entrance into the political arena. It’s your sweat and positive energy that keeps me going despite the willful ignorance of so many on the inside. It’s you that matters. Thank you so much.



Dan began his career with the NYPD in 1995 as a member of the pattern identification unit, specializing in the identification of serial criminals, and became a full time police officer in 1997, where he graduated with honors from the Police Academy.

Dan proudly joined the ranks of the U.S. Secret Service in 1999 as a special agent in the New York Office where he was assigned to investigate computer crimes, bank fraud, and credit card fraud. His early career was marked by a number of investigative successes earning Dan a Department of Justice recognition award.

Dan moved to Maryland in 2002 to become an instructor at the Secret Service training academy. Dan was awarded a number of commendations for his work in redesigning the investigative curriculum to reflect current investigative trends.

In 2006, Dan entered into duty with the elite Presidential Protective Division in the administration of President George W. Bush. Dan distinguished himself by becoming one of the earliest tenured agents to be given responsibility for an operational section of the protective detail. Dan remained on protective duty during the change in administration to President Barack Obama, quickly becoming the highest ranking member of his operational shift of agents. With this distinction came greater responsibility and Dan rose to the challenge. He was designated as the lead agent responsible for the coordination of President Obama’s visits to Prague, Jakarta, amongst a myriad of terror threats, and finally as the lead agent responsible for his visit to an active war zone in Afghanistan. Dan was awarded a series of commendations and left the protective detail as one of their most distinguished agents.

After completing the maximum time served allowed on presidential protection duty in 2010, Dan chose to stay in Maryland, transferring to the Baltimore Office. There, he immediately made an impact on the community by breaking up one of the largest fraud rings in Maryland’s history.

Upon resigning from the Secret Service in 2011, Dan began a grassroots campaign for the U.S. Senate against the feared Maryland Democratic machine. Despite overwhelming odds, Dan defeated nine opponents in the Republican primary. Dan finished second in a three-­‐way race in the general election and continues to act as an activist within the community.

Dan is currently married with two young children. His wife Paula is a web-­design consultant. Dan is a consultant specializing in international security and corporate strategy. He has earned master’s degrees in both psychology and business administration.

How the Establishment Suppresses Independent Candidates

I just received a phone call from a telephone number that my caller ID registered as only Sarasota and (914) 312-7514. Upon answering, the caller said they were conducting a quick one question poll. I said okay.

She said the poll question was: If the election for Governor was held today who would you most likely vote for?

A.  a Republican Candidate
B.  a Democrat Candidate
C.  Undecided

I responded by asking her why wasn’t there a choice for an Independent candidate?

She hummed and hawed and wanted to quickly get off the phone. I told her I can’t answer her poll because I would vote for a candidate other than a Republican or Democrat. In fact I am planning to vote for Adrian Wyllie, a Libertarian candidate. She said thanks and hung up.

Moral of the story:

Political polls are designed not to get to a true accounting and read out of the people’s opinions. Polls are designed to perpetuate the lies. Don’t pay attention to the results of political polling. They are pure fiction and designed to deceive and support the establishment.

It is time for the people of Florida to make 2014 the next 1860. What happened in 1860? Abe Lincoln won on a new party line, a third party. The Republican Party had been established in 1856 to challenge the Whig and Democratic parties. A Third Party won in 1860 and a Third Party can win in 2014 (if the people stop voting for the corrupt establishment that they claim to reject).

Immigration: It’s Time to Face Reality

In the years following the close of the Revolutionary War, the United States and Great Britain found little agreement on issues of national importance. There were ongoing disputes over trade, attacks on commercial shipping on the high seas… in which captured American seamen were forced to serve in the Royal Navy… as well as the provocation of American Indian tribes. As a result, the U.S. Congress approved a declaration of war against Great Britain in June 1812.

On August 24, 1814, British troops occupied Washington, DC, setting fire to the White House, the U.S. Capitol Building, and a number of other government buildings, and in September 1814 British forces in Canada invaded and occupied eastern Maine, along with portions of Michigan and Wisconsin.

With the exception of the shelling of an Ellwood, California oilfield by a Japanese submarine on February 23, 1942, the War of 1812 was the only instance in American history when forces of a foreign nation brought armed conflict to American soil… that is, until now.

Now, in the summer of 2014, in response to the open borders policies of Barack Obama, and in the face of the most horrific genocide taking place in Iraq… the kind of genocide we have not seen on this Earth since the Nazi holocaust of the 1930s and ‘40s, if then… we have no choice but to finally face reality.

The American people find their country invaded by hordes of minor children, drug dealers, and gang members from Mexico and Central America, and a host of troublemakers from Africa and the Middle East. Instead of importing the best and the brightest from the rest of the world, American leftists find it politically expedient to import the poorest and the most uneducated who will come to understand, as they enjoy the generosity of the American taxpayer, that liberals and Democrats are their principal benefactors. It is the most shameless and the most cynical political stratagem imaginable.

When all those impoverished indigents become registered voters, whether legally or illegally, and Arizona and Texas join the ranks of the blue states, Democrats will control 315 electoral votes, 45 more votes than are necessary to elect a president and a vice president. In that event, the United States of America, as we’ve known it, will cease to exist. No longer will we be the beacon of hope for all freedom-loving people; the “shining city on a hill” will be no more.

As it is, criminals from south of the border continue to cross our border, time and time again, after being deported. They have no respect for the rule of law, so they murder, rape, and rob, indiscriminately, with no concern for their victims or for the law. Prison life holds no fear for them because life behind bars is far preferable to the quality of life in their home countries.

Nor have recent administrations, Bush or Obama, taken the steps necessary to stem the growing tide of Islamists from Asia, Africa, and the Middle East, nearly all of whom arrive by plane at ports of entry, overstay their visas, and disappear into Muslim enclaves. Many have become American citizens and are free to travel between the U.S. and terrorist training camps in Libya, Somalia, Yemen, and elsewhere. Within the past week, the FBI arrested a North Carolinian, 44-year-old Donald Ray Morgan, as he attempted to re-enter the U.S. from Lebanon, where it is believed he had attempted to cross into Syria or Iraq to join Islamic State forces. Morgan has distributed videos of Islamic State beheadings and mass executions… including videos showing terrorists playing soccer with severed heads. I shudder to think of how many such homegrown jihadists are already living among us?

In confronting these intractable problems we can no longer concern ourselves with what may be politically correct, or with manufactured rights and privileges that liberal judges may find in our Constitution that simply do not exist.

While our commander in chief flits around on Air Force One, hosting high-dollar fundraisers for Democrat candidates, the American people are forced to endure reports of entire populations of Iraqi Christians and members of the Yazidi sect being given the choice of death by the sword or death by starvation. We see video reports of Iraqi soldiers being crucified, beheaded, shot to death, and buried in mass graves. We see reports of non-Muslim women being wantonly raped and sold into slavery. And we see reports of Christian children being captured and beheaded.

As these unspeakable atrocities take place just a twelve hour flight from New York, we are forced to stand helplessly by while Obama plays golf and members of his administration squabble over what should be done to end the slaughter, if anything.

Eventually, a great many of the criminals who sneak across our southern border, and a great many Islamic jihadists, will end up in our American prison system. When that time comes we cannot afford to imprison them in the same prison population with other prisoners… those who would be subject to recruitment into violent drug gangs or Islamic terror networks. Because of the danger they represent, we cannot afford to house them in facilities such as the Thomson Correctional Center at Thomson, Illinois, which Barack Obama and Eric Holder have proposed as an alternative for Guantanamo Bay detainees.

Because they are as dangerous as they are, and because, as terrorists, they are not entitled to the protections of the Geneva Convention, they may be held incommunicado for an indeterminate period of time. Accordingly, we must find locations where detainees can be treated humanely, but where they would be of no danger to anyone in the event of a massive prison break.

The State of Alaska, the largest of our 50 states, contains more than 2,600 islands in the Aleutian chain, which stretches some 1,100 miles across the north Pacific, from the western tip of the Alaskan Peninsula, on the east, to Attu Island on the west. The Aleutian chain contains 14 large islands, some 55 smaller islands, and more than 2500 islets. Many of the islands are uninhabited and would provide the remoteness necessary to prevent detainees from ever again being a threat to Christians and other non-Muslims.

For example, the Rat Islands are a chain of islands that stretch some 110 miles in the Aleutian chain. Kiska Island, one of the largest islands in the chain and uninhabited, was occupied by the Japanese during World War II. However, when allied forces arrived to liberate the island on August 15, 1943, they found the island completely abandoned. The Japanese, apparently finding the climate of Kiska to be a bit harsh, abandoned the island just two weeks earlier, on July 28.

The weather on Kiska would be perfectly suited for warehousing Middle Eastern terrorists and Mexican criminals who’ve seen sunny skies every day of their lives, who’ve rarely seen days when the temperature dipped below 90 degrees F, and where there is little or no annual rainfall. The average high temperature on Kiska in August is 55 degrees F and the average low temperature in January is 27 degrees F. It rains five or six days each week, there are only eight to ten sunny days in any given year, and the island is often blanketed by a heavy fog. It is the perfect venue for warehousing Mexican drug dealers and Islamic jihadists.

Amak Island, a part of the Delarof chain, is a large uninhabited island lying northwest of the Alaskan Peninsula. The island’s land area is approximately 5.8 square miles. The closest city is the town of Cold Bay (pop. 108) which has a small airport. The average high temperature is 56 degrees F in August and the average low temperature in February is 24 degrees F.

Finally, Montague Island is the largest uninhabited island in the United States with a land area of 305.4 square miles. It lies at the mouth of the Gulf of Alaska, the entrance to Prince William Sound, and is reachable only by boat from Seward, Alaska.

Any of these uninhabited islands would make an excellent location for a maximum security prison… a GITMO of the north… where we would not have to worry about prison breaks or prison conversions, either to Hispanic gangs, to drug cartels, or to Muslim terror networks.

Unfortunately, the vast majority of Americans are either so naïve or so self-absorbed that they fail to follow national or international political developments, or they learn whatever they think they know from watching ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, or NBC. Most of the regular citizens I know… otherwise good, decent, hardworking Americans… have succumbed to the propaganda themes put out by liberals and Democrats. They tend to scoff at those of us who get our news from the Fox News network… the only reliable source of news among the mainstream and cable news networks.

