Tag Archives: socialism

President Trump: "America Will N O T Become a Socialist Nation!" 

by Rev. Austin Miles
WASHINGTON, D.C. 2/5/10–It is interesting as a journalist how two or three writers come up with the same headline at the same time when doing a story. Yep, it happened last night as one sentence was pulled out of the SOTU address by our president to herald a new story. Several used that statement in their headlines. The sentence this column used was written immediately after the address.

Having seen every State of the Union Address by every president since the age of 12 (85 now) this writer is now qualified to say that this was the best State of the Union Address ever made. It was a message of reconciliation, of two rival parties being able to work together for one cause–the good of America. There was also a message of hope, accomplishments and patriotism.
Never has America been a more divided country than during this century and especially at the time of this event.. No matter how beneficial to the people a new law or idea could bring, the Democrats immediately come against it. Their entire goal seems to be to sabotage everything Trump offers. Then again, the Democratic Party is actually the Communist Party.
Chuck Schumer was seen in the audience with a perpetual sly-snake half grin on his face as he mentally engineered how to take down President Trump. For political correctness this column apologizes to the snakes in this world for suggesting they have faces like Schumer.
Nancy Pelosi sat lemon-faced during most of the address even though there were times she HAD to applaud and stand up or face criticism. The Dems intended to sit out every standing ovation when President Trump hit it out of the park. The points he made were so solid that the Dems and Pelosi popped up, then glanced around confused as though an invisible spring sprung them up to their feet.
A big protest was carefully planned by ‘women mistreated by misogynists such as President Trump (?)  They all dressed in white, taking up a big visible section of the chambers to bring attention to themselves.  The white dresses indicate how they are being held down by men and do NOT stand a chance of succeeding in this male dominated world. How’s that again?
These poor mistreated women in white who were protesting are official Delegates of the U.S. House of Representatives.  The House now has more than 100 women in office. Ninety of those are Democrats.  Not only that, President Trump, a highly successful businessman, has put more women in executive positions than anyone on record. ‘Held back’ women indeed! And the Democrat-Communist women are in the majority of women holding office in D.C. Yet they still are not satisfied.
When President Donald Trump saluted the record number of women elected to Congress in the November elections, Democrats in white leapt to their feet, high-fived each other and chanted, “U-S-A.!”
Republicans jumped to their feet again and again when Trump said the U.S. needs to crack down on people entering the US illegally. Mostly, Democrats stayed seated. Some booed when Trump described immigrants on the march to the US.  Some chuckled when he referred to a “tremendous onslaught” of people coming over the border. Most sat in silence when he said that encouraging illegal immigration was “cruel.” These Demrats are destructive mental cases who do not want the U.S. to succeed. They want only a Socialist-Communist government where only the leaders will have excellent living conditions while the rest live in squalor and poverty.
The neighbors were probably jarred by the word, “Y E S”  that emanated from my home during the SOTU address when our President stated firmly that; “America will NOT become a Socialist Nation.”
Our president went on to say:   “We stand with the Venezuelan people and their noble quest for freedom and we condemn their brutality of the Maduro​ regime, whose socialist policies have turned that nation from being the wealthiest in South America into a state of abject poverty and despair.Here in the United States, we are alarmed by the new calls to adopt socialism in our country.  America was founded on liberty and independence and not government coercion, domination, and control. We are born free and we will stay free.
“Tonight, we renew our resolve that America will never be a socialist country.”  A roar of approval could be heard. The camera then settled on Bernie Sanders in the audience whose face was so sour he must have been raised on dill pickles. That statement meant a lot to this writer personally, who totally rejects Socialism and Communism, knowing full well what it’s like to be under that dictatorship.
Again this speech was beautifully crafted and delivered showing President Trump’s eagerness to work together with the Dems for the good of our country. But the Demrats wouldn’t have it. They only want to destroy America. They are not capable of civil discourse..
The Democrat Socialist Bernie Sanders is set to announce his presidential  bid “imminently.”  Bernie would join Sens. Kamala Harris, Kirsten Gillibrand, Elizabeth Warren, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, and former Obama HUD Secretary Joaquin Castro in making their 2020 plans official. Try not to have nightmares tonight.

