What Is “American Exceptionalism”?

Colonial Fort at Jamestown, Virginia - The Beginnings of American Exceptionalism

Colonial Fort at Jamestown, Virginia

President Obamas interpretation of American Exceptionalism is dead wrong, as is that of the Minion Media. At a 4 April, 2009 press conference President Obama was asked:

Q: whether you subscribe, as many of your predecessors have, to the school of American exceptionalism that sees America as uniquely qualified to lead the world, or do you have a slightly different philosophy? And if so, would you be able to elaborate on it?

A: I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism.

His answer confirms that our elected President is completely ignorant of the nature, and indisputable historical grounding of American Exceptionalism. Obama, and the progressive left incorrectly think that the term is a slight to the rest of the world, an arrogant, insulting slap down. They couldnt be more wrong!

In point of fact, American Exceptionalism is a matter of law. Its historically based, and undeniable because it speaks to our Constitution and the fact that the United States of America was the first country in the history of mankind, an exception to every country that came before and after, where the government was designed to protect the rights of the people. America was a country established “of the people, by the people, and for the people” instead of countries that used their people as props to maintain and build up governments. Whether they were pharaohs, Kings and Queens, dynasties or despots the pattern reigned throughout human history. The United States was the first and only exception to that rule.

In America, the people were in charge. The government was there to maintain our God given rights. “American Exceptionalism” is foundational to why we have achieved so much in such a short period of time. Going from 1776 as a penny less government to becoming the wealthiest most prosperous nation in the history of mankind. America has done more good, freed more people, created more wealth and prosperity, health and goodness for the world than any nation in history.

Because of our Constitution, in the United States, the government is there at the peoples’ bidding. That is “American Exceptionalism” Mr. President!

5 Reasons Bernie’s Nordic Model Fails

Bernie Sanders, and his army of supporters, cite countries like Sweden as utopian ideals that they wish to transform America into.

“I think we should look to countries like Denmark, like Sweden, and Norway and learn from what they have accomplished for their working people.”

Denmark, along with other Nordics, Sweden, Norway and Finland, runs a current account surplus, and its public finances are in good shape. It is often cited as a good example of democratic socialism, a combination of socialism with a multiparty democracy. Even President Obama is feeling the Nordic burn.

Here are the top 5 reasons why Sanders et. al. are wrong to tout these countries as models for America.

1. Each of these nations have small populations compared to the United States. The table below ranks US state populations vs. Sweden, Denmark, Finland and Norway. Sweden, by far the most populous Nordic Nation, would only rank as the 10th most populous state. The rest would rank 22nd or higher. Applying socialist policies from such small nations at a national level in the US, which is over 30 times bigger, is a dubious proposition at best.

US State Populations vs Nordic Nations

US State Populations vs Nordic Nations

 

 

 

 

2. Instead of looking to Europe for answers, we should look across the United States for them. The Tenth Amendment:

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, not prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

America’s 50 states, not to mention its territories, serve as policy laboratories, for experimentation, study, and replication when effective.

Texas, for example, is a great state to model other state economic policies after. It produces a disproportionate share of America’s recent economic growth and outlook. Where appropriate, national policies should be put in place to improve the economic climate for states and their people to prosper. Why weren’t Apple, Microsoft, Walmart, Facebook, GPS, Exxon Mobil, GE, HP, etc. created in Sweden?

California used to be America’s breadbasket, and model economy. But like Sweden, progressives and socialists are slaying the goose (capitalism) that laid the golden egg (wealth generation), and Americans are leaving California. Government by its nature is corrupt, our founders knew this. The larger the government, the greater the risk of corruption.

3. Unfortunately, like most socialist utopian goals, the truth of progressive policies are typically masked in fallacies, or the outright misrepresentation of history. “Nordic-philes” insinuate that socialist economies and welfare programs brought them wealth. This is incorrect.

Take Sweden for instance, Swedish economist Johan Norberg exposed the problems with Bernie’s adulation in this YouTube video.

Stefan Molynux goes into greater detail and pulls in the other Nordic States in his YouTube video “The Myth of Scandinavian Socialism.”