While we attempt to minimize political discussions with our friends and neighbors, at times it is unavoidable. During a recent dinner party the conversation turned to the many scandals of the Obama administration. And when one of our guests mentioned Lois Lerner and the IRS scandal, another neighbor, an educated man with a masters degree in education, asked, “Who’s Lois Lerner?” Sadly, by the time such people are finally forced to face reality, it may be too late for any of us.

The Islamic State animals will be here, in our neighborhoods, knocking on our doors, and we will be powerless to do anything about it.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is courtesy of Ironic Surrealism.

RELATED ARTICLE: Ineligible Illegals File Request to Get Dreamer Status, Force Obama’s Hand

RELATED VIDEO: Agents have separated some child immigrants from the general population due to gang affiliations.

Libertarian Movement on the Rise? by Doug Bandow

It’s about time. We’ve tried everything else.

The New York Times wonders if the libertarian moment has arrived.

Maybe, suggested an article in the Sunday magazine.

Supporters of Rand Paul and father Ron think so. Award-winning economist turned left-wing pundit Paul Krugman is not convinced.

Unfortunately, there have been false starts before. Ronald Reagan’s election seemed the harbinger of a new freedom wave. His rhetoric was great, but actual accomplishments lagged far behind. Taxes were lower, but when he left office government looked pretty much the same as it did when he was sworn in, only bigger.

So, too, with the 1994 Republican takeover of Congress. As before, there was a tendency to confuse partisanship with philosophy. Admittedly, members of the GOP tend to toss around such phrases as “individual liberty” and “limited government.” However, their behavior in office looked little different from that of many Democrats. Like the Reagan Revolution, the Gingrich Revolution also sputtered out.

Since then there’s been even less to celebrate in America, at least. George W. Bush was an avid proponent of “compassionate,” big-government conservatism. Outlays rose faster during his administration than they had during Bill Clinton’s. No one did more to bail out business and enrich corporate America than Bush, the architect of the big-spending response to the 2008 financial crisis.

Barack Obama continued the tradition, promoting corporate welfare, pushing through a massive “stimulus” bill for the bank accounts of federal contractors, and seizing control of what remained private in the health care system. About the only good news is that incipient federal bankruptcy has discouraged Congress from adopting other massive new spending programs.

Over the last half-century, members of both parties took a welfare state that was of modest size despite the excesses of Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s New Deal and put it on a fiscally unsustainable basis as part of the misnamed “Great Society.” Economist Lawrence Kotlikoff figures government’s total unfunded liability at around $220 trillion. America’s annual GDP is just $17 trillion. How Uncle Sam will ever make good on all its promises is impossible to imagine.

The national government has done no better with international issues. Trillions went for misnamed “foreign aid” that subsidized collectivism and autocracy. Only the recent growth of international markets and sustained pain of domestic failure moved many poor countries to reform. And even so the foreign money continues to flow, only in renamed programs for slightly different purposes.

Moreover, trade liberalization faces determined resistance, and is often blocked by countries that enjoy the greatest benefits of global commerce. Indeed, the Left in wealthy, industrialized nations has discovered how to kill trade agreements with kindness, loading them with environmental and labor regulations in the name of the world’s poor, but guaranteed to prevent new jobs from being created for those very same poor.

Even worse has been foreign policy. The ecstasy felt by most people after the collapse of the Berlin Wall—a quarter-century ago—has been forgotten. The defense budget has turned into a new form of foreign aid for America’s populous and prosperous allies. The U.S. has been constantly at war, repeatedly proving that the Pentagon is no better at social engineering than is any other government agency. Yet again and again Washington attempts to transcend history, culture, ethnicity, geography, religion, ideology, nationality, and more to fix other societies. It turns out that war is the biggest big government program around.

Americans across the political spectrum agree that something is wrong, that the status quo is no good. But they disagree on the remedy.
However, the answer shouldn’t be that hard to discern. The definition of insanity, runs the old adage, is to keep doing the same thing while expecting different results. Today, government attempts to solve problems by doing ever more of whatever it is already doing. Thus, those who support such policies, whether on the left or right, and expect things to improve in the future should head off to see their psychiatrists. For they are exhibiting disturbing symptoms of insanity.

The economy is slowing, people are falling behind economically, freedoms are being lost, and security fears are rising? No problem. Roll out the usual failed nostrums.

More spending on old programs. Lots of spending on new programs. New and more restrictive regulations. Paternalistic crusades. Criminal penalties for violating commercial and environmental rules. Restrictions on civil liberties. Wars in new places and new wars in old places. We know what the impact of these policies will be. All we have to do is look around the world and see what has happened.

It is this reality, not new personalities, organizations, generations, or something else, that is creating a libertarian moment. Statism and collectivism have been tried and found wanting in all of their variants.

The twentieth century killed off communism and fascism as serious alternatives. They resulted in totalitarian death states capable of killing on a mass scale, but little else. Lives were squandered, liberties were extinguished, the human spirit was suppressed, and people were impoverished.

