GUEST COMMENTARY

Corrupted Means Always Corrupt the Ends

Corrupted Means Always Corrupt the Ends

By David Risselada

Democrats have really trapped themselves in a corner, haven’t they? It was all too obvious that the constant anti-American rhetoric they have been pushing would result in the kind of political violence we witnessed today. For years, ever since being a student in a radical left wing social work program, this author has been warning anyone who would listen that this was the direction we were going. The only problem is that no one was listening.

Think about it a moment; for decades now the radical left has controlled our institutions of lower learning while teaching students that they were oppressed victims of an evil, selfish, racist, sexist, homophobic capitalistic society. One that no less, caters to the privileged white man more than any other. They have ridiculed Christianity while removing it altogether from the public school system. They have replaced a traditional understanding of what is right and wrong with moral relativism which allows them to justify any action based on the view points of particular cultures or worldviews.

Isn’t it ironic? A political party who all but removed God from their political platform while pushing hateful lies to destroy their opposition wants us to believe they prayed for the Republicans? It seems that the idea of ends justifying the means is coming back to bite them right in the square of their proverbial donkey.

Alinsky always taught that believing corrupted means would corrupt the ends was a misguided principle, and that corrupting one’s self was the greatest act of morality if one was truly interested in pursuing the greater good. Well here we are, the Democrats have certainly corrupted themselves to levels unseen before and all we have to show for it are disgruntled Americans who believe Republicans want everyone to die because we are all selfish, racist, women hating Islamophobes who don’t want anyone having health care. The sad thing is liberals really believed they would have the opportunity to create a perfect world as a result of these hateful lies. Such is the way I suppose.

As usual, Democrats have come out with cries for gun control. What they fail to understand is that it was their constant politicization of tragedies such as this that cost them the election in the first place. Please, by all means keep calling for gun control and we will see whatever remaining Democrat seats there are left lost to pro-gun Republicans in 2018.

The issue of gun control, in this humble authors opinion, shows the true nature of the Democrat party. They claim to be for human rights and dignity but fail to understand that a human being has nothing if not the absolute right to self preservation in the face of danger. How can an individual maintain dignity when forced into a helpless situation where the right to defend his or her own life has been taken away by others seeking political gain? Call your congressman and senators and ask them this question. Furthermore, to suffer helplessly at the hands of criminals who never have any intention of complying with society’s laws is just a slap in the face by those who look down on us from their positions of power. Positions of power which were created to preserve the people’s liberty.

The truth is that Democrats don’t care about individual liberty or human dignity. They are collectivists and as such they see us as nothing but useful tools that can be played at will to accomplish a political objective. Sadly, their political objectives would see the masses psychologically subdued and chained to an ideology that has done nothing but wreak havoc and human misery since its inception. The fact that younger Americans are viewing socialism/communism as legitimate alternatives to our capitalist society is indicative of the fact that we are on the verge of witnessing more political violence. Blacks on college campuses are demanding segregation, college professors are calling for Republicans to be lined up and shot and there is even one student group who demanded Republicans be beheaded because they believe we want to take everyone’s health care.

Things will likely get far worse before they get any better. Democrats will continue to blame Republican gun ownership for violence committed by Democrats while still pursuing an agenda we all know is based on lies. They will continue to tell their followers that they are oppressed victims while encouraging them to revolt in the name of pursuing a better world. The question remains however, whether or not an agenda based on lies can lead to a better world at all. So far the evidence says otherwise.

David Risselada is a former U.S. Serviceman, commentator, and author of the book “Not on My Watch: Exposing the Marxist Agenda in Education.” David currently writes for Western Free Press.

Posted by Erik Rush in GUEST COMMENTARY
Conservatives Aid in the Left’s Agenda by Reacting To It

Conservatives Aid in the Left’s Agenda by Reacting To It

By David Risselada

Kathy Griffin is now blaming Donald Trump and his family for the potential loss of her career. Like a typical liberal she is taking no responsibility for her actions and redirecting the consequences of her rude and crude behavior onto others. She is doing what the left does best, playing the victim of an oppressive intolerant society who doesn’t allow for dissenting view points. Of course, we all know this is a bunch of baloney; however, by reacting to it at all we are allowing the left to win the battle in the ever going war against free speech and in some ways, we are accelerating their victory.

We are not dealing with rational people here. The left does not share the same moral base as those on the right. To them there simply is no right or wrong and because of this, there is no shame in anything they do. If you remember, Saul Alinsky taught his followers that believing in principles was for the weak hearted and an unwillingness to corrupt themselves for the greater good meant they didn’t care about their cause. To be specific he said the following-

“In action one does not always enjoy the luxury of a decision that is consistent with both one’s individual conscience and the good of mankind. The choice must always be for the latter. Action is for mass salvation and not for the individual’s personal salvation. He who sacrifices the mass good for his personal conscience has a peculiar conception of personal salvation; he doesn’t care enough for the people to be corrupted for them.” (Saul Alinsky, Rules For Radicals.)