THE BLM: A Case Study in the Perversion of Government

In the first article I wrote titled, The BLM: A Case Study in the Perversion of Government, I highlighted the fact that Bruce Babbitt, Secretary of the Interior in 1993 was a co-founding member of the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC). When Bill Clinton came into office, he was the Chairman of the DLC.
The germ cell for the DLC was a group of Democrats who were called the Atari Democrats. Atari was the first real computer game. Atari sought political support for what was then a budding technology industry located in Silicon Valley, CA. They wanted government support to ensure that the technology industry stayed in the U.S. rather than being moved offshore. A group of Democrats – Al Gore, Dick Gephardt, Tim Wirth, Gary Hart just to name a few, were all Atari Democrats.
Al From was the Chairman of the Democratic Caucus from 1981 to 1985. As a political strategist, after the loss of the 1980 and 1984 presidential elections, he formed the Democratic Leadership Council to “reinvent democrats” – casting off traditional liberal politics. The Atari Democrats were the core of the newly formed DLC forming the New Democrat Network (NDN).

Technology + Environmentalism

Within the context of the DLC’s redefinition of the Democratic Party, there was a confluence of politics and ideology. The politics involved government support for the Silicon Valley technology companies and the ideology was environmentalism.   The combination of the two with the leaders of the DLC at the pinnacle of power gave rise to what has become essentially a new religion conceived in the delusionary sphere of gold fever. Big money buys true belief. The Earth Summit held in Rio de Janiero in 1992 took it global.
It was within that context that our government was “reinvented” during the Clinton Administration.   You can see from Al Gore’s First 100 Days in Officehow they hit the ground running with the green-tech, reinvention of government agenda.   It was within this context that the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) – caretakers of the nation’s natural resources was “reinvented” under the leadership of DLC co-founder, Bruce Babbitt.

Third Way International

On June 1, 1998, the New Democrats Online had a description of what they called The Third Way. Third Way was the non-descript way they chose to label the movement described in the previous section. Below, in the description, they describe it this way:
The core principles and ideas of this “Third Way” movement are set forth in The New Progressive Declaration: A Political Philosophy for the Information Age.
The Declaration was an attempt to define a philosophical basis for the Third Way Movement which was more accurately defined by greed, avarice and a lust for power.
The following is the text from the description of the Third Way posted on the New Democrats Online website.
America and the world have changed dramatically in the closing decades of the 20th century. The industrial order of the 20th century is rapidly yielding to the networked “New Economy” of the 21st century. Our political and governing systems, however, have lagged behind the rest of society in adapting to these seismic shifts. They remain stuck in the left-right debates and the top-down bureaucracies of the industrial past.
The Democratic Leadership Council, and its affiliated think tank theProgressive Policy Institute, have been catalysts for modernizing politics and government. From their political analysis and policy innovations has emerged a progressive alternative to the worn-out dogmas of traditional liberalism and conservatism. The core principles and ideas of this “Third Way” movement are set forth in The New Progressive Declaration: A Political Philosophy for the Information Age.
Starting with Bill Clinton’s Presidential campaign in 1992, Third Way thinking is reshaping progressive politics throughout the world. Inspired by the example of Clinton and the New Democrats, Tony Blair in Britain led a revitalized New Labour party back to power in 1997. The victory of Gerhard Shroeder and the Social Democrats in Germany the next year confirmed the revival of center-left parties which either control or are part of the governing coalition forming throughout the European Union. From Latin America to Australia and New Zealand, Third Way ideas also are taking hold.
On Sunday, April 25, 1999, the President Clinton and the DLC hosted ahistoric roundtable discussion, The Third Way: Progressive Governance for the 21st Century, with five world leaders including British PM Tony Blair, German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, Dutch PM Wim Kok, and Italian PM Massimo D’Alema, the First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton and DLC President Al From.
Read more at http://tvoinews.com/environment/third-way-to-socialism/

Which way are we Headed? Choose One!


Unfortunately the reality is, we never have owned our property, the county or state owns it.  Just try not paying your real estate taxes.


The article below was written in 2002 and is about a document written 83 years ago but the information in it is more relevant today than many articles written about education and what the government is doing to our children. Read it, share it. Seek out his other articles if you like this one; he is a wonderful researcher and writer about the issues that affect us now.

By Dennis L. Cuddy Ph. D.
June 15, 2002

The Florida Forum Editor’s note: This article is a very valuable document showing the goals of the NEA nearly 70 years ago in 1932. This is about the time that William Z. Foster wrote Toward Soviet America and the Humanists wrote their First Manifesto. It should be read and kept as a clear understanding of the subversive plans the NEA had for using America’s schools. Many people think of these goals as recent. This article should serve to set them straight.

Concerning the movement toward a one-world government today, if the power elite are to accomplish their objectives, traditional values would, of course, have to be undermined. In that regard, education has played a critical role for many years, and a typical example can be found in The Tenth Yearbook of the National Education Association’s Department of Superintendence, published in February 1932, and titled Character Education, in which one reads:

“Relativity must replace absolutism in the realm of morals as well as in the spheres of physics and biology.

“…If the individual is to be happy in the contemporary order, he must be open-minded with respect to new values and new arrangements.

“…Loyalty to the family must be merged into loyalty to the community, loyalty to the community into loyalty to the nation, and loyalty to the nation into loyalty to mankind. The citizen of the future must be a citizen of the world.

“…Also, within the limits of a particular society, individualistic and competitive impulses must be subordinated increasingly to social and cooperative tendencies.

“…Interdependence rather than independence is the rule of life.

“…Under the condition of freedom and plenty generated by industrial society, the youth of the country are abandoning the severe sex taboos of the past; the sanctity of the marriage relationship is being challenged; the dogmas and ceremonies of the church are losing their power.

“…Until we have a more equitable distribution of property and income in this country, great numbers of families will remain totally unfit agencies of character education.

“…The church seems never to have been able to win either the masses or the statesmen of the Western nations to the Christian way of life. “…The position of the church today is one of confusion and uncertainty. It has lost much of the authority with which it at one time was clothed.

“…Only when it employs the outworn dogmas of the past and appeals to certain of the traditional prejudices of the people does it appear to have confidence in its own pronouncements.

“…This analysis shows a need for statements of objectives which….stimulate the creation of new moralities in accord with our changing society.

“…The center of attention is not to be some traits to be expressed, some rules of conduct, some ideal of truth or beauty. The center of attention is to be the situation.

“…The old structure passes. Religion, morality, business, family, school, and state change.

“…Emotional conditioning does determine a great deal of one’s attitudes toward persons, things, and ideas, and is responsible for a large part of one’s outlook on life. Conditioning is therefore a process which may be employed by the teacher or parent to build up attitudes in the child and predispose him to the actions by which these attitudes are expressed.

“…It is probable that the chauvinistic teaching of much of the history of the home country is responsible for a good share of the international friction and conflict.

“…An eminent teacher of ethics, Professor George Herbert Palmer (said): ‘Many here (New England) carry a conscience about with them which makes us say, “How much better off they would be with none!”‘

“…Education must be redirected if it is to become the chief means whereby society will attempt to remake itself.

“…School life will begin with the nursery school and extend to include adult education in various forms. “…It may come to be, in this changing world, that society will come quickly to support and control a program of education extending, for the individual, from the cradle to the grave.

“…As need arises, it will offer the individual opportunity to change quickly or slowly from one vocation or profession to another.

“…The question of demand and supply of workers in the various professions and occupations may in time also become a part of our social planning.
“The objective of character education is to teach the child that he will do the best possible thing in each situation, old and new.

“Presumable the person which has specialized in child psychology and other sciences is better prepared to engineer a group of boys and girls in certain socialized activities than is the lay parent….”

Does this sound like the sexual liberation, situation ethics, social engineering, lifelong learning, school-to-work, redistribute-the-wealth, interdependence, and world citizenship promoted and accepted by many toward the end of the 20th century?

The world government of the power elite will be Socialist in nature, and thus during the 1930s, the United States began to move toward Socialism at the national level. In 1940, former Indiana Congressman Samuel Pattengill authored Smoke-Screen, in which he wrote: ”
I have not believed the immediate threat is Communism. The outright confiscation of property, and the overnight destruction of liberty are not likely. The danger today is something else. It is creeping collectivism.

“…The progress will be gradual but the end inevitable. There will be no sudden coup d’etat. The march will be step by step, and by muffled tread. It will move under the smoke-screen of laudable ‘objectives’ to its hidden goal. That goal is National Socialism.

“…We are yet a long way from National Socialism of the Hitler species. We will probably never get that variety. But that we are moving toward some form of National Socialism and away from our form of government seems hard to not believe.

“…What is really at stake in America today is our form of government. The issue is “Freedom or Feudalism.”

Congressman Pattengill’s reference to the march being “step by step” and his warning about a future feudalism are striking, because in the April 1974 edition of the Council on Foreign Relations’ Foreign Affairs, Rhodes Scholar and CFR member Richard Gardner declared that “the ‘house of world order’ will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down. “…but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.”

Gardner in this article went on to explain how GATT would be part of this, and the GATT’s World Trade Organization has today become something of a feudal mechanism whereby the global elite are managing labor serfs in a global economy.

The plan developed many decades ago was that in order to achieve International Socialism with a World Socialist Government, nations (including the U.S.) would first have to move toward the National Socialism about which Congressman Pettengill warned, and then those National Socialist nations could more easily be merged under an International Socialist World Government. Likewise, regional economic arrangements (e.g., NAFTA, the European Community, etc.) would be formed and then merged into a world economic structure such as the WTO, which the power elite would then say had to be managed by a World Socialist Government.

Most people are already familiar with how the global economy has caused American jobs to go overseas to third world nations and how the WTO has coerced the U.S. Congress into changing our laws. Senior writer for the Chicago Tribune, Richard Longworth, in Global Squeeze (1998) wrote that “…the big story of the twenty-first century will be globalization’s impact on the nations of the world. But already, secure jobs at ever-rising wages are becoming a thing of the past.

“…The poor (in the U.S.) are getting poorer, and there are more of them.

“…This is the ‘race to the bottom,’ a process that drives income ever lower.

“This is the dehumanization of labor. No other major country treats its workers as commodities in this way, as raw materials or components that can be bargained to the lowest price.

“…Globalization has already weakened the ability of the governments to control their own economies.

“The global economy is a reality and cannot be denied. But uncontrolled, it can destroy these civilizations, to the point that we will wake one day to discover that we are neither consumers nor producers nor citizens at all.”

How does this bargaining of workers to the lowest level play out in the cities and towns of Florida and all across America? Let’s say there’s an influential businessman who has a grass-cutting or carpet-cleaning or fast food business or one of many other enterprises. And let’s say he gets work permits for 10 migrant workers whom he lodges in a 2 bedroom house. He then goes to his 10 lower middle-class American workers, each of whom has a wife and children and small houses with mortgages, and tells his workers that they are being let go because he can pay his migrant workers a lot less because they share expenses (each would pay only $10 per month on a $100 electric bill, for instance). All it takes is for one businessman in an industry in a community to do this, and others in the same industry in the community are forced to do likewise if they are to remain competitive. This type of thing is happening all across America, and the consequences for American workers and their families are traumatic.

Of course, if we are to have a world government, there will have to be an enforcer. And in that regard, the U.N. tribunal’s arrest of former Yugoslav leader Slobodan Milosevic is precedent-setting. Some years ago, the World Federalist Association, which promotes world federal government, outlined a plan for the U.N. to have agencies such as the International Criminal Court whereby national sovereignty would be gradually eroded and a world federation established. President Clinton wrote a letter to the WFA wishing them in general “future success,” and Clinton, of course prosecuted the war against Milosevic over Kosovo. Recently, the Bush administration threatened to withhold reconstruction aid unless Yugoslavia turned Milosevic over to the U.N. tribunal at the Hague on the charge of crimes against humanity. Though the current head of Yugoslavia protested, leading Serbians turned Milosevic over for trial. Of course this is hypocritical, because while current President Bush and former Presidents Bush and Clinton have approved of this action, they at the same time have applauded Mikhail Gorbachev even though he prosecuted the Soviet war against Afghanistan, which included exploding toys that maimed and perhaps even killed some Afghan children. Also, it raises the question of whether Henry Kissinger will be turned over to a U.N. tribunal for what Cambodian leaders have called his illegal war against them 30 years ago. And since the vast majority of the international community was opposed to former President Bush’s invasion of Panama, could he be taken to a U.N. tribunal for trial?

But how would such a U.N. tribunal get around Americans’ Constitutional rights? I’ve said for some time that it would be through crises. Recently, more than one mother has killed her children, and so the cry goes up for the government to monitor families carefully because children may be at-risk. Furthermore, eco-terrorists have recently been committing arson in the northwest, and on June 25, the CBS Evening News showed one of the victims saying:
“A month ago, if you’d asked me, I would have said I didn’t want to live with security systems ruling my life because I didn’t want a fortress mentality. And now I welcome them.”

Crises cause Americans to be more willing to give up Constitutional privacy rights. And every time there’s a shooting, there are calls to limit our Second Amendment right to bear arms. and without that right, how can we defend ourselves if a U.N. tribunal comes after us?

© 2002 Dennis L. Cuddy, Ph. D., All Rights Reserved