The chief competitor was not laissez-faire capitalism, as some suggested, but highly regulated and monumentally expensive welfare states. They were freer and more prosperous than their geopolitical antagonists—even a little capitalism goes a long way—but the erosion of liberty and prosperity was constant. Perhaps more debilitating was the corrosive impact on the foundational principles of a free society, such as independence, self-reliance, responsibility, accountability, and more. This assault in America continues with, for instance, the federal government recently turning health care into another massive entitlement, highlighted by pervasive regulation and income redistribution.
The obvious, and only, alternative to more government, which has failed so badly, is less government. Why blame individuals and companies for fleeing the tax mess created in Washington? Lower tax rates and rationalize complex tax systems. Why threaten America’s future by running budget-busting deficits into the future forever? Cut the wasteful looting and pillaging that is a hallmark of today’s transfer society.

Why concoct expensive development and stimulus programs? Kill unnecessary and relax unnecessarily stringent regulations, while making legitimate rules more market-friendly. Why attempt to micro-manage the world with strategies that have failed at home? Model liberty, prosperity, tolerance, and peace for others, allowing individual Americans going abroad to be America’s best ambassadors.

Has the libertarian moment arrived? The bankruptcy of statism and collectivism and all their variants is evident. So is the desperate need for liberty-minded solutions.

However, the tyranny of the status quo, as Milton Friedman termed it, remains omnipresent and powerful. Those who benefit from the politics of plunder will not yield voluntarily. As a result, the libertarian moment will not “arrive.” It will have to be brought forward, seized by those committed to a better and freer America.

dougbandow3540ABOUT DOUG BANDOW

Doug Bandow is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and the author of a number of books on economics and politics. He writes regularly on military non-interventionism.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is courtesy of FEE and Shutterstock.

Julio Gonzalez wants to expand Obamacare in Florida

Dr. Julio Gonzalez is running for the Florida House of Representatives in District 74. The cornerstone of his campaign is his opposition, as a physician, to Obamacare. You would expect that Dr. Gonzalez would be against using any federal or state funds to expand Obamacare wouldn’t you? Well you may want to look at what Dr. Gonzalez stated in a Florida Conference of Catholic Bishops candidate questionnaire.

The Florida Conference of Catholic Bishops sent Dr. Gonzalez and his primary opponent Richard DeNapoli a candidate survey. One of the questions asked was:

COVERING THE UNINSURED: Using federal and state funds to decrease the percentage of uninsured Floridians by at least 50 percent?

Dr. Gonzalez responded:


Candidate Comments: Only in situations where there are absolutely no viable alternatives available (a safety net). The state’s efforts should be directed at promoting ample opportunities and resources to our uninsured to obtain coverage for catastrophic conditions if they desire such coverage, and not to propagate the problem by having the federal or state governments artificially mask the problems of joblessness and poverty through patch-work solutions.

Richard DeNapoli responded:


Candidate Comments: I am opposed to Obamacare and the current proposal to expand Medicaid because of the costs involved. If we reduce federal regulations and mandates on health insurance policies, the private sector will be able to offer more options for policies to address individual consumer needs.

Gonzalez on his campaign website states, “Repeal Obamacare.  Take care of our seniors by making sure Medicare remains vibrant and healthy.” How does this statement and his support for expanding coverage for the uninsured under Medicaid in Florida (a key provision of President Obama’s Affordable Care Act)  jive? Florida has opted out of Medicaid expansion.

Perhaps Dr. Gonzalez would like to clarify his comments to the voters of Sarasota/Charlotte County. Perhaps voters need to truly understand where District 74 candidates Gonzalez and DeNapoli stand on Obamacare and expanding Medicaid in the sunshine state.

UPDATE: The Florida Family Association sent out its voter guide for the District 74 race. Dr. Gonzalez did not respond to any of the questions posed by the Florida Family Association. You may view Richard DeNapoli’s responses by clicking here.

EDITORS NOTE: To see how your elected officials responded to the Florida Conference of Catholic Bishops candidate questionnaire click here.

John Bolton Endorses Four Florida Candidates for Congress

WASHINGTON, Aug. 14, 2014 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Ambassador John Bolton endorses four Florida Congressional candidates. Citing the importance of the electoral map in Florida, Bolton’s PAC also contributes to the GOP candidates’ campaigns to ensure each has the resources needed to win in November. The candidates include Rep. Ron DeSantis (FL-6), Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (FL-25), Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (FL-27), and Carlos Curbelo running to represent Florida’s 26th district.

Bolton is committed to supporting candidates for elected office who believe in protecting the United States’ vital freedoms at home through securing American interests in a challenging world. The John Bolton PAC and John Bolton Super PAC have raised a combined $4.5 million to date with over $3 million cash on hand.

“Going into 2016, the importance of succeeding in Florida can’t be understated,” said Bolton. “I’m committed to helping Florida Republicans win this November so that come 2016 we’re able to create the change America needs.” Further statements from Bolton on each candidate endorsement:

  • Rep. Ron DeSantis (FL-6):  “As a former JAG Officer and current Navy reserve, Ron is a leader and understands the importance of a strong U.S. national security policy.”
  • Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (FL-25): “Mario has been representing South Florida for over two decades. He understand the need for strong national security policy and is the right person to represent the 25thdistrict.”
  • Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (FL-27): “Ileana understands this is a changing and challenging world. As the former Chairwoman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, she has become a leader on American foreign policy.”
  • Carlos Curbelo (FL-26): “The son of Cuban immigrants, Carlos represents a new generation of Republican leadership that will bring new ideas and direction to Congress.”