 
In other words, Kathy Griffin and others on the left do not care that they are hypocrites. They have a specific goal in mind that furthers their agenda and that goal is the destruction of free speech and in general, conservatism. Of course, people will be asking how Griffin’s photo of Trump’s decapitated head would aid in the destruction of free speech. After all, her ability to pose with such a photo is the epitome of what the First Amendment stands for. The protection of speech that others find offensive. Isn’t it? While the left is on a rampage across the nation against speech they find offensive, our rallying call has been defending the First Amendment because it protects speech others find offensive. The First Amendment was meant to protect free, political speech that could be used to hold government accountable in order to preserve the people’s liberty. Conservatives typically defend free speech fervently, even when they know the speech is being used to discredit America. In this case however, they have conservatives demanding that Griffin be boycotted, arrested, and fired because her photo was so offensive. In other words, they have turned many on the right into complete hypocrites who can’t live up to the values they allegedly espouse to. The First Amendment doesn’t just protect speech that liberals find offensive, it protects everyone’s speech.
This is a deliberate tactic of the Alinsky left and it kills us every time. The following is the fourth rule of tactics in Rules For Radicals.
“Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules. You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.” (Saul Alinsky, Rules For Radicals.)
 
Many people fail to realize that the left gets away with what they do because many of their actions are designed to do exactly this, use our values and rules against us. It is very easy to label the right as hypocrites and extremists when we are always crying for free speech then demand the boycotting of someone because they do something we find offensive. All that does is aid the left’s agenda of proving a concept like free speech isn’t constructive. You can’t label the left as hypocrites because they have no shame in what they do and they don’t claim to have values in the same manner that those on the right do. As suggested in the first quote in this article, they are willing to fall to any level if they believe their actions will advance the agenda of destroying conservatism.
Many people probably believe what Kathy Griffin did was so over the top and offensive that it should be viewed as a threat to the president. While it was vile and telling of her character she didn’t do anything illegal. All throughout the previous administration pictures of Obama hanging for treason were regularly shared by conservative groups on Facebook pages. How is this any different? Like so many other instances our reaction tells people that this isn’t ok because it is being done to our guy this time, allowing the left to not only label us as hypocrites but play the phony victim game as well.
The worst thing we as conservatives can do is give this any credibility by reacting to it. Let them show their vile disgusting selves and the self evident truth of who they are and what their agenda is will be revealed. These people can take any reaction and use it to their advantage. By reacting to their antics we are giving them the opportunity to keep the pressure on and force us in a reactionary mode when what we should be doing is letting them show us who they really are.

David Risselada is a former U.S. Serviceman, commentator, and author of the book “Not on My Watch: Exposing the Marxist Agenda in Education.” David currently writes for Western Free Press.

Posted by Erik Rush in GUEST COMMENTARY
Police Shootings, White Privilege and the Intentional Destruction of the Black Community

Police Shootings, White Privilege and the Intentional Destruction of the Black Community

By David Risselada

Tulsa police officer Betty Shelby was recently found not guilty in the shooting death of Terrence Crutcher. The shooting represented another in a long line of national incidents where an unarmed black man was shot and killed by a white police officer. In many instances these shootings lead to cries of racism and wide spread violence by protest groups like Black Lives Matter. Luckily for the residents of Tulsa these type of protests never gain any real momentum. It seems that the shooting of Crutcher was justified in the sense that he was acting in an erratic and non-compliant manner. He had a known history of drug abuse as well as a criminal record. While this does not justify the immediate shooting of the man there are some hard questions that are not being asked and in order to ever find true justice they must be explored. One of these questions is of course, who is to blame for his death? The left will continue to blame the so called institutional racism of the United States and it’s institutions as the cause of all these unfortunate events. Sadly, the truth is far different and the blood of Terrence Crutcher as well as other innocent people actually falls on the hands of the liberal left.

For decades now the left has pushed the destructive narrative that blacks in America are oppressed and white people live privileged lives. Academic theories such as Black Liberation Theology, Critical Race Theory and White Privilege education have diluted the minds of American students by teaching them that the system they live in is inherently racist and designed only to benefit the selfish, greedy interests of white men. Blacks are taught that they are incapable of racism because they have no institutional power. In other words, because the institutions of power are allegedly controlled by whites, blacks have no power to discriminate against others. The purpose of these educational theories is to create a counter-hegemony against the dominant social group and it is communist in origin. Italian communist Antonio Gramsci devised the theory of counter-hegemony because he realized that Marx’s idea of an armed struggle between the economic classes didn’t materialize. Gramsci instead posited the idea that different groups of oppressed people could be created on the basis of gender, criminal status and race. These groups could then be used and pitted against the dominant culture to create a revolutionary mind set.

