GOP Misses Opportunity In Iowa –Again

Carl Jackson
-
0
GOP Misses Opportunity In Iowa –Again

Sometimes I wish I could stomach being a Democrat. Why? Not because I believe in any of their policies, but because they know how to win elections and drag the country into socialism with every chance they get, hence the word “progressive.” The first Latino presidential candidate ever to win the Iowa caucus happened to be a conservative Republican senator out of Texas named Ted Cruz. Since his victory, what have you heard from the GOP leadership, the tea party, media and even rank-and-file Republicans? Crickets! Whether you like Ted Cruz or not, the left would never make this mistake.

Despite being biracial, President Obama will always be known as the “first black president,” perhaps rightfully so. Democrats will wisely and predictably utilize that talking point for decades to come to deter blacks from exiting their party. On the other hand, white, racist, Bible-thumping tea party Iowans gave a Latino their sacred vote, and we don’t even take time to recognize it. No headlines, no celebration, nothing! Shame on us! What do we do instead? We immediately turn our attention to the third-place finisher, the preferable Latino, I presume, Marco Rubio. Furthermore, we convince ourselves that anyone who wins Iowa surely can’t go on to win the nomination – despite knowing that in 2008, Mike Huckabee didn’t have the organization or the finances to capitalize on his Iowa victory. The same was true for Rick Santorum in 2012, even with the Iowa caucus debacle that didn’t declare him the winner for nearly a week.

Consider the fact that everyone and their mama came out against Sen. Cruz, yet he won Iowa anyway. Jerry Falwell Jr., president of Liberty University, endorsed Donald Trump, as did Sarah Palin, former Sen. and GOP presidential nominee Bob Dole, and even John McCain made it clear he preferred Donald Trump before the caucusing began.

Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad virtually endorsed Donald Trump himself, strongly condemning Cruz for coming out against government welfare in the form of ethanol subsidies. The governor’s son, a lobbyist, followed Ted Cruz’s campaign around like an ankle-biting chihuahua, causing a ruckus at his campaign stops. The result: Iowan voters repudiated government welfare.

Republicans don’t have a diversity problem. They have a presentation problem. Even liberal Latino’s would appreciate a fellow Hispanic rising to the heights of success. They’re much more forgiving and fair when it comes to political issues than blacks. If you give their community something to take pride in, they do! We missed it! Why? Because we’re too concerned about Ted Cruz’s negatives than strategically growing the base, without compromising our principles.

For years Republicans have been told we’re angry, warmongering, money-hungry bigots. We’ve failed to correct those narratives along the way. When you’re speaking with your liberal family member or neighbor, aren’t you pleasantly surprised when you realize you have more in common than not? On a micro level, one-on-one conversation is often the best way to persuade those on the left when communicating our values. On a macro level, conservatives need to learn how to capitalize on any victory that discredits the negative labels imposed on us by Democrats.

George W. Bush’s unwillingness to celebrate his accomplishments during his presidency allowed Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, their cohorts in the media and the Democratic Party to define his entire presidency. As a result, we got President Obama. Judging by the results of the Iowa caucus, it appears we haven’t learned our lesson.

Thank God the Democrats don’t have a Latino in the race. There’d be bumper stickers by now.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2016/02/gop-misses-opportunity-in-iowa-again/#Cw1e3SgHmJ1KOFQo.99

 

Are You A Voter The Founders Would Be Proud Of?

Carl Jackson
-
0

Are You A Voter The Founders Would Be Proud Of?

“Winning” Is Not Synonymous With Liberty

Carl Jackson
-
0
“Winning” Is Not Synonymous With Liberty

The left loves robots. Their obsession with sameness over individuality while claiming they hold the mantle on diversity is laughable. They won’t admit to this, of course. They’ll simply erect more regulatory agencies like the EPA that are designed to make you feel moral while losing your individual liberties; or they’ll coerce you to succumb to government programs like Obamacare. If neither of those work, they’ll give out more goodies at your expense, hoping you’ll become addicted to their government crack. Incrementally, we all become socialist.

It may be true that many on the left like different types of people, but they’re certainly not fond of people who hold traditional moral values that are found outside of Hollywood and their indoctrination camps, better known as college campuses. Truth be told, for liberal politicians to succeed, you must fail. Their employment is determined by how dependent you become upon them – the government. The opposite is true for Republicans, or at least use to be. Are we all socialists now?

I live in a moderate to conservative county, in Orlando, Florida. However, my neighboring county is run by Democrats. As I drove down one of its residential streets last week, I observed brand new county-issued trashcans as far as I could see. They were huge! Each home had received two of them – one for recycling and the other for garbage. One had a blue lid the other had a green lid. It occurred to me that we no longer recognize socialism when it’s sitting on our own curbs. Does that sound “extreme”? That’s what progressives are hoping you’d think.