Ambassador Bolton’s PAC has endorsed and made contributions to 17 candidates, including U.S. Senate candidates former Sen. Scott Brown (NH), Thom Tillis (NC), Ed Gillespie (VA), Rep. Tom Cotton (AR), Joni Ernst(IA), Terri Lynn Land (MI), and Leader Mitch McConnell (KY), along with U.S. House of Representatives candidates Will Hurd (TX-23), Martha McSally (AZ-2), Barbara Comstock (VA-10), Rep. Adam Kinzinger (IL-16), former Rep. Robert Dold (IL-10), and Rep. Mike Pompeo (KA-4).


The John Bolton PAC was founded by former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. John R. Bolton to raise the importance of American national security in federal elections. The PAC will support and contribute to candidates who are committed to restoring strong American economic and national security policies that secure America’s interests in a challenging world.

Long Term U.S. Senators Rarely Visit Home: Worst offender Harry Reid

Nick Tomboulides, Executive Director of U.S. Term Limits (USTL), has sent out a very revealing chart showing that the longer a U.S. Senator is in office the less time he or she spends in their respective state.

Tomboulides writes, “I’ve got a feeling we’re not in Kansas anymore. No, this line doesn’t just apply to Dorothy in the wonderful land of Oz. It’s also true about Kansas Senator Pat Roberts, who acknowledged in February that he doesn’t actually live in the state he was elected to represent. When Roberts visits Kansas, he stays with wealthy donors at their home on a golf course (really). The rest of the time, he’s in D.C.”

Roberts’ scant visits home were recently featured in research by the Washington Examiner’s Luke Rosiak, who analyzed congressional travel records to conclude that the longer a Senator stays in office, the less likely he is to travel home. Roberts, a 34-year Washington politician, was near the bottom with only 32 trips back to Kansas in three years. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid was the undisputed champ of ignoring constituents, with only 11 trips home over the same period.

As USTL President Phil Blumel commented in the Examiner piece, “When they get up in age, folks like Thad Cochran, particularly in the Senate, you really don’t ever have to leave as long as you’re breathing because you’re going to get re-elected no matter what.”

“What Phil describes is really an iron rule of politics: A majority of politicians will only serve the public when that same action will also serve themselves. In an atmosphere of non-competitive elections, a public official’s interests only line up with the people’s interest about five percent of the time. That’s roughly the competitive slice of House elections each year,” notes Tomboulides.

Congressman Kevin McCarthy in a  2010 CNN op-ed wrote, “Washington isn’t listening. The disconnect between the American people and the agenda being advanced in Washington is growing by the day. When Americans have spoken up, their voices have fallen on deaf ears. Political expedience and partisan allegiances have repeatedly trumped the priorities of the American people.”

Time for Congressional term limits?

Why is the pro-amnesty Florida Chamber of Commerce defending Julio Gonzalez?

An email to supporters from the Julio Gonzalez campaign states, “Richard DeNapoli, candidate for District 74 State Representative, has been formally asked by the Florida Chamber Political Institute to discontinue the use of confidential information that he and his supporters have been using to attack Dr. Julio Gonzalez.”

So the Florida Chamber is angry that its information is being used against a candidate that it supports and endorses. It that a bad thing?

The Florida Chamber of Commerce website states:

The Florida Chamber of Commerce joined with our partners at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, National Association of Manufacturers and the American and Florida Farm Bureau Federations in urging Congress and the administration to work together to enact immigration reform during a Day of Action – an effort that included events in Washington, DC and in more than 60 congressional districts across 25 states.

The Florida Chamber supports a comprehensive, federal approach to immigration reform – one that serves our nation’s best interest and is crucial for Florida as we position ourselves to win the global race for talent and jobs.

Comprehensive federal immigration reform is code for “amnesty.”

The campaign website for Dr. Julio Gonzales states, “Julio’s conservative pro-growth policies have earned him the endorsement of the Florida Chamber of Commerce.” There is no mention of immigration in the issues section of the Gonzales campaign website. Gonzalez has been endorsed by both the pro-amnesty Florida Chamber and Senator Marco Rubio, who is the Republican face for amnesty. What does that tell you about Gonzalez?

In stark contrast, Richard DeNapoli has these positions on immigration posted on his campaign website:

  • No Amnesty – period,
  • E-verify for all employers to ensure the jobs magnet for illegal aliens is turned off,
  • Oppose all Obama efforts to house illegal immigrants in Sarasota County jails,
  • Demand Congress act to secure the border,
  • Support completion of the border fence,
  • Shift taxpayer funding from benefits for illegal aliens to helping keep our commitment to caring for our Veterans.

It is clear where DeNapoli stands on immigration. It is not clear where Gonzalez stands, except  that he stands shoulder-to-shoulder with the Florida Chamber of Commerce.

The August 26th Republican primary is upon us. Voters need to understand where the candidates stand on important issues like immigration.


Florida: Since 2000 52% of jobs went to legal immigrants and illegal aliens
Hundreds of Convicted Criminals Among Illegal Immigrants Released by Obama Administration
Illegals hit jackpot with lenient U.S. judges…
DREAMers plan to occupy Cruz office…
PEW: More than 60% of Hondurans in USA Illegals…
CONFUSION: Obamacare Plans to End Without Proof of Citizenship…

Immigration: The Ultimate Get-out-the-vote Drive

One reason predictions of a Mitt Romney victory in 2012 were inaccurate, say analysts, is that the turnout among certain Democrat constituencies — in particular blacks and Hispanics — was greater than expected. And what a significant factor this is. Whether we call it getting out the vote, having a great “ground game” or just turnout, it can make or break an election.

But while the phrase “getting out the vote” is well understood, there is a lesser known election strategy: getting in the vote. What’s the difference? While the former involves getting as many as possible of the set number of sympathetic potential voters to the polls, getting in the vote is the process by which you increase that number of sympathetic voters. This process is most effectively exercised by Democrats, and it’s done in two ways. One is by indoctrinating people — especially young people — via academia, the media and entertainment. The second way is through immigration.

Why immigration? Because virtually the whole world is, to use our provisional (and lacking) political terminology, to the “left” of America. In addition, indoctrinating a young person is effective, but it’s an expensive process that must continue throughout his formative and teen years. Far easier is to import ready-made leftists. The results are quicker, too: the targeted babe born today won’t be entering the voting booth for 18 years. An immigrant, however, can perhaps be naturalized in just a few years. And politicians are more interested in the next election than in a future election involving the next person to hold their seat.

Moreover, you have to add to this the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965’s creation of a status quo in which 85 percent of our immigrants now hail from the Third World and Asia. This is significant because, like it or not and whatever the causes, there is an ironclad correlation between racial/ethnic identification and voting patterns. The GOP derives 90 percent of its votes from approximately 63 percent of the population: whites. In contrast, there is no major non-white group (note that I’m including Hispanics in this even though most are anthropologically classified as Caucasian) that doesn’t break Democrat by wide margins. Blacks cast approximately 94 percent of their votes for Democrats, while Hispanics and Asians come in at about 75 percent.

So if you’re a Machiavellian leftist who values power above all else, what do you do?

You increase the non-white segment of the population while decreasing the white segment percentagewise — as much and as fast as possible.

Call this demographic warfare. The idea is that if the people won’t change the government to your liking, you change the people.

This places our current border crisis in perspective. It explains why Barack Obama will not enforce immigration law. It explains why we’ve had seven amnesties during the last few decades, all accompanied by unfulfilled promises to secure the border. And it explains why a promoter of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 was hard-core leftist Ted Kennedy. Expecting power-hungry Democrats to seal the border and not facilitate the invasion of our nation is like supposing they will cancel their get-out-the-vote drives. Migration — illegal and legal — is one of the main ways in which they grow their constituencies.

Yet while we, again, face a largely statist world, Democrats would still prefer non-white migrants. There could be many reasons for this, but I will mention three. First, many such migrants are especially socialist, which is why south-of-the-border peoples have elected demagogues such as Hugo Chavez and Evo Morales. Second, they’re poor. This means that, unlike some European immigrants, they have no reason to be concerned about higher income tax rates. It also means that in a prosperous land in which they see wealth surrounding them, their socialist tendencies will be stoked all the more. Envy is a dangerous and easily exploited sin, and why shouldn’t they get a piece of that American pie?

Lastly there is the divide-and-conquer factor. Even if European immigrants are left-leaning, they will nonetheless associate with and more quickly assimilate into the more conservative white majority. In contrast, consider Hispanic immigrants. They generally will circulate within a left-leaning group — the wider Hispanic community — which places them in an echo chamber in which their socialist tendencies are reinforced, nurtured and where deviation from them could make one a pariah. It also makes them ripe for racial/ethnic demagoguery. You don’t want to vote like the gringos, do you? And I think here about how Obama told Hispanics in the run-up to the 2010 mid-term elections to “punish” their “enemies.” To whom do you think he was referring?

In fact, assimilation of many of these newcomers isn’t just unlikely, it’s impossible. This is because we have in our midst more than just an ethnic echo chamber — we have a burgeoning nation within our nation.

Consider: approximately 50 percent of our legal immigrants come from Mexico, and 67 percent of American Hispanics have origins in that nation. This translates into a legal and illegal Mexican-heritage population of 20 to 30 million — perhaps 20 percent of Mexico’s population. The consequences of such an unbalanced and suicidal immigration policy are severe, and they were explained well by University of Edinburgh professor Stephen Tierney in his book Multiculturalism and the Canadian Constitution:

In a situation in which immigrants are divided into many different groups originating in distant countries, there is no feasible prospect of any particular immigrant group’s challenging the hegemony of the national language [press one for English, folks?] and institutions. These groups may form an alliance among themselves to fight for better treatment and accommodations, but such an alliance can only be developed within the language and institutions of the host society and, hence, is integrative. In situations in which a single dominant immigrant group originates in a neighbouring country, the dynamics may be very different. The Arabs in Spain, and Mexicans in the United States, do not need allies among other immigrant groups. One could imagine claims for Arabic or Spanish to be declared a second official language, at least in regions where they are concentrated, and these immigrants could seek support from their neighbouring home country for such claims — in effect, establishing a kind of transnational extension of their original homeland in their new neighbouring country of residence.

So liberals are seeking to overwhelm what they call white America through demographic change. In the name of power, of a get-in-the-vote drive, they happily commit cultural genocide, the fear of which, Professor Tierney goes on to write, “is often compounded in situations where the immigrant group has historic claims against the receiving country. … For example, in the Mexican-United States case….”

This is why our handwringing over the current border crisis is a little ironic. Yes, the situation is outrageous, but taking exception to illegal migration while blithely accepting our legal-immigration regime is like thinking that government death squads are preferable to roving gangs of murderous miscreants. Demographically, politically and culturally the two types of migration have precisely the same effect. All the illegal variety does is accelerate the process, giving the left more votes now and authentic Americanism a quicker, and perhaps more merciful, death.

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Twitter or log on to SelwynDuke.com

EDITORS NOTE: The featured photo is of President Johnson signing the Hart-Celler Immigration and Nationalization Act of 1965 bill taken by Yoichi Okamoto, White House Photo Office.

Truths About the “Do-Nothing” Congress

The House of Representatives is being labeled as a do-nothing congress. Congressional approval ratings are at an all-time low. I guess they must be pretty bad.

Should we believe every item of propaganda thrown our way? The president – who has the advantage of being before cameras on a daily basis – continually rails against the congress for failing to do anything. He wants us all to follow his lead, and blame congress for his non-accomplishments. In fact, the people of congress are elected by constituencies that may, in fact, expect their representatives to represent them and their wishes to hold back spending, control borders, investigate corruption and take action against government out of control.

If you believe the president and his acolyte, Harry Reid, it would appear they are the good guys and congressional representatives are the bad guys. But if you dig a little deeper and actually investigate the truth, it paints a different picture.

What people don’t know is that any bill passed by the House of Representatives must be evaluated or modified and then voted on by the U.S. Senate before they can be given to the president to sign. That is, if the Senate Majority Leader allows. Yes, that’s true. Senator Harry Reid has the power to run America, at the behest of the president with whom they are in lock-step on most issues. Harry Reid runs the legislative agenda of America. Period. (to quote the president)

If Senator Reid doesn’t like the contents of a House bill, it will not see the light of day on the senate floor. There will be no vote. It’s a one-man blockade who has that power, no matter the will of the people who elected 435 congresspersons and one hundred senators. One Man!

Consider this minor statistic: The so-called “do-nothing” congress is not so “do-nothing” after all. They have passed 352 bills, which still await action from the do-nothing Senate Majority Leader. That’s three-hundred, fifty two bills, 98 percent of which were passed in the house with bi-partisan support, but blocked in the senate. Fifty-five of those bills were actually introduced by democrats. Two-thirds of the bills were passed with 70 percent of the House votes….which includes scores of democrats.

In fact, congress is actually working together…until they hit a stone wall in the senate in the form of Senator Harry Reid. Meanwhile Reid and the president exploit the inaction by senate leadership as fodder, twisting facts to make the public believe it’s all the fault of the republican-led House. The general public, who listens to sound bites and never bothers to look further, buys into the propaganda.

If America is in a downward tailspin home and abroad, remember this: Our nation is being guided by four significant power brokers, two of whom are not elected. Barack Obama, Harry Reid, Eric Holder and Valerie Jarrett. It’s all about political gain and power.

If you think the president, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi feel sympathy for the migrants from Central America, don’t be naïve. They are thinking ahead. This has been engineered by policies executed in this administration for one purpose: Future power. Lopsided power. Demographic manipulation in the form of mega thousands of immigrants will translate to registered democrats in future voting bases. It’s all on purpose. Ten years from now, these “children” will be voting in more Reids, Pelosis and Obamas…only in greater majority numbers.

We’re being duped. Our grandchildren will be paying the price for our ignorance.


Guess How Many Bills the Senate Has Actually Voted on This Year | TheBlaze.


Following are Congresswoman Jenkins’ remarks:

“The President is fond of referring to the House as the “Do-Nothing Congress.” But we have 352 reasons why it’s a “Do-Nothing Senate.”

“352 bills are sitting on Harry Reid’s desk, awaiting action.

“98% of them passed with bipartisan support. Republicans and Democrats working together to pass legislation.

“50% of the bills passed unanimously, with no opposition.

“70% of the bills passed with 2/3rds support in the House.

“And over 55 bills were introduced by Democrats.

“352 bills. Why won’t Harry Reid act? These are good bills; bills that put the American people back to work, put more money in hardworking Americans pockets, help with education, and skills training.

“We call upon Harry Reid to get to work before he adjourns in August to pass some of these bills. The American people deserve better.”

Libertarian Folly: Why Everybody is a Social-issues Voter

There is this notion, one we hear more and more, that the Republican Party has to shed the social issues to seize the future. “Social issues are not the business of government!” says thoroughly modern millennial. It’s a seductive cry, one repeated this past Tuesday in an article about how some young libertarians dubbed the “Liberty Kids” are taking over the moribund Los Angeles GOP. Oh, wouldn’t the political landscape be simple if we could just boil things down to fiscal responsibility? But life is seldom simple.

If you would claim to be purely fiscal, or assert that “social issues” should never be government’s domain, I’d ask a simple question: Would you have no problem with a movement to legalize pedophilia?

Some responses here won’t go beyond eye-rolling and scoffing. Others will verbalize their incredulity and say that such a movement would never be taken seriously. This is not an answer but a dodge. First, the way to determine if one’s principles are sound is by seeing if they can be consistently applied. For instance, if someone claims he never judges others, it’s legitimate to ask whether he remains uncritical even of Nazis and KKK members; that puts the lie to his self-image. And any thinking person lives an examined life and tries to hone his principles.

Second, there is no never-land in reality. People in the ’50s would have said that homosexuality will “never” be accepted in the U.S. And Bill O’Reilly said as recently as 15 or 16 years ago that faux marriage (I don’t use the term “gay marriage”) would “never” be accepted in America. Sometimes “never” lasts only a decade or two.

Third, my question is no longer just theoretical. As I predicted years ago and wrote about here, there now is a movement afoot — one that has received “unbiased” mainstream-media news coverage — to legitimize pedophilia. Moreover, it has co-opted the language of the homosexual lobby, with doctors suggesting that pedophiles are “born that way” and have a “deep-rooted predisposition that does not change.”  A film reviewer characterizing pedophilia as “the love that dare not speak its name” and activists saying that lust for children is “normative” and those acting on it are unjustly “demonized.” Why, one Los Angeles Times article quoted a featured pedophile as saying, “These people felt they could snuff out the desire, or shame me into denying it existed. But it’s as intrinsic as the next person’s heterosexuality.”

My, where have we heard that before?

So, modern Millie, as we venture further down the rabbit hole, know that one day you may be among “these people,” these intolerant folks who just can’t understand why “social issues” should be kept out of politics and government out of the bedroom.

I should also point out that a movement advancing bestiality has also reared its head, using much of the same language as the homosexual and pedophiliac lobbies.

Of course, I’m sure that many libertarians have no problem with legalized bestiality; hey, my goat, my choice, right? And there may even be a rare few who would shrug off pedophilia, saying that, well, if a child agrees, who am I to get in the way of a consensual relationship? But these issues, as revolting and emotionally charged as they are, are just examples. There are a multitude of others, and this becomes clear if we delve a bit more deeply.

After all, what are “social issues”? What are we actually talking about? We’re speaking of moral issues, which, again, thoroughly modern millie would say should be kept out of politics. But this is impossible. For the truth is that every just law is an imposition of morality or a corollary thereof — every one.

Eyes may be rolling again, but let’s analyze it logically. By definition a law is a removal of a freedom, stating that there is something we must or must not do. Now, stripping freedom away is no small matter. Why would we do it? Unless we’re sociopathic, like Aleister Crowley believe “Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law” and are willing to impose our will simply because it feels right, there could be only one reason: we see the need to enforce an element of a conception of right and wrong. We prohibit an act because we believe it’s wrong or mandate something because we believe it’s a moral imperative. This is indisputable. After all, would you forcibly prevent someone from doing something that wasn’t wrong? Would you force someone to do something that wasn’t a moral imperative? That would be truly outrageous — genuine tyranny.

There are laws where this is obvious and unquestioned, such as the prohibition against murder. But the same holds true even when the connection to morality isn’t so obvious, such as with speed laws: they’re justified by the idea that it is wrong to endanger others.

Then there is legislation such as ObamaCare. The wind beneath its wings was the idea that it was wrong to leave people without medical care; this case was consistently made, and, were it not for this belief, the bill could never have gotten off the ground. Or consider the contraception mandate and the supposed “war on women”: the issue would have been moot if we believed there was nothing wrong with waging a war on women.

Some will now protest, saying that there is nothing moral about ObamaCare and the contraception mandate. I agree, but this just proves my point. Note that my initial assertion was not that every law is the imposition of morality — it was that every just law is so. Some legislation is based on a mistaken conception of right and wrong, in which case it is merely the imposition of values, which are not good by definition (Mother Teresa had values, but so did Hitler). It is only when the law has a basis in morality, in Moral Truth, which is objective, that it can be just. Hence the inextricable link between law and morality. For a law that isn’t the imposition of morality is one of two other things: the legislation of nonsense or, worse still, the imposition of immorality.

So this is the fatal flaw behind the attack on social conservatives. It would be one thing if the only case made were that their conception of morality was flawed; instead, as with those who sloppily bemoan all “judgment,” they’re attacked with a flawed argument, the notion that their voices should be ignored because they would “impose morality.” But what we call “social conservatives” aren’t distinguished by concern for social issues; the only difference between them and you, modern Millie, is that they care about the social issues that society, often tendentiously, currently defines as social issues and which we happen to be fighting about at the moment. This is seldom realized because most people are creatures of the moment.

But rest assured that, one day, the moment and “never” will meet. And then you very well may look in the mirror and recognize that most unfashionable of things: a social-issues voter.

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Twitter or log on to SelwynDuke.com