It has worked perfectly, our nation is now divided with so many different social groups claiming to be oppressed by “white privilege.” In truth however, these people are only being used and it is leading to their own destruction. The idea that blacks are oppressed and the teaching of such nonsense like white privilege has led to a movement based purely on hatred and resentment. The constant rhetoric and demonization of police by former President Barack Hussein Obama led to an all out war on cops where blacks were ambushing and killing police officers for no reason other than being told they are oppressed victims. This war on cops surely contributed to the fear and knee jerk reactions of officer Betty Shelby when she was facing down a non-compliant man who was in fact, acting in an erratic manner and reaching back into his car.

Ever since the creation of Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society programs black people in America have been oppressed. They have been tricked into believing that the government will provide for them through welfare. The results were the destruction of the black family, generational poverty and government dependence. This was done on purpose in order to be able to carry out Gramsci’s plan of counter-hegemony. Anyone who truly understands history knows that Republicans have traditionally voted for civil rights for blacks and Democrats have opposed them. The KKK was the terrorist arm of the Democrat party and it was Democrats who opposed the eradication of slavery. Blacks in America were at one time just as successful and integrated into American society as whites and in many cases had stronger, more successful family lives. This all changed with Johnson’s Great Society welfare programs. This was the creation of the perfect revolutionary army to bring about socialism in America.

Manning R. Johnson, author of the book Color, Communism and Common Sense was a black member of the Communist Party USA. He was highly trained in subversive techniques and worked his way as high as being a member of the Politburo. He defected from the Communist Party when realizing the black community in America was being used to carry out a communist agenda. He writes in the book that the grievances of the black community such as slavery and discrimination, were to be exploited and used as a weapon against the capitalist system to bring about socialism.

“Little did I realize until I was deeply enmeshed in the Red Conspiracy, that just and seeming grievances are exploited to transform idealism into a cold and ruthless weapon against the capitalist system — that this is the end toward which all the communist
efforts among Negroes are directed.”

 
In short, the impoverished state of many black Americans can be traced back to early roots of America’s communist movement. They have been exploited and used by those who have taught them they are systematically oppressed by the white man, namely the Democratic party. They have been organized into an effective voting machine where they continually vote the same racist party into power on the promise of welfare and other benefits. The conditions of their communities never change; in fact they worsen, this is then used to further the argument for socialist solutions. Black youths are being indoctrinated into an ideology of hatred and society destroys their futures by justifying acts of violence based on the false precepts of White Privilege and Black Liberation Theology.
The shooting of Terrence Crutcher was surely a tragedy, one that happens all too often in this country. Again, the question arises. Who’s really to blame? Surely police have a responsibility to their communities to exercise their training in a responsible manner and in some cases, they should show a little more restraint in the name of preserving life. On the other hand, the evidence strongly suggests that the black community has been used to create a revolutionary fervor which has done nothing but create mistrust and fear among police. With all of the attacks against police perpetrated by groups like Black Lives Matter what do you think was going through Betty Shelby’s head? Police nor citizens should be fearful of each other; however, because of the efforts of the liberal left our nation is now made up of groups who are motivated by a burning hatred based on lies told intended to create chaos.

David Risselada is a former U.S. Serviceman, commentator, and author of the book “Not on My Watch: Exposing the Marxist Agenda in Education.” David currently writes for Western Free Press.

Posted by Erik Rush in GUEST COMMENTARY
The FBI’s Darkest Days Were During Mueller’s Term

The FBI’s Darkest Days Were During Mueller’s Term

by Bob Bennett

The ecstatic reaction to Deputy AG Rosenstein’s choice of former FBI director Robert Mueller to be the special counsel in the Russia investigation may be justified, to the extent of Mueller’s bipartisan credibility. Many have gushed that he presided over the FBI’s development into an agency of counterterrorism after 9/11. But, these statements omit the fact that he also presided over the subsequent hobbling of the FBI in carrying out that mission.

Though it would not bear upon his acting as special counsel, before we beatify him altogether, we should recall that during his time as FBI director, Mr. Mueller permitted an appalling partnership between the FBI and the enemy itself, in the form of Islamist advocacy groups the DOJ had identified as fronts for Hamas during the Holy Land trial, in 2007-8. The federal judge in the case “stated in one ruling that ‘the Government has produced ample evidence to establish the associations with CAIR, ISNA and NAIT with … HAMAS.’” (p. 14-15)

The Global Jihad Movement scored its greatest win against the U.S. in 2011 when, as Patrick Poole wrote in TheBlaze, then–FBI director Mueller’s work with these groups had the result of hindering the agency’s fight against radical Islam.

Following a series of articles in September 2011 by “far-left blogger Spencer Ackerman at WIRED Magazine that claimed counter-terrorism trainers and materials used by the FBI were promoting ‘Islamophobia,’ a letter signed by fifty-seven U.S. Islamic groups, including the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), was sent to Obama’s then–counterterrorism czar, John Brennan.” He’s the man who once referred to Jerusalem as “al Quds.”

The almost immediate result was the Obama White House’s compelling the FBI and other agencies to purge all federal government training materials of “biased” materials—content linking Islam with terror.