– The bottom line is that Sweden made its wealth as a free trade, open capitalist economy. The socialist welfare system came recently, and is drowning the world’s former #4 economy. Sweden is now retreating on its welfare promises, at the same time Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton are promising massive expansions of government programs in the United States.

4. Instead of looking at these Nordic States, which are slowly taxing themselves out of wealth, you should study Venezuela, as the most recent country to succumb to socialist dogma. In 19 short years, Hugo Chavez took Venezuela from a prosperous, oil-exporting nation, to a near failed nation state as a direct result instituting socialism.

UPDATE: Following my initial post, Leon Krauze from Univision asked Bernie Sanders this very question. If Bernie Sanders can’t face up to answer this question, his supporters likely won’t either.

Professional Venezuelan Women Forced Into Prostitution To Feed Their Families

President Nicols Maduro Prepares To Force Starving Venezuelans Into The Fields

“Dear Socialists of America, Let’s Chat About Venezuela.”

Socialists Stack Venezuelan Supreme Court

5. Marxist, progressive, and liberal politicians constantly search for the utopian application of the most destructive economic model in world history.

“The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other peoples’ money.” British PM Margaret Thatcher

There is never enough wealth transfer: ex. Switzerland’s welfare programs aren’t enough for many of its people, and it could be the first country to enact a national basic income when the Swiss vote this June 5th. Such a measure will swamp Switzerland’s economy.

BOTTOM LINE: The answers to prosperity and freedom are within America’s borders. If you want socialism, move to Venezuela. If you want prosperity, stick with what made America the greatest economy in the world. Shrink the federal government’s power, and let Americans drive the economy.

Latest:

How Energized Are Democrat Voters In 2016?

How energized are Democrat voters in the 2016 primaries so far? My last Blog showed that the GOP turnout has blown away both 2012 and 2008 so far, but what about the Democrats?

Using the same comparisons as used for the GOP, CHART 1 shows that the opposite trend prevails in the Democrat primaries. Voter turnout in 2016 is below the 2008 turnout in 11 of the 14 states shown.

Notes:

  • No totals from 2012 are shown, as President Obama was unchallenged as the incumbent president.
  • Iowa isn’t in the chart due to the State Democrat party’s reluctance to release an official vote total.
CHART 1: 2016 Compared With 2008 Vote Totals. More Votes Were Cast in 11 of 14 Contests in 2008.

CHART 1: 2016 Compared With 2008 Vote Totals. More Votes Were Cast in 11 of 14 Contests in 2008.

When the total votes from all 14 states are compared, as shown in CHART 2, the size of 2016’s Democrat turn out is revealed as lagging far behind 2008. So far, 2.6 million fewer votes were cast in 2016 than in 2012.

CHART 2: 2.6 Million More Votes Were Cast In 2008 In These 14 States Than In 2016.

CHART 2: 2.6 Million More Votes Were Cast In 2008 In These 14 States Than In 2016.

So how would Hillary Clinton be doing if she ran against the winner’s totals from 2008?

CHART 3 compares the winning candidate vote totals from each of the first 14 states, minus Iowa as noted. The data shows that the winner in 2016 would have lost with the same votes in 2008 in 9 of the 14 states.

CHART 3: The Winners In 2016 Would Have Only Carried Only 5 of 14 States vs 2008

CHART 3: The Winners In 2016 Would Have Only Carried Only 5 of 14 States vs 2008

TABLE 1 shows the raw vote totals, and breaks out the states won by then Senator Obama in 2008, and Hillary Clinton, the 2016 front-runner, in blue. Barack Obama would have won 5 states vs. the 9 he actually won in 2008. Hillary Clinton would have won only 5 states, vs. the 9 she has won so far in 2016.

TABLE 1: The 2016 Willer's Votes Would Have Only Carried 4 of 14 States vs. 2008.

TABLE 1: The 2016 Winner’s Votes Would Have Only Carried 5 of 14 States vs. 2008.

So what does this data mean?

First, it indicates that the 2016 Democrat turnout is lagging way behind 2008. Going into this weekends contests, Democrat votes were 2.6 million fewer than in 2008. Added with the GOP increased turnout, there is a delta of 6.3 million votes in favor of Republicans. Some of that delta is the result of democrat and independent voters moving into the Republican primaries.