One gentleman I know received some of those county-issued trashcans. He told me he had just bought two new ones himself recently that he didn’t know what to do with. The government-issued cans were too large for his garage, so he was planning to build a small enclosure on the side of his house to hide them. Do you notice what happened there? He isn’t a liberal, yet he had no problem accepting the new government trashcans – although he had his own and didn’t need them. Additionally, he planned to build an enclosure that wasn’t necessary a week prior. Lastly, he wasn’t going to take action to give them back. Why? I contend because everyone on the block had one. Why should he be left out? That’s why liberals, even the ones running in the GOP primary, win.

I keep hearing “we need a businessman in the White House.” “We need someone who can provide jobs and get this economy back on track.” Really? There’s no doubt business experience would help any president in office, but what we need is a commander in chief that understands the Separation of Powers. Restraint is the most important attribute required of our next president. Regulatory agencies have been flying under the radar in a seek-and-destroy mission to circumvent the Congress and usurp the power of your vote. But what occurs right in front of our eyes is what leads me to believe we won’t be choosing a constitutionalist this year.

Maintaining liberty isn’t a part-time job. “Winning” is not synonymous with liberty. The duties of the president are few and defined. Here’s a list, lest we fall for the next Obama that just so happens to belong to our party:

  1. Chief of state for all Americans.
  2. Commander in chief over our military.
  3. The chief executive officer of the Executive branch of our government only.
  4. The chief diplomat in handling foreign affairs.
  5. The chief architect for legislation, but not a lawmaker.
  6. The conscience of the nation when granting pardons or reprieves for justice’s sake.

I hope we’ll all do our part to “Make America ‘Exceptional’ Again.”

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2016/01/winning-is-not-synonymous-with-liberty/#5bD4OHmHMiyglTB2.99

 

“WINNING” IS NOT SYNONYMOUS WITH LIBERTY

Carl Jackson
-
0
“WINNING” IS NOT SYNONYMOUS WITH LIBERTY

“WINNING” IS NOT SYNONYMOUS WITH LIBERTY

I use some of this weeks top stories to break down the Separation-of-Powers and why they must be maintained so we’re not bullied by politicians.

#OscarsSoDemocrat: Black Lives Matter Goes Hollywood

Carl Jackson
-
0
#OscarsSoDemocrat: Black Lives Matter Goes Hollywood

It must be difficult being a black multi-millionaire in Hollywood. Think of all the grievances you have to overcome in your head to suppress your “success guilt.” Imagine how stressful it must be to make it out of the ‘hood, while trying to maintain your ghetto pass. That’s a hard balance!

Nothing says “America is a racist nation” like a bunch of rich black actors in Hollywood that are in the top one-tenth of 1 percent of income earners. While most Americans are striving to achieve the American Dream, Hollywood elites like Spike Lee, Tyrese Gibbons, Snoop Dogg and Jada Pinkett Smith have surpassed it by far. Question: Are the Oscars really “so white,” as many black actors claim, or could it be they’re “so Democrat”? I contend it’s the latter. I assure you that many of the white liberals that oversee the Academy’s nominating process were under the illusion they were “down with the struggle.” Therefore, they could judge films, actors, attendance of movie goers strictly based upon merit instead of racial quotas. Wow, were they wrong!

Civil rights hustler Al Sharpton (aka Big Perm) is calling for a “tune out” of the 88th Academy Awards show that’s set to air on Feb. 28. Others have gone so far as to ask the host of this year’s awards ceremony, Chris Rock, to step down.

What has gotten some of America’s richest residents, who just happen to have dark skin, up in a tizzy? The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences nominated 20 actors and actresses for awards in the most coveted acting categories, and all of them happen to be white. Coincidence? Many black actors in Hollywood believe so. Granted, there are times when racism manages to lift its ugly head to the surface of the heap pile, but this ain’t one of them!

Scratch your head and think for a second. Can you recall any film in 2015 in which a leading black actor or actress put on a stellar performance? Please don’t say Will Smith, in the politically charged film “Concussion.” Give me a break! If anything, black actors are suffering losses at the ballot box and their snooty awards ceremonies because audiences are tired of being preached to rather than entertained on the big screen by liberals of all stripes and colors.

Look, I’d be a fool to say that racism no longer exist in America. I’d be just as foolish to believe that there weren’t many racial barriers that had to be overcome in the film and television industry at one point of time in history. It’s hard to believe that’s the current state of mind in Hollywood when Will Smith, Samuel L. Jackson and Denzel Washington are amongst the highest-paid actors in Hollywood during years where they act in good films.

If you haven’t seen it yet, it’s worthwhile to watch Larry Elder, author and radio show host, on Prager University, disputing Obama’s claim that “racism is in America’s DNA.” If that’s a true statement, then it’s a waste of time for black Hollywood actors to demand remedial affirmative action measures for the Oscars. But it’s not true! America has come a long way in race relations. In 1960, 60 percent of Americans said they’d never vote for a black president. Obama was elected twice! This is the only time I may have approved of racism – strictly on Election Day 2008 and 2012. Otherwise, it’s despicable and evil!

The bottom line is this: When you’re worth is defined by an Oscar nomination or how many people worship you due to your wealth, chances are you’ll be let down a whole lot more than those of us who find our worth in the God that created us.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2016/01/when-1-percenter-black-actors-crank-up-the-whine/#hId2UP5VUbLmOZ2b.99

 

Cruz or Tyranny: Two Important Questions Conservatives Aren’t asking For 2016

Carl Jackson
-
1
Cruz or Tyranny: Two Important Questions Conservatives Aren’t asking For 2016

I feel like an “outsider” amongst my own people – not blacks, but conservatives. Conservatism is as conservatism does, or at least it used to be that way just one year ago.

President Obama missed his opportunity to strengthen America. Are we going to miss ours? Those that elected him hoped he would unite our country among racial and ethnic lines, strengthen relationships with our global allies, and fix a perceived “economic crisis,” which in comparison to today’s national debt and annual deficit spending seems more and more like a balanced budget. I’m convinced our generation will get one shot to fundamentally restore our constitutional values. This election is that important! Are we seriously going to choose the wrong leader at the right time? Admittedly, I’m beginning to think so.

Six months ago, I would’ve never imagined so many “conservatives” could potentially become as detrimental to the future of America as Obama voters – either unable or unwilling to discern effective rhetoric from reality, campaign tactics from core convictions. Amongst the so-called “establishment,” “bipartisanship” has become code language for choosing a political party over principles. Likewise, and even more disturbing, many in the conservative movement have quickly fallen prey to populism despite tangible evidence of waffling convictions from our leading candidate, Donald Trump. I assumed conservatives would settle for nothing less than a proven constitutionalist in the White House this time around. Someone that would work to restore our Judeo-Christian heritage and reestablish the rule of law and our Separation-of-Powers, as outlined by our Constitution. Boy, was I wrong.

It’s uniquely possible that the very movement that rose up to save America, the Tea Party, may be remembered in light of history as accomplices to her demise. I refuse to be one of them, and you can too.

Understanding how far left America has shifted under President Obama’s reign, Republicans are rightfully asking “who’s most capable of defeating Hillary Clinton in the general election?” It’s a fair question given she’d be the third term of Obama. However, it isn’t the only question we should be asking.

We have the opportunity of a lifetime! Were we to win the White House with a candidate that campaigns as a conservative but governs as a moderate, we may skip an entire generation of voters who have never seen a “real conservative” in the White House. Can you imagine an entire generation of kids who were never taught about the importance of our Judeo-Christian heritage, our Constitution, free speech, religious freedom, the Second Amendment, free market capitalism, less government intrusion, and maintaining a strong military force? Imagine no more – we’re there!

The good news however, is that we’re not so far removed from the Constitution that it can’t be restored. The bad news unfortunately, is if a proven moderate to Progressive like Donald Trump, or socialists like Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders were to win the election, America as we’ve known her is done.

We all “want” our candidate to win. But at what cost? What we “need” is a devout constitutionalist. Stop and ask yourself, is your guy or gal the right one for such a time as this in American history? How can you know? You have to look beyond November! In Exodus 18:21 Moses’ father-in-law, Jethro, encouraged Moses to choose good men amongst the Israelites to help him judge and settle disputes so that he wouldn’t wear himself out. The criteria was as follows (ASV): “…you shall select out of all the people able men who fear God, men of truth, those who hate dishonest gain…”

Stop! Think! Who should that eliminate from the race? Furthermore, knowing that, consider these two questions before you choose your candidate:

1) Which candidate is most likely to begin restoring our Constitutional heritage by listening to “We The People,” respecting the boundaries of the Separation of Powers, reducing the overall size of the federal government and its bureaucracies, nominate constitutional Originalist to the Supreme Court, and abide by the 10th Amendment, leaving all decisions to the states that are not outlined in the Constitution?

2) Which candidate has the proven moral leadership over a long period of time, as well as the training and expertise to utilize our three branches of government effectively without over stepping their bounds?

We all want a fighter, but what about a Constitutionalist? Have you asked that? A good president won’t be good enough this year! A good president, without a fundamental understanding of who God is and why He matters, as well as why our founding documents are exceptional, may cut taxes for a spell, build up our military, defeat ISIS, build walls on our borders, but yet and still neglect to change the trajectory of our out of control federal government. Can you say George W. Bush?

Have we become so blinded by our disgust with the GOP “establishment,” that we’ve become more anti-establishment than conservative? Let me be Frank, Ted Cruz is everything Donald Trump is portraying himself to be. It is the difference between a man campaigning and a man with core convictions. We could get as many as four Supreme Court picks during the next presidency. Ted Cruz is the only one with the expertise to make sure we get Originalists on the bench. I hoped we conservatives learned our lesson after Obama won the White House.

“Hope and change,” has been replaced by “Make America Great Again.” I don’t want a “great America!” I want an “exceptional America.” There’s a huge (say huge like Trump) difference! When are we going to start choosing morality over mantra? Thus far, apparently not in 2016.

Read more at: http://townhall.com/columnists/carljackson/2016/01/21/cruz-or-tyranny-two-important-questions-conservatives-arent-asking-for-2016-n2107908/page/full

 

1...555657...72Page 56 of 72