On February 8, 2012, FBI Director Mueller met with representatives of some of the Islamic groups that had signed the demand letter, “including representatives from ISNA and MPAC.” Their intent was to check the progress of their demands for a ‘purge’ (the term they used) of the bureau’s counter-terrorism training materials…. They were told that more than 700 documents and 300 presentations had been purged from the FBI’s training.”—TheBlaze

Poole also noted that “In one Justice Department filing, prosecutors noted that ‘numerous exhibits were entered into evidence establishing … ISNA’s … intimate relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood,’” and “MPAC as an organization has been criticized for publications defending terrorist organizations and equating Islamic suicide attacks with Patrick Henry and ‘American freedom fighters.’”

A report on ISNA’s website reflected that “more than 160,000 pages of documents were reviewed by subject matter experts multiple times. Consequently, more than 700 documents and 300 presentations of material have been deemed unusable by the Bureau and pulled from the training curriculum.” [Emphasis added.]

Just who were these experts? When members of Congress asked for the names of the “subject matter experts” who had reviewed the training materials, the FBI actually classified their names, said Patrick Poole.

TheBlaze reported that on March 23, 2012, a meeting took place “between a representative from the FBI responsible for purging the counter-terrorism training materials, and attorneys and staffers with the House Judiciary Committee.”

“A document the FBI presented to the congressional staffers … was represented as the ‘guiding principles’ by which [training] materials were reviewed. But a review of the … document show[ed] a … shocking shift in U.S. government policies:

Training must clearly distinguish between constitutionally protected statements and activities designed to achieve political, social, or other objectives, and violent extremism….

This distinction includes recognition of the corresponding principle that mere association with organizations that demonstrate both legitimate (advocacy) and illicit (violent extremism) objectives should not automatically result in a determination that the associated individual is acting in furtherance of the organization’s illicit objective(s).

Patrick Poole writes that “a congressional staff attorney” explained to him that:

The FBI is clearly saying here that if you support a designated terrorist organization or group that engages in violence, but that same organization engages in some kind of non-violent activity, like religious or ideological instruction, your support for that terrorist organization is deemed by this administration as constitutionally protected.

As for exactly what was purged, a study done by terrorism expert Stephen Coughlin for Rep. Louis Gohmert revealed that certain words—some of which were used hundreds of times in the 9/11 Commission Report—had vanished from the FBI’s Counter-Terrorism Analytical Lexicon.”

For example, according to Gohmert, the 9/11 report mentioned the word “Islam” 322 times. However, Gohmert declares that the FBI training manual no longer contains the terms: “Islam,” “Muslim,” “jihad,” “Muslim Brotherhood,” “Hamas,” “Hezbollah,” “al-Qa’eda,” “caliphate,” “Sharia law,” even “enemy.” [See video at 22:40.]

Yet, then–FBI director Mueller told members of the House Judiciary Committee in 2012 that “I can say absolutely and with certainty that political correctness played no role in the efforts I undertook to make certain that we will give the best training to our personnel.”

Some might think that Mueller should have resigned before allowing this travesty.

Bob Bennett is a New York-based writer who has written op-eds for the Wall Street Journal and the NY Post, and has appeared on Fox and Friends and America’s Newsroom. He has traveled widely and written travel pieces for the NY Post, a cover article for the Jewish Press, and an op-ed for the medical journal Cancer Biotherapy & Radioimmunotherapy. Bob was also award-winning producer of a travel radio show heard on New York stations: WMCA, WNWK and 50,000 watt WOR and the national Sky Angel Network. He now blogs on Tea Party Nation, Tea Party Community and Red State Diaries.

Posted by Erik Rush in GUEST COMMENTARY
Barry’s New Job

Barry’s New Job

Dr. Jim Garrow

It didn’t take long for the saying to kick in – you know the one about “Idle hands are the devils workshop.” The leader of 27% of America is getting ready to put it into high gear and join the rabble on the front lines of the fight against all things American. He is just waiting for the right timing, the right mob and clearance from his Secret Service handlers to ensure that he looks wild and free while being tethered to the safety and security of his well-armed group of eight. Then he can really get into it, surrounded by eager young thugs, ready to rock and roll against “the man.”

Remember “the man?” Up until January, Obama had been “the man” for the past eight years. Like peeling back the onion, the underlying layer of Barry Soetoro was just waiting to be revealed. Transitioning from being the leader of the free world to being the commie-inspired agitator. I’m waiting for him to make the error of referencing Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and the struggle for equal rights for blacks. Mrs. King can then put a hurt on him with the truth of how he is in no way, style or fashion anything like the dearly-departed Reverend. That would be a classic battle come to think of it. All style versus all reality. The Poser versus the Champion. Obama might be better off thinking that one through a little more.

If folks ever got hold of the notion that he is merely an actor putting forth a characterization versus the track record of a real champion of the people like Dr. King, his goose would be cooked.

As the walls go up around the suburban home of the previous President, the metaphor of contraction, of protectionism, of trying to be the common man behind a moat and a bridge and battlements is pretty hard to hide. “Hypocrazy” is my word for it. The hypocrite whose reality is a far cry from what his press clippings would indicate, hiding behind the wall of separation while trying to convince the world that his is just one of us. The picture is worth a thousand words and I can’t wait to see if we will get some cell phone movies from the first public protest encounter showing folks being herded and shoved in order for the perfect photo op showing Barry as the man of the people. I hope no one is trampled or killed while trying to get a selfie with Barack, the man of the people. If things get really rough, Barry can always head back to Hawaii and put his feet up, throwing back a couple of Coors Lites while munching on fresh pineapple, writing his next book by Bill Ayers and Company.

Educator and former intelligence operative Dr. Jim Garrow was the runner-up to President Barack Obama for the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize. The Pink Pagoda, an organization started by Dr. Garrow, is responsible for having saved the lives of over 40,000 Chinese baby girls from China’s one-child policy.

Posted by Erik Rush in GUEST COMMENTARY
Suck it Up Hippies, a New Sheriff is in Town

Suck it Up Hippies, a New Sheriff is in Town

Dr. Jim Garrow

The almost apoplectic left wingers (communists) have been throwing everything possible at President Trump since Day One of his administration’s signing the documents of ascension. Now the travel ban has been stopped albeit temporarily as the left-leaners take up the Pelosi mandate to slow down the process so that it stops everything possible.

Hitting back with a vengeance is what the hate-mongers in the Democratic party are doing. Damn the torpedoes – and the will of We The People – batten down the hatches and clog up the arteries of government. In the end it is the people who pay the price for this planned interference and its natural fall out. Government – which sucked at getting things done before the election – will now go slower and hope that nobody takes notice of where the marching orders are coming from (hint – it’s the Democratic Party).

As Pelosi and crew signal clearly that their petulant disregard for the election results and their immature temper tantrums in blocking the Trump freight train, will only result in wreckage that is expensive and in some cases life threatening as legislation and healthy debate are set aside because of brinksmanship and the forced “nuclear option.”

Mind you, it is clearly the choice of the Democrats to take this tack. Reid and Pelosi forced the nuclear option on America and reaped the whirlwind in the election process. Forcing the President to use Executive dictate to enable and enact his promises from the election cycle will not slow him down much. But it will show clearly who is acting in the public’s interests versus the best interests of the elites who could always depend on the Democrats to step up to the mic and lie to the American people.

Progress will be made, and the refreshing thing is that we are seeing a President with a work ethic doing what he promised and not sitting with his feet on the Resolute desk dispensing phony wisdom to fawning media sycophants. The war on for our minds and our opinions has clear evidence showing what a President with the values of We The People can do rather than just say. Pontification is being replaced with action and the gnashing of Democrat teeth can be heard across the land.

Suck it up hippies, a new sheriff is in town…

Educator and former intelligence operative Dr. Jim Garrow was the runner-up to President Barack Obama for the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize. The Pink Pagoda, an organization started by Dr. Garrow, is responsible for having saved the lives of over 40,000 Chinese baby girls from China’s one-child policy.

Posted by Erik Rush in GUEST COMMENTARY
Control of Education is the Left’s Ace in the Hole

Control of Education is the Left’s Ace in the Hole

By David Risselada

Finally, after eight years of governance by a left wing radical intent on turning our nation upside down, a new President is at the helm. We can only hope that Donald trump proves himself to be the conservative we are expecting him to be. If he demonstrates otherwise we have a responsibility to hold him accountable in the same manner we attempted to hold the previous White House occupant accountable. As an author who offered up some pretty harsh criticisms of The Donald it must be admitted that some of his cabinet picks are outstanding.

For instance, Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt is a staunch constitutionalist and climate change denier which makes him the perfect choice for the EPA, if that unconstitutional monstrosity is to be reigned in. Marine Corps General James Mattis for Secretary of Defense has liberal heads spinning as he is not likely to play politically correct games designed to protect peoples feelings while putting the nation at risk. Other picks have created a bit of a controversy, like Rex Tillerson for Secretary of State for instance, or Elaine Chao, wife of an establishment Republican who did little to stop Obama’s agenda, Mitch McConnell. Truthfully, if something isn’t done about education it wont matter who Trump nominates because the next generation will simply be brought up being taught that they are all racist, warmongering, sexist islamophobes that don’t care about the planet. Trump’s pick for Education Secretary, Betsy Devos, vows to be a force for change in our education system. She is a strong advocate for school choice who vociferously stated her opposition to common core standards.

These are good signs, however; until someone acknowledges that our school systems have become a breeding ground for behavior based psychology and behavior modification techniques, which indoctrinate children into the tenants of progressivism, nothing will change.

If Betsy Devos is serious about reforming our education system the first thing she would do is eliminate the United States participation in UNESCO, which stands for The United Nations Educational, Scientific, Cultural Organization. The United States has been a member since 1946. Since this time the United Nations has dictated educational policy in the United States with the main goal being the elimination of  patriotism, individualism and any concept of what is right and wrong. This explains how the radical left has maintained such control over education, getting away with teaching racially divisive concepts like “white privilege,” while at the same time raising generations of American students who have no understanding of the constitutional republic in which they freely live.

During the early 1900’s, “Americas progressive era,” educators became convinced that the Soviet model of education was superior to America’s. Instrumental players like John Dewey, author of the Humanist Manifesto, worked to turn America’s education system into one where students were trained to become “socially acceptable” members of society as opposed to free thinkers able to exercise their own free will. Schools were designed to create the ideal citizen as opposed to the next great inventor, or entrepreneur.

In 1932, William Foster, national chairman of the Communist Party of the United States wrote the book Toward Soviet America. In this book he laid out his vision for education, which is strikingly similar to what we see today as much of what he describes has been accomplished.

“A U.S. Department of Education; implementation of a scientific materialist philosophy; studies revolutionized, being cleansed of religious, patriotic and other features of the bourgeois ideology; students taught on the basis of Marxian dialectical materialism, internationalism and general ethics of a new socialist society; present obsolete methods of teaching will be superseded by a scientific pedagogy. The whole basis and organization of capitalist science will be revolutionized. Science will become materialistic, hence truly scientific. God will be banished from the laboratories as well as from the schools.” (Foster, Toward Soviet America)

This is exactly what our school system teaches today. American students are convinced that America is the worlds greatest evil and believe an international government will solve many of the world’s problems. Science and psychology have completely eradicated religion in public schools and universities, and the idea that pursuing wealth and property is equated with selfishness and greed.

Unfortunately, the practice of psychology has taught educators that training students using behavior modification techniques can have lasting results. In other words, the earlier the radical left gets a hold of your child the more likely they are to grow up being a communist without even knowing it. B.F. Skinner wrote in his book Beyond Freedom and Dignity that manipulating the environment to create a fear of non-acceptance can be a greater form of control than an all out police state. This seems to be a popular theme as another well known psychologist, Bertrand Russell, says virtually the same thing.

“Scientific societies are as yet in their infancy. . . . It is to be expected that advances in physiology and psychology will give governments much more control over individual mentality than they now have even in totalitarian countries. Fitche laid it down that education should aim at destroying free will, so that, after pupils have left school, they shall be incapable, throughout the rest of their lives, of thinking or acting otherwise than as their schoolmasters would have wished. . . . Diet, injections, and injunctions will combine, from a very early age, to produce the sort of character and the sort of beliefs that the authorities consider desirable, and any serious criticism of the powers that be will become psychologically impossible. . . .”—-Bertrand Russell, 1953

As long as government remains in control of education it is certain they will use it to psychologically condition students to behave in manners that suit governments needs. Today, our kids are being inundated with propaganda concerning race, gun control and a belief that America has stolen the worlds resources. Their ability to clearly think and problem solve has been destroyed and replaced with an emotional outburst spouting off liberal talking points to anything that upsets their fragile egos. Unfortunately, the earlier they are exposed to this propaganda the more likely it is to become embedded in their brains as a permanent fixture.

“Education should aim at destroying free will so that after pupils are thus schooled they will be incapable throughout the rest of their lives of thinking or acting otherwise than as their school masters would have wished … The social psychologist of the future will have a number of classes of school children on whom they will try different methods of producing an unshakable conviction that snow is black. When the technique has been perfected, every government that has been in charge of education for more than one generation will be able to control its subjects securely without the need of armies or policemen.” —–Bertrand Russell quoting Johann Gottlieb Fichte

Donald Trump could appoint the most conservative cabinet in the history of the United States. Betsy Devos could be totally devoted to reforming America’s education system; however, failure to acknowledge the real issue while acting like school choice will solve our problems will accomplish nothing, aside from determining which school gets the privilege of indoctrinating your child. As long as the left remains in control of education they will continue to pound ideas into our children’s head that support their beliefs, not ours. Our children will be the next generation of useful idiots demanding social change they don’t understand, while standing in opposition to whatever positive changes Trump has made.

Control of education is the left’s long game folks. The biggest mistake we could make as a nation is become comfortable with the belief that winning this election means we have won the nation back. Therein lies the point of this whole article; many of us have been affected by our education to the point we are comfortable with government control over certain aspects of our lives. The only way things will change is if we remember that we control our government, not the other way around. We need to be a thorn in Trumps side America, make him remember why he won.

To learn my personal battle with left wing education check out my book Not On My Watch: Exposing the Marxist Agenda in Education

David Risselada is a former U.S. Serviceman, commentator, and author of the book “Not on My Watch: Exposing the Marxist Agenda in Education.” David currently writes for Western Free Press.

Posted by Erik Rush in GUEST COMMENTARY
The Feminist Movement’s Roots in Marxist Philosophy

The Feminist Movement’s Roots in Marxist Philosophy

By David Risselada

Despite the fact that Donald Trump is days away from assuming the presidency, the choo choo train of fundamental transformation continues to chug along. The left remains in firm control of America’s educational system; which means that no matter what conservative changes Trump may make, students will still be indoctrinated into the tenets of progressivism. The latest example of this is coming from the same place that white privilege education originated, Wisconsin. It is overwhelmingly obvious that there is an agenda to not only weaken and discredit American institutions, but the American male as well. The University of Wisconsin is set to launch its “men’s project” which is designed to teach male students to be more self aware of how their masculinity and manly attitudes affect the people around them. One of the main objectives, according to the college, is to address the negative characteristics of masculinity and the violence it allegedly causes. Also, the program seeks to encourage men to engage in critical self reflection and promote gender equality. Like White Privilege education, the gender equality/feminist movement has its roots in Marxist philosophy and is designed to break down the most basic of American institutions, the nuclear family.

Karl Marx viewed the family as a vehicle of class oppression. A strong family structure is essential to any free nation where people rely on themselves as opposed to government. To Marx and Engels however, the family was an instrument of exploitation. The family structure was a byproduct of the oppressive capitalist system where the woman’s labor was exploited and undervalued. Marxist theory on the family argues that the modern structure developed out of a need to pass on property through familial lines. As the development of agriculture and the use of livestock became more prevalent, the need to maintain and pass down private property became a dominating factor in family life; thus, relinquishing women into subservient roles. Therefore, in order to create true gender equality, private property must be eliminated.  These ideas were later developed into the modern feminist movement by left wing activist, Betty Friedan.

Friedan, who was a communist sympathizer, authored the book The Feminine Mystique where she attempted to convince American women that the lives they were living were no more than comfortable prison camps. Marxists thrive on the creation of discontent, and in the very first chapter of this book Freidan holds no punches. Attacking the very nature of what it meant to be a 20th century American woman, Friedan suggests they should all be wondering if there is more to life than simply serving their families.

“The problem lay buried, unspoken for many years in the minds of American women. It was a strange stirring, a sense of dissatisfaction, a yearning that women suffered in the twentieth century in the United States. Each suburban wife struggled with it alone. As she made the beds, shopped for the groceries, matched slip cover material, ate peanut butter sandwiches with her children, chauffeured cub scouts and brownies, lay beside her husband at night-she was afraid to ask herself the silent question. Is this all?”

In that very first paragraph Friedan exposes her Marxist leanings by citing the typical work of a house wife as a source of discontent. She attacks the very nature of motherhood by implanting the idea that caring for children is somehow unfulfilling, and that family life itself is a form of oppression by describing it as a buried, unspoken of problem. The feminist movement, with the help of Freidan’s book, has aided in the destruction of the American family by convincing women that they are oppressed victims in patriarchal oligarchy. This draws back to Antonio Gramsci and the idea of counter hegemony. The feminist movement represents a class of people whose values are antithetical to the dominate social group. This will create the necessary conflict which will, in the minds of Marxists, inevitably push society towards full communism.

The feminist movement, in it’s epic struggle for total equality between the sexes, has completely destroyed what it means to be equal by forcing the idea that men and women are the same onto society. Marx and Engels viewed marriage and the family from the same dogmatic precept that they viewed everything else. That there was no god and mankind held no more special significance than any other animal. This is completely antithetical to the way most Americans view marriage.

Despite the changes we have endured, America still holds a Christian majority that wants the institution of marriage protected. The institute of marriage, according to our founding fathers, was unique in the sense that it best prepared individuals for responsible citizenship which is essential for self governance. While Marxists view marriage as a vehicle of oppression which subjugates women while protecting the interests of the patriarchy, the truth is that marriage protects both men and women equally while ensuring mutual interests are protected. The marriage represented equality in the sense that it was an agreement that both parties agreed to in the interest of raising children and forming a stronger community.

The feminist movement insists that men and women be treated as complete equals; however, this destroys the true character of women and suggests that they have no special characteristics which define womanhood. When it comes to the issue of raising children it would be difficult to argue that women do not possess a nurturing characteristic that is unique to motherhood while men bring different parenting skills necessary to child rearing. The point is that marriage represents true equality between the sexes because a true marriage brings men and women together into the forming of one union working together to achieve a common goal; a stronger, more responsible society. The feminist movement, deriving it’s origins from the radical left, has sought to destroy this union because they understood that the family was the bedrock of any self governing society and in order to get people to accept state control it must be destroyed. The attempts to redefine masculinity while psychologically neutering the American male are part of this agenda and unless some drastic reforms are made to higher education, they will continue to fill our students heads with mush.

Originally published in Western Free Press.

David Risselada is a former U.S. Serviceman, commentator, and author of the book “Not on My Watch: Exposing the Marxist Agenda in Education.” David currently writes for Western Free Press.

Posted by Erik Rush in GUEST COMMENTARY
Deranged Democrats Plot Sabotage, Criminal Activity for Trump Inauguration

Deranged Democrats Plot Sabotage, Criminal Activity for Trump Inauguration

By Jim Kouri

In a newly released video, renowned investigative journalist James O’Keefe continued his far reaching probe of the allegedly deranged Democratic Party’s connections to anti-Trump, anti-GOP activities many of which border on criminal action, perhaps even acts of terrorism.

O’Keefe is credited with bringing down President Barack Obama’s top supporter known as ACORN, as well as uncovering Democratic Party contractors’ use of shady tactics to sabotage the campaign of now President-elect Donald Trump.

The young man who calls himself a citizen journalist has uncovered members of a secret organization calling themselves the DC Anti-Fascist Coalition who are planning several acts including an attack using Butanoic acid — also known as Butyric acid —  at the National Press Club during the Deploraball event scheduled for the evening of Thursday January 19.

The substance has in the past been used as a “stink bomb” by animal-rights groups to disrupt whaling crews, as well as by pro-life activists to disrupt operations at abortion clinics.

Although the evidence doesn’t point to any direct connection with the Democratic Party or its minions in the news media, some suspect that those members of the U.S. Congress such as Rep. John Lewis (pictured above), Rep. Luis Gutierrez and Rep. Keith Ellison, are boycotting the inauguration on Friday because they are aware that there will be violent incidents by Democrat-supported protesters and want to maintain their deniability.

“Anyone who is a student of history recognizes these anti-Trumpers as being very much like the Nazi Party ‘Brown Shirts’ who created havoc that helped the rise to power of Adolf Hitler. Also, look for these people to seek creating a ‘martyr’ to hold up to the people of American with the help of less-than-honest news media organizations,” said former NYPD detective and U.S. Marine Michael Snopes.

SECURITY FOR INAUGURATION

According to news analysis by former law enforcement official, Jim Kouri, appearing on the Conservative Base,  security surrounding the inauguration of Donald Trump is proving to be the most challenging in recent history, according to senior officials involved in its planning, largely because of the same forces of political rancor that shaped the race for the presidency.

The dozens of government and contracted agencies responsible for security at the Jan. 20 festivities are preparing for the possibility of large numbers of protesters pouring into the capital, along with what may be nearly 1 million supporters of Trump. For example, there is talk of one group of anti-Trump “potheads” who are claiming they will handout thousands of marijuana “joints” for protesters to smoke while protesting the inauguration.

In 2009, Obama’s inauguration was the first transfer of power in the post-9/11 era — and the first in which an African-American was taking the oath of office. Obama faced a rash of racist threats, as well as concerns about a terrorist plot that ultimately proved unfounded but sent the president-elect and top aides scrambling on the eve of his swearing-in.

Even so, Obama did not face the kind of large-scale protests expected to greet Trump when he officially arrives in Washington. The 2009 crowd of nearly 2 million people, a record, included few, if any, protesters and did not lead to a single arrest, according to Christopher T. Geldart, the director of homeland security for the District of Columbia.

A vast planning board of intelligence analysts, military personnel, and law enforcement officers numbering in the tens of thousands will be working to protect the inauguration and related activities.

In total, more than three dozen different agencies spread out across the capital will be working to prevent the occasion from becoming a platform for individuals or groups looking to do harm. Their work, begun months ago, has taken on a new urgency since Election Day and will soon include the imposition of a security perimeter around the Capitol, the Mall, and large parts of the city.

Soldiers and airmen from the South Dakota National Guard are preparing for joint support of the 58th Presidential Inauguration in Washington, Jan. 20, 2017, according to Air Force Master Sgt. Christopher Stewart.

“They will join hundreds of National Guardsmen from across the country to assist with security, crowd control and traffic management throughout the national capital region when President-elect Donald J. Trump takes the oath as the 45th president of the United States,” Sgt. Stewart wrote. “This joint service security group is preparing with refresher training on the safe and secure movement of civilians prior to, during and after inauguration events.”

“The purpose of the training is so that the two branches can blend together and work together as a cohesive team,” said Army Sgt. Kurtis Brown, 235th Military Police Company team leader. “For a joint operation like the Presidential Inauguration we all want to be on the same page.”

Instructors from a local air ambulance service provided medical training on Dec. 3 that was focused on medical issues civilians might develop at the inauguration.

“The practice was needed and beneficial to all of us, said Air Force Lt. Kristopher King,” 114th Security Forces chief of information protection. “It’s a great opportunity to make sure everyone is speaking the same language and using the same techniques.”

The costs of security alone are expected to exceed $100 million.

Jim Kouri, CPP, is founder and CEO of Kouri Associates, a homeland security, public safety and political consulting firm. He’s formerly Fifth Vice-President, now a Board Member of the National Association of Chiefs of Police, a columnist, and a contributor to the nationally syndicated talk-radio program, the Chuck Wilder Show.. He’s former chief of police at a New York City housing project in Washington Heights nicknamed “Crack City” by reporters covering the drug war in the 1980s. In addition, he served as director of public safety at St. Peter’s University and director of security for several major organizations. He’s also served on the National Drug Task Force and trained police and security officers throughout the country. Jim writes for Conservative Base.

Posted by Erik Rush in GUEST COMMENTARY