Second, if the general election follows the path of the primaries, it bodes well for the eventual Republican nominee. The challenge for the GOP is to keep the energy up, carry every primary vote into November, and to unite the party.

The Communist Manifesto – Top 10 Most Notorious Elements

Karl Marx - German Philosopher and Father of Marxism

Karl Marx – German Philosopher and Father of Marxism

This primer summarizes the key points in Karl Marx (18 May 1818 – 14 March 1883) and Friedrich Engels’ (28 November 1820 – 5 August 1895) infamous 1848 work, and the resulting political movement that slaughtered an estimated 100+ million people across the planet. It is also the ideological predecessor of the teachings of Saul Alinsky, the father of America’s radical progressive movement.

Despite the fall of the Soviet Union, Communism, Marxism and Socialism are alive and growing internationally, including growing in strength within the United States.

1. The Communist Manifesto was written by Communists of “various nationalities” with the intent of:

  1. “Openly, in the face of the whole world, publish their views, aims, …tendencies”
  2. “In short, the Communists everywhere support revolutionary movement against the existing social and political order of things.”
  3. “They openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions”

2. “General Intent Across All Countries”

  1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
  2. *A heavy and progressive or graduated income tax.
  3. Abolition of all right of inheritance. (Death Tax in the U.S.)
  4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
  5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly. (Nearly all student loans are now owned by the Federal Government).
  6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
  7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State.
  8. Equal liability of all to labor. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
  9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equitable distribution of the population over the country. (President Obama’s efforts to distribute populations across the U.S. through immigration and HUD policies)
  10. *Free education for all children in public schools. Destroy home education by socializing education.

*Fully instituted within the U.S.

3. Communist Foundational Premise:

World History is the history of class struggles, oppressors vs oppressed, in constant opposition to one another. The oppressors hoarded civilizations wealth, while the oppressed toiled under the oppressors for meager cash payment.

  • Named modern oppressors the “Bourgeois”.
  • Named modern oppressed the “Proletariat”.

4. The Bourgeois is responsible for all of humanity’s ills, including:

  1. Stripping every occupation (including professionals) into paid wage laborers, reducing them to slaves.
  2. Craftsmen were reduced to unskilled machine operators.
  3. Reduction of the family relation to a mere money relation.
  4. “Compels all nations to adopt the Bourgeois mode of production…” creating a world after “…its own image”.
  5. Massive global productive expansion that created an “…epidemis of over-production”.
  6. The strength advantage of male laborers over women was eliminated by modern industrial machinery.

“…not only has the Bourgeois forged the weapons that bring death to itself; it has also called into existence the men who are to wield those weapons-the modern working class-the proletarians.”

5. Every class struggle is a political struggle.

The struggle between Bourgeois and Proletariat grows from localized struggles, into trade unions with national struggles, and eventually global revolution, where the Proletariat inevitably overthrows the Bourgeois.

“The Communists do not form a separate party opposed to other working-class parties”.

Communists ally themselves with numerous parties who oppose the bourgeoisies in “…whatever country they are in”.

6. Communists believe themselves above the working-class parties of every country:

They are the “…most-advanced and resolute understand the line of march the conditions and results of the proletarian movement”.

7. The Stated Theory of Communism: “The abolition of private property.”

Capital is a collective product only by the united action of all members of society, can it be set in motion. Bares eerie resemblance to President Obama’s comment “If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.”

“Capital is a social power and should be converted into common property.”

“The average price of wage-labour is the minimum wage”. Described as requisite in bare existence as a laborer.

Freedom under bourgeois means “…free trade, free selling and buying”. Communists intend to do away with buying and selling, and property. Disagrees with the argument that once private property is abolished, that all work will cease, and universal laziness will take hold.

8. Communists intend to abolish the family, believing bourgeois poisoned the family’s foundation. Disgusted with the “…hallowed co-relation of parent and child.” Does Hillary Clinton’s book, It Takes a Village, have it’s root philosophy in this marxist concept?

Look at marriage with disdain, as it is also corrupted by the bourgeois. Want to create an openly legalized community of women.

9. Intend to abolish countries and nationality. Is this what Obama is doing by subverting U.S. sovereignty to international actors? Is the leftist UN global government intent a manifestation of this?

10. Communism abolishes eternal truths, all religion, all morality.

The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralize all instruments of production in the hands of the State; i.e. of the proletariat organized as the “ruling class”.

Noted Author Trevor Loudon’s discussion of communist Influence, and the devious means used to expand it.

Abolition of all morality looks like Saul Alinsky’s 11 Rules of Ethics of Means and Ends

Examples of Communist Influence In US:

Examples of Democrat Party Leaders Unable to Differentiate Socialist From Democrats:

Who Is The Real JV Team?

IMG_0543

President Obama Speaking to DHS Employees.

On 7 January, 2014 President Obama made his now infamous and grossly inaccurate remark about the Islamic terrorist organization ISIS:

The analogy we use around here sometimes, and I think is accurate, is if a jayvee team puts on Lakers uniforms that doesn’t make them Kobe Bryant,

The Presidents JV team continues not only to expand its territory, recruiting, funding and brutality but also the length of its deadly reach. They blew up a Russian Airliner killing 244 people and just over a month later murdered 129 people in Paris. The President stated the day before the attack that his strategy had them contained. The problem here is two fold. First, no foreign policy expert from either party knows what President Obamas strategy is. Second, whatever the strategy is doing, it certainly isn’t containing ISIS.

Perhaps the Presidents foreign policy advisors are really the JV Team. In this case, to take from the President, they may be wearing Lakers uniforms, but that doesn’t make them Kobe Bryant!

Does the President have his JV team scouring the internet for the reason ISIS attacked Paris. Im sure that if they scrub YouTube long enough the State Department can find the video responsible. If Obama can catch the disgusting video’s maker, and also put them in jail, maybe ISIS will live and let live…but of course they won’t!

“Illegal” Amnesty

Today is a tragically sad day in American history. Tonight, the president violated his oath of office and threw this country into a constitutional crisis by legalizing at least 4.5 million illegal aliens. The truth, is that number will be far larger.

As part of the illegal amnesty, Obama will unilaterally allow the parents of children in this country illegally, and the children of parents who are in this country illegally, to also emigrate freely to America. Adding insult to injury, according to the State Department, taxpayers will even be on the hook to fly illegal immigrants into the US, from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras. Tonight, Obama spit in the eye of every poor sap who got in line, and followed the immigration laws passed to protect this country, the American people, our jobs and our way of life. In the process he devalued, yes devalued what it means to be an American citizen. Instead of it being something that people strive for, something that they work for, something that they dream for and that they follow our established laws for, he will give it away for nothing. In the process he will create a new lawless and dependent class within this country. The fallout will reverberate through our nation if not righted.

Perhaps the President’s efforts here are meant to block the repeal of Obama care by creating another firestorm crisis to overload the country’s ability to respond. Regardless of his desires or intent he knows that his actions are illegal. He’s clearly said so many times.

Now, the Republicans must govern. It’s time for them to take the Senate and with sound strategy march through a positive agenda for this country. They must unwind the destruction that’s been wrought, restore freedom, liberty and enable economic growth. It’s time to show leadership, and to reestablish the GOP’s credibility within the eyes of the American people.

Update:

– President Obama admits to changing US immigration law, in violation of his Oath of Office, and the Constitution.

Obama’s Contradictory Immigration Plans

rp_1200px-Seal_of_the_President_of_the_United_States.svg_.pngPresident Obama has been vocal about his intent to legalize millions of illegal immigrants through executive action. Despite overwhelming Republican gains in Tuesday’s midterm election, the President plans to press on with his “pen and a phone”.

At his 5 Nov 14, post election Press Conference, President Obama stated:

“And, you know, I think that the best way, if folks are serious about getting immigration reform done, is going ahead and passing a bill and getting it to my desk. And then the executive actions that I take go away. They’re superseded by the law that is passed”.

How is it that President Obama’s Executive orders can supersede laws passed by Congress and signed by previous presidents, but new immigration laws supersede his Executive Orders? The U.S. Constitution is clear that the Executive Brach is charged with executing laws duly passed by Congress. The President can’t constitutionally write them away with his “pen”, and he clearly acknowledged the limits of the POTUS’s authority when he stated “They’re superseded by the law that is passed.” That makes his statement, and expected illegal amnesty, an even more egregious affront to the American people, and the rule of law.