Memo to the "progressive" Democratic Takers

Intro to ‘Memo to the "progressive" Democratic Takers’

By Justin O. Smith

John R. Houk, Editor

Posted 5/18/17

Many Leftists like to describe themselves as Progressives. I have never liked that description because in my “Progressive” denotes a positive step forward.

There is nothing positive about a Leftist especially relative American Liberty and Freedom. Everything about the political Left is about government control of individuals deceptively masked as a progressive betterment of human society.

The thing is moving Left always results in some form of elitist totalitarianism. History demonstrates that if one decides to examine it, massive deaths of human lives all in the name of the some mythological greater good for the betterment of humanity.

According to Stéphane Courtois’s The Black Book of Communism, Communism is responsible for 100 million deaths, a number total that far exceeds Nazism, which left 16 million dead—and it eclipses the 20th century death tolls of lung cancer, diabetes, and homicides. (Communism: The Leading Ideological Cause of Death in the 20th Century; By Jim Liao; The Epoch Times; 1/25/17 12:20 PM - Last Updated: 3/16/17 2:54 pm)

The number of genocidal deaths may differ among demographic experts but not by much. Also, I find it interesting that most people view Nazism as a Right Wing phenomenon. People forget that Nazi is an acronym when translated into English is “National Socialist German Workers' Party”. Note the word “Socialist”. Socialism is a Leftist term. Thus, you can add Hitler’s Nazi regime accredited 16 million deaths to the Communists as far as I am concerned.

Hitler, Mao, Stalin & Pol Pot

With all the efforts of the Dem Party to undermine President Trump with hypocritical fake conspiracies that when compared to the real conspiracies attributed Obama, Slick Willie and Crooked Hillary; Americans concerned about Constitutional heritage should become extremely upset! And at the very least NEVER vote for a Dem Party candidate for any reason! Justin Smith goes into greater detail about the counter-American Marxism the Dems are leading America toward.

JRH 5/18/17

Please Support SlantRight 2.0

************

Memo to the "progressive" Democratic Takers

By Justin O. Smith

Sent 5/17/2017 7:50 PM

To ALL Democrats and Socialists out there:

While You may not be a Marxist, You definitely support many of the anti-Christian, anti-family, anti-Constitution/Bill of Rights/property rights and anti-American ideas that have derived straight from the Ten Tenets of the Communist Manifesto [SEE Analysis], however inadvertently or knowingly that may or may not be.

When You ask for Us to "come together and make a change that works for all of us", I am reminded of the numerous times that Progressive Democrats pushed for "compromise", so long as that compromise was heavily lop-sided in their favor and pushing the country farther and farther towards full blown communism, just as Bernie Sanders Socialists now do.

Compromise is fine, where room exists for that compromise, but one can never compromise with Evil and proposals that VIOLATE core Truths and moral human decency and principles that support and defend liberty.

The party of Marx --- the Democratic Party --- has pushed their agenda too far, and You are still pushing even though You lost the election, as You riot in Our streets and attempt to burn down Our cities, clamoring for privileges to be made into "rights".

Americans who love God, their family and America are working to move this country back closer to a government that is limited in scope and aligned with Constitutional principles, in response to the abrogation of much of the Constitution under Obama and through activist judges who departed from any rational premise based upon "the law".

And before We see this nation chipped away at, further destroyed, by people who demand wants and desires as "their right", many of Us are prepared to fight, to pick up arms if necessary, because once the government can determine that privileges are now "rights", you can expect to see a tyranny unleashed in the nation never seen before, with citizens forced to bow at the altar of the State for survival and the country reduced to the lowest common denominator in poverty, a "utopian" Third World hellhole.

So I don't really think We have so much in common at this point. Before I die on my knees begging for sustenance from the government, I'd rather fight for my God-given Rights as a Free Born Man to live my life as I see fit without government intrusions in areas that do not concern our so-called "leaders". And before I see America lurch further into the Dark Red fields of Communism, single-payer systems-Medicare for all, total government control of natural resources including water, over-regulating businesses out of existence, I would rather fight to Live Free, but because like my Ol' Daddy told me, after fighting fascists and communists in three different wars, "Better Dead Than Red".

And I plan on Living Free or Dying in the Battle, in order that Freedom and Liberty are preserved for America's Children and Their Children and generations beyond.

Some of You might live fairly decent lives in a humanist sort of style, but rather than reach out to Us, the Conservative Americans, You and Your people need to look inward and see that perhaps the nation has already been soaked of all it's willing to part with. We're $20 trillion in debt and rapidly approaching economic collapse, due largely to socialist programs that have caused a convergence of capitalism and communism, that will certainly fail. It's past time for All Americans to look to themselves and their own personal responsibility to their families and, wherever it may apply, to each other.

May God Bless America for All Eternity.

Justin O Smith 

_______________

Edited by John R. Houk

All links as well as text enclosed by brackets are by the Editor.

© Justin O. Smith

U.S. Communists fret as some progressives shun Hillary

This article was originally posted on WND. The writing is about how the U.S. Leftist Communists are concerned that Crooked Hillary is alienating some Dem Leftists. The article uses the pc version for Leftists with the word Progressives.

JRH 8/29/16

Please Support SlantRight 2.0

****************

U.S. Communists fret as some progressives shun Hillary

Posted by Dee Fatouros

Sourced from WND

August 28, 2016 07:26 PM PDT

The Realistic Observer

 The Communist Party USA (CPUSA) has infiltrated the Democrat Party far more than most realize. Its influence has been steady and pernicious like a slow growing cancer. It has now taken over the entire body politic in varying degrees. Although much of the electorate remains uninformed or in denial as to this phenomenon, many exist who do recognize that something is not quite right with the Dems.

Numerous progressives remain idealistic and cannot neither relate nor stomach what they are seeing in the present party as corruption, hypocrisy, and betrayal. (Many in the GOP have the same disgust with their party, but that is another story).

Witness the rise of Bernie Sanders. Was it because his supporters were true hard core Socialists/Communists or because they were fed up with leaders who talked out of both sides of their mouths and saw him as "the real thing".

The following post discusses the dismay of the CPUSA over the fact that not all Dems seem willing to support Hillary. They are concerned. She must win in November in order for the agenda begun in earnest by the present WH occupant to continue.   

These voters have apparently abandoned Hillary and possibly the party.  

 Democratic Party nominee Hillary Clinton (Photo: Twitter)

'They deeply despise her ties to Wall Street and call her a warmonger and a liar'

WASHINGTON – How deