“Negrophilia: From Slave Block to Pedestal — America’s Racial Obsession”

Fans of noted author, columnist and speaker Erik Rush will be delighted to know that Erik has released his latest opus, Negrophilia: From Slave Block to Pedestal – America’s Racial Obsession (Publisher: WND Books).

The Bold Pursuit is pleased to endorse “Negrophilia …” as the definitive book on race politics in America. This is one of those rare ‘must-read’ books that exposes the dynamics of race, politics and media within current and historical context.

From Erik’s website:

“Negrophilia: From Slave Block to Pedestal ~ America’s Racial Obsession”

dissects the dynamic of race relations and how conscientious Americans may discern the deeper truths of these matters and thus develop healthier perceptions.”

“A Few Steps to Making Things Better”

by Ruel Russell

On the way to making the USA a better place, I want to share some simple steps:

#1 Compassion

#2 Commitment

#3 Involvement…then God, knowledge and pick your path.

If you just strive to live according to your beliefs, others may notice, follow you and good things happen! It’s not what we are, but who we are!

Over the weekend, I volunteered, per usual, at my church’s food shelf project. Our community is very familiar with our church’s programs and through our church, we do GOD’s work to create a positive effect in the community.

Last Saturday, another church, located 40 miles away, brought their minister and youth group (about 15 young people) to our church to help with our food shelf project. These kids were so full of energy! If we can involve our children in compassion projects early in life, they will probably stay involved throughout their lives.

This coming week, my church is planning a youth dinner in which we will have the opportunity to sit and discuss the rewards of involvement in God’s work, found also in service to their community and country.

On Saturday, I will attend my Republican caucus, followed by our local Republican ‘meet and greet’ at a local restaurant.

Minneapolis & St. Paul Democrats are very strong in their local support and involvement, so my goal this last year has been to get a grass roots plan underway. Members of my Senate district agreed with my plans and intend to act upon my idea. I hope this will become a model for our inner city areas; our next steps are to merge this project with an effort to support our troops.

We now have less than two years until the next election cycle; it is vitally important that we seek a positive direction for ourselves, our children and grandchildren. Now is the time to get involved and move forward with rock solid preparations.

Many of us have served our country (myself included) and it’s time again to step up and work for the best interests of our country and communities! Remember, it’s We the People …

Thank You, Ruel Russell

Canada’s Obama — Another Look at The Patriot’s Notepad…

View From the North: Canada’s Obama…

The following blog was first published on February 10, 2009. Northern Neighbour, our conservative Canadian friend, contributed his thoughts about Obama and the comparison with “Canada’s Obama,” Pierre Trudeau.

by Northern Neighbour

Our Obama AKA Pierre Elliot Trudeau burst onto our political scene in Canada in the late 1960’s. There were things we did and did not know about this man, but I believe that if we would have had the Internet – and learned about his associations and where his base of beliefs came from –
he would not have gone very far. He was a very good orator. Could talk the birds out of the tree and was our pied piper of social programs …

‘Trudeau was a charismatic figure who, from the late 1960s until the mid-1980s, dominated the Canadian political scene and aroused passionate reactions.’ Please click here for the full article: A View From the North: Canada’s Obama



TBP Praiseworthy: “The End of Labor Unions in America,” “When Americans Come Knocking,” “Toxic Rhetoric …” and “A False Premise of Leadership”

The Bold Pursuit is pleased to showcase some of our most recent articles, including today’s JWT’s Journal column, “The End of Labor Unions in America,” Part Four of “The Deliberate Destruction of the Middle Class.”

In Patriotic Perspectives, we have a new blog from one the first TBP guest bloggers, our conservative Canadian friend, Northern Neighbour. Northern Neighbour’s unique perspective as an objective observer, as well as one who has experienced the socialist experiments under former Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau provides valuable insight into our current political landscape. Please check out “When Americans Come Knocking…”

Rep. Gabrielle Giffords continues to improve after being shot during a deadly assault at an open-air town hall meeting in Tucson. However, the politicians and pundits are still taking potshots at each other, as noted in a feature by Clio. “Toxic Rhetoric Trumps Tucson Attacks: Liberals Take Aim at Palin, Tea Parties…”

You’ll also enjoy another edgy and provocative article by Sandy Stringfellow, a frequent contributor to The Bold Pursuit: “A False Premise of Leadership”

The Bold Pursuit welcomes your comments about our articles and blogs!

~ Clio

Honoring Patriots: January 17, 2011

Today, we celebrate the 305th birthday of Benjamin Franklin, one of the most influential Founders of our nation. We honor him today, as well as note the observance of Martin Luther King Day. The Bold Pursuit pays tribute to the legacy of Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Benjamin Franklin’s Thirteen Virtues:

1. “Temperance. Eat not to dullness; drink not to elevation.”
   2. “Silence. Speak not but what may benefit others or yourself; avoid trifling conversation.”
   3. “Order. Let all your things have their places; let each part of your business have its time.”
   4. “Resolution. Resolve to perform what you ought; perform without fail what you resolve.”
   5. “Frugality. Make no expense but to do good to others or yourself; i.e., waste nothing.”
   6. “Industry. Lose no time; be always employ’d in something useful; cut off all unnecessary actions.”
   7. “Sincerity. Use no hurtful deceit; think innocently and justly, and, if you speak, speak accordingly.”
   8. “Justice. Wrong none by doing injuries, or omitting the benefits that are your duty.”
   9. “Moderation. Avoid extremes; forbear resenting injuries so much as you think they deserve.”
  10. “Cleanliness. Tolerate no uncleanliness in body, cloaths, or habitation.”
  11. “Tranquility. Be not disturbed at trifles, or at accidents common or unavoidable.”
  12. “Chastity. Rarely use venery but for health or offspring, never to dullness, weakness, or the injury of your own or another’s peace or reputation.”
  13. “Humility. Imitate Jesus and Socrates.”

 Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.

“From every mountainside, let freedom ring. When we let freedom ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God’s children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, “Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!” Martin Luther King Jr., I Have a Dream, 1963  (www.mlkonline.net)

Governor Sarah Palin posted a tribute to the late Dr. King on her Facebook Notes, re-printed on our US4Palin Syndicate page: Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

“Toxic Rhetoric Trumps Tucson Attacks: Liberals Take Aim at Palin, Tea Parties …”

by Clio

Last Saturday, January 8, we were jolted by breaking news reports of a gunman’s attack on Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords at an open-air town hall meeting in Tucson, Arizona. Six others were killed in the assault, including nine-year-old Christina Taylor Green, U.S. District Judge John M. Roll and Giffords’ aide, Gabe Zimmerman. According to reports, 19 people were shot in the rampage by 22-year-old Jared Lee Loughner and eight of his victims remain hospitalized.

Apparently, Rep. Giffords was Loughner’s target; FBI investigators found notes in Loughner’s Tucson home on which he wrote, “Die, bitch,” referring to Giffords. According to other sources, Jared Loughner has a history of odd behavior and posting aggressive comments on online gaming sites; neighbors and former classmates describe the 22-year-old as “mentally disturbed.”

The attack on Giffords (whose doctors are optimistic that she’ll survive the shooting) is still the top story on most news outlets. Sadly, this devastating and deadly event was commandeered by liberal politicos, pundits and seemingly legitimate news outlets which seized the opportunity to construct a secondary headline – another assault on Sarah Palin and Tea Party supporters. 

The media lambasted the former governor of Alaska for a map she posted on her Facebook page featuring “crosshairs” for congressional district targets in last November’s mid-term elections. Many media outlets asserted that Palin’s “don’t retreat, reload” slogan incited violence; Giffords’ congressional seat was one of the targets on Palin’s map.

Liberal pundits are still droning on about Palin’s ‘toxic rhetoric’ and suggesting that she is either directly or indirectly at fault for the fatal acts of a seemingly unstable young man.

As the media did a grimly gleeful happy dance on Sarah Palin’s political grave, I decided to ignore their lopsided and ludicrous headlines – political candidates on both sides of the aisles use similar terminology and target lists during campaigns. However, the media scourging of Sarah Palin is nothing new; last year’s exposé of the journ-o-lists scheme is point in fact of the cabal against Palin.

Almost 800 members of the media (on the listserv, journ-o-list) declared their intention to defame Palin and act in collusion against the popular governor during the 2008 presidential campaign and continued to strafe Sarah Palin for almost two years post-election. It wasn’t until after the journ-o-list story broke and some media outlets, namely Fox News, noticed the unusually intense and negative media interest in the governor did the daily vitriol against Palin begin to abate.

This week, as families mourn their loved ones and others sit bedside as other gunshot victims heal from their wounds, the media, liberal pols and pundits continue to target Palin and Tea Party groups for their own ideological and political advantage.

Regardless of the congresswoman’s political party or the affiliations of Mr. Loughner’s other victims, I will choose to ignore the sensational, ‘toxic rhetoric’ of the ideologues and say a silent prayer for those Americans who were killed or injured by, from most accounts, a mentally-ill man. I hope you’ll join me in offering condolences to the families of the deceased and prayers for those who are recovering from their wounds.

In conclusion, I’d like to direct you to an article that I wrote last year about media bias:

“My Observation on The News: Liberal V. Conservative …”

A few years ago, I returned to Portland. During my first breakfast at home, I collected the neatly re-organized newspaper and began my daily read. A few pages into the front page section, I realized that I was no longer in liberal L.A., but in a place where conservative viewpoints were virtually verboten and could find scant evidence of balanced, unbiased journalism.

During the 2008 Obama campaign “The Oregonian” became so biased for Obama that I felt the word “advertisement” should appear on every news and Op-Ed page. Eventually, the only section of the “Obama-gonian,” as I now refer to it, I found to be accurate and unprejudiced was the television log … for the full article, please click here: My Observation on The News

“A False Premise of Leadership”

by Sandy Stringfellow 

It was in high school that I first read “Animal Farm,” the brilliantly satirical expose of Stalinist communism by George Orwell. Among other things, Orwell illustrated how control of language determines the outcome of events.

“Newspeak” was the modus operandi of those seeking power, with indoctrination of thought being the end result.

Although many words in our English language often have specific meanings, the impressions left upon us from the manner in which words are used in society often have as great an effect as the actual definitions themselves.

The word “racist” is thrown around quite a bit these days. In most cases, a more accurate word for the intended meaning of the insult is “bigot.”

Through political correctness, we’ve been conditioned to understand that “racist” has a greater negative political charge than “bigot,” and we respond with a more pronounced knee-jerk reaction when it is used.

Even though it would appear, in this day and age, that few people in America are actual racists, most of us have been taught to be afraid of the word.

It’s not the meaning of the word that counts, but the perceived impact of the word.

I believe the inverse holds true as well, that some words we’ve accepted through frequency of use as having a singular meaning should, instead, be considered as they are defined; as a dichotomy, with meanings that are related but separate.

My edition of Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary defines “leader” primarily as “a person who has commanding authority or influence.”

However, there’s another definition: “the principle member of the party elite in a totalitarian system endowed by official ideology with a heroic or mystical character and who governs with a minimum of formal constitutional restraints, extreme national demagogy, and claims to be above narrow class and group interest.”

Webster’s defines “demagogue” as “a leader who makes use of popular prejudices and false claims and promises in order to gain power.”

If one reads “popular prejudices” as “political correctness,” the insidious nature of over one hundred years of social engineering and political conditioning begin to come into focus.

As Americans, we’ve grown accustomed and are generally predisposed to view leadership in the most positive of contexts. We revere those bravest and most honorable of leaders throughout our nation’s remarkable history. The positive leadership of great Americans like George Washington, John Adams, and Benjamin Franklin are an inspiration to us all.

When someone in a leadership role fails to produce results considered positive, it’s usually referred to as an “absence of leadership,” and their efforts deemed a failure.

However, if the leader’s end result is negative in nature and this negative result is by design, is it still considered ineffectual leadership? Should it still be considered a failure?

With the recent nationalization of health care, banking, automotive manufacturing, insurance companies, student loans, home mortgages, et al, we’ve observed King Barry’s leadership skills in action.

He’s effectively injected elements of fascism into our fundamentally capitalist economy; a stunning example of “negative” leadership, if his results are viewed through the prism of our founding documents and the rule of law.

It’s common to accept this false premise of leadership; that leadership must be positive in nature or otherwise considered as failure.

I believe the problem with it is, by doing so we lose focus on our own conservative objectives and miss opportunities to draw important political distinctions.

King Barry is not a simple-minded boob, not stupid, and not an idiot.

Ladies and gentlemen, may I respectfully submit that King Barry is not a simple-minded boob, not stupid, and not an idiot. Although his actions are often mischaracterized as being the result of inexperience, he doesn’t fit the bill of a simpleton, in over their head. The real issue is his motivation.

I think one reason King Barry often appears less than competent, is because he dare not say what he actually believes. Virtually all of his statements, when carefully dissected, consists of flagrant lies and “Wizard of Oz”-like smokescreens; a difficult facade to maintain.

The fact that he’s decided it’s politically advantageous to cultivate an affection of speech to indicate he’s “cool” and “of the street” doesn’t bolster his credibility rating except with those who read and write at the fifth grade level; quite possibly his target audience.

King Barry demonstrates his particular brand of experience daily. Through subterfuge, cunning, misdirection, and prevarication, he is re-designing America as he exacts a strange narcissistic revenge, all in the name of rectifying the past and creating a new “social justice”; it is a Progressive Marxist ideological vision, and he pursues it with the relentless and dogmatic determination of a true believer.

Politics is not unlike the game of chess, where one must think well ahead of the move being considered. Based upon the degree of national security, economic, social, constitutional, judicial, and environmental damage inflicted thus far by King Barry and his royal court, it’s reasonable to conclude they grasp the concept that a “win at all costs” strategy is required to fulfill their long-standing dream of a New World Order and America’s subservient role in it.

How could a stupid leader create so much harm?

I am concerned about the frequency with which King Barry’s totalitarian oligarchy is being “soft-pedaled” by both conservatives and non-conservatives alike, often because he’s been dismissed as being stupid, an idiot, etc.

How could a stupid leader create so much harm? If he truly is stupid, is it not reasonable that the negative impact of his policies and initiatives are being exaggerated?

There certainly are a significant number of people who think King Barry is an idiot, and it appears that many of these people don’t appreciate the terminally serious stage of our national demise. Why?

Do they think he’s too dumb to do any lasting harm to America? That anything he does can be undone with a minimum of effort; have an election and “poof,” everything changes back to normal?

To insult his intelligence creates a perception that King Barry and his members of the revolutionary left are far less dangerous than advertised, instead of reinforcing an image of their having the competence to establish a plan of attack specifically designed to implement “change” to the fundamental precepts and structure that define America, and ultimately bring about her collapse and destruction.

When King Barry is not credited for the mind-numbing damage inflicted through his application of negative leadership, simply because we’ve labeled him “stupid” or “idiotic,” conservatives forfeit a prime opportunity to point out his lethal and catastrophic behavior through everyday conversation.

Conversely, when King Barry’s negative leadership is viewed as a “skill,” albeit treacherous and despicable, the results of his policies and initiatives become attached to him topically as a derivative of his “talents,” and more people are made aware of the truth; that his attack on America continues to be both effective and devastating.

Far too many voters, democrat and republican, are in a state of denial

I believe that far too many voters, democrat and republican, are in a state of denial. Over-stimulated, stressed-out, or products of the welfare state, these voters are not investing the time and intellectual discipline necessary to keep up with the onslaught of King Barry’s blitzkrieg against America. 

They appear resigned to complacency, drifting along with the flow of the mainstream media, nurturing detachment, convinced they receive all the facts necessary to vote responsibly from the local newspaper, or that things aren’t as bad as have been reported on conservative talk radio.

Many of these voters get their “facts” from alphabet soup networks during the six o’clock news on television.

The entrepreneurial approach to give King Barry well-deserved credit for our nation’s perilous condition, by emphasizing his motive and ability, may encourage a new voter perspective; an increase in awareness of how potentially fatal our national crisis has grown.

It reminds me of a classic technique to overcome objections when closing a sale. It’s based on simple psychology, and it works. Briefly put, after hearing an objection, the salesman responds in a conversational manner:

“If I were in your situation, I would feel the same way. In fact, I’ve thought the same thing myself sometimes. But if you look at it from my perspective, you’ll see the wisdom of why it makes sense to change your point of view.”

I think it’s important for conservatives to trumpet the fact that King Barry has done a remarkable job of planning his work and working his plan.

With due credit established, we can then explain exactly how damaging and effective his plan has been thus far, and where it’s going to lead us if he’s not stopped this November by electing conservatives to the House of Representatives and the Senate.

King Barry has created the “soft tyranny”

King Barry has created the “soft tyranny” Mark Levin writes about in his excellent book “Liberty and Tyranny”, through the blatant disregard of our United States Constitution, abrogating the rule of law, ignoring the courts, and seizing power through fiat governance and the issuing of executive orders; classic Marxist methodology.

It is an unapologetic attack on civil society, personal liberty, private property rights, national security, and American sovereignty. For those investing a modest amount of time in research, or for those simply willing to listen, it’s not difficult to connect the dots; King Barry’s mission is the total destruction of America as we know it, and as it was founded in our Declaration of Independence, our Constitution, and our Bill of Rights.

Sandy Stringfellow is a writer and musician with an interest in history, economics, and politics.

(Reprinted with author’s permission, www.canadafreepress.com. First published on Saturday, July 3, 2010)



“Will Lukewarm Republicans Prevail?”

by Robert Arvay
 
This month will be the test. When the newly elected Republicans take office, they will be greeted by the old guard Republicans. The old guard will pleasantly direct the Tea Party members to the back of the room, politely put pillows on their chairs, and smilingly assure them that they should just allow the “experienced” members to run the show.
 
That will be the deciding moment.
 
The new Republicans will then either accept the old order, or they will establish themselves as the revolutionary front line. If they accept the old order, we rank and file conservative voters will soon find ourselves faced with a brutal choice. With no leadership in power, we will either seize power ourselves, or surrender our children and grandchildren to a socialist fate.
 
My desire is that the Tea Party members will assert themselves. My hope is that  at every opportunity they will pound away at the message, “The United States of America is a nation of laws, not of personal whimsy. Our Constitution is a contract between free citizens who govern themselves and are not ruled by politicians.

  • Our opponents are many and the dangers we face are extraordinary. To name a few:
  • The socialist and so-called “progressive” forces are powerful and well-organized.
  • While Europe begins to back away from the ruinous policies of big government, the American Left is pushing us toward the edge of that cliff.
  • The president is doing by executive order what he failed to do through representative government.
  • Foreign enemies are poised to launch military attacks as soon as they find an opening.
  • Terrorists lurk among us, seeking to kill as many of us as possible.
  • The economy threatens a financial apocalypse.
  • Illegal aliens and their advocates are undermining the rule of law.

There is no shortage of problems. The question is, do we possess the courage to face them and the resolve to overcome them?
 
Make no mistake. This is not the era of the sunshine soldier. You have a part to play, an important part. In every victorious struggle, there are some defeats, many casualties, and much suffering. This is not a battle fought from a position of comfort and safety.  It is a war of the trenches, muddy and bloody. However, we cannot withdraw; the stakes are too high for us to do anything less than our best. 
 
In the words of George Washington:

 
“Let us, then rely on the goodness of our cause, and the aid of the Supreme Being, in whose hands victory is, to animate and encourage us to great and noble actions. … Liberty, property, life, and honor are all at stake; upon your courage and conduct rest the hopes of our bleeding and insulted country. … The enemy will endeavor to intimidate by show and appearance; but, remember, they have been repulsed on various occasions by a few brave Americans.”

I pray that when the moment comes, and it may come sooner than we think, that I will be found worthy to stand beside you, shoulder to shoulder, in defiance of the forces of tyranny, and in support of the Constitution of the United States.

“Public Virtue, the Lynch Pin”

by MyMati

The battle in America between freedom and bondage has gone on since our earliest days and in a variety of ways. For most of our first century, freedom had the upper hand, inasmuch as the government was kept within the bounds of the spirit of the Constitution. Once we had some generational distance from the Founders, we began to accept more progressive ideas regarding government’s role in our lives, handed off our responsibilities and began to deny the consequences of our actions. Our freedoms were traded for bondage to the government teat because we are taught by the government that life is easier and safe that way.

Because the concept of “Public Virtue” has disappeared from our public life, most people cannot even conceive of a government that does not coddle and care for every manner of somehow disadvantaged citizen and even many that are not. While care for those who truly cannot care for themselves is necessary, the first level of care should come voluntarily from the citizenry. Only those who are left with no recourse should be helped with public money – preferably through the State instead of the Federal Government.

Progressive federal government policy shepherded us away from this critical premise of our founding. Public virtue was what the Founders looked at as the societal “lynch pin” that meant we were prepared to take on the responsibility of and maintain self governance. Even going so far as to say the Republic could not exist without it.

George Washington said in his farewell address: 

” ‘Tis substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule indeed extends with more or less force to every species of free Government. Who that is a sincere friend to it can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?”

John Adams said: 

“Public virtue cannot exist in a Nation without private Virtue, and public Virtue is the only Foundation of Republics.”

 

Henry Ward Beecher said: 

“There is no liberty to men who know not how to govern themselves.”

How does one define “public virtue”? Virtue incorporates characteristics of good will, tolerance, kindness, patience, courage, respect, humility, gratitude, honor, industry, honesty, chastity and fidelity. These concepts are old and outdated to the progressive Left (and even many of the Republic elites) and they do absolutely everything they can to undermine these concepts that were so cherished by our Founders. Liberals seem to have no time for such things they are to busy trying to equalize outcome, make life fair, spread the wealth, and otherwise tear apart this fabric of time-tested truths that our Founders knew would be required to perpetuate the Republic.

The Founders warned us of the consequences of failing to pass on virtue to each generation.

“It is in the manners and spirit of a people which preserve a republic in vigour. . . degeneracy in these is a canker which soon eats into the heart of its laws and constitution.” Thomas Jefferson

“Sell not virtue to purchase wealth, nor Liberty to purchase power.” Benjamin Franklin

“Whenever we are planning for posterity, we ought to remember that virtue is not hereditary.” Thomas Paine

For more than one hundred years, we have failed to pass on the necessity of virtue to each successive generation. It is just not cool enough for today’s, liberal-dominated media to portray virtue as something worthwhile. Instead, the Hollywood crowd, for the most part, lifts up examples of ridiculous personalities that are riddled with drugs and lack self control. They abuse each other, their pets, themselves and their fame in full view, splashed across headlines on TV and in print. Young people see how these people are celebrated and even rewarded with fantastic riches and want emulate them.

The government-run schools are complicit in this destruction of virtue by not teaching those characteristics critical to it. The unions now collude with the federal government through massive political donations and employ lobbyists to keep the citizenry confused and uneducated on the subject of virtue. Instead, they teach our children how to be “green” and to accept government control of nearly every significant facet of their lives.

It is left to us, the few patriots that still believe in the value of “public virtue” to replace that missing “lynch pin,” to fight for our freedom, to throw off the chains of government bondage and walk free. We must exemplify this key principle of our Republic if we are to save it. We must be sure to do everything to promote the type of thinking that will preserve virtue, for without it we are lost as a republic and will, inevitably slide into tyranny.

“No Labels”

by MyMati

A group of political elites in Washington, D.C .recently began a movement called “No Labels.” Who they are is not terribly important, but in typical D.C. fashion, these elites are trying to start a movement where no natural call for one of this sort exists. It’s not a grassroots movement; it is a manufactured undertaking to make these chosen few that fancy themselves leaders, but are nothing more than pompous political pretenders pining for power, feel important.  

What is the problem with applying political labels? Is it not of critical importance to be able to identify some basic ideology of those who oppose or support one’s policy decisions? Don’t we do this in a subconscious way with each person we meet? Does “No Labels” really think they can go without labels for long?

Automatically, we sort people in our minds: friend, not friend, trusted, not trusted, has ideas I like, has ideas that frustrate me, and so on. Therefore, Liberal, Conservative, Left, Right, Democrat and Republican are just labels that we apply to identify and sort those we meet or listen to in speeches and debates or who we support and who we have as friends. 

Thus, it begs the question, ‘why does the Left fear labels, which we apply as a matter of course in our daily lives?’ Of course, not all on the Left are afraid of labels. There is a few in the media and in Congress that wear their Left-leaning labels with pride, but they are few. Within the public, unless one lives in a very liberal city or town, many on the Left find being identified by labels such as Liberal or Progressive is a pejorative. Those on the Right, however, rarely shun labels like Conservative and Libertarian. Heck, often we embrace the taunts that the Left bestow upon us such as Bible-clinger and we wear them with pride – which I’m sure drives the Left crazy or at least confounds

This odd dichotomy in American political discourse seems to me to be a matter of fear and of confidence. The Left’s fear seems to come from not being accepted by the greater public and their lack of confidence due to that pesky feeling that all they believe, politically, could be wrong. This is evidenced in their shrill defenses, needless, unprovoked name-calling =, and the habitual use of four letter words, especially when confronted along ideological lines. Note their assignment of racist meanings to totally non-racist words and phrases is now ‘racist code.’ Twisting “Zimbabwe” and “grab your pitchforks” into racism is simply their newest scheme to marginalize us so they don’t have to defend their politics. By defining these terms as racism, the Left hopes to squelch dissent so they are not cornered into defending the indefensible positions of socialism and progressivism. They know they will lose if legitimate debate is allowed.

American conservatives, on the other hand, seem to derive strength from their political beliefs. The surety of knowing that our political principles will lead to greater freedom and wealth for all – even those progressives is very powerful.

This strength that I see in my fellow conservatives, however, does not extend to all Republicans, as many of them desire admiration and acceptance from the Left. They pretend to believe the same ideologies as Conservatives in order to secure their power, but still seem to suffer the same fate as their Liberal counterparts; they lack the confidence that what they know politically is sure, fully-defined and developed in our Founding documents and explained in our Founders written words. In my opinion, their fear is based in losing their positions of power.

Conservatives, I know, are sure and confident in their belief in the Constitution as a timeless set of principles as relevant today as the day the document was signed. Today’s Commonsense Constitutional Conservatives are unafraid to wear, proudly, any label that identifies us as what we are. We are prepared to defend our position with logic and solid historical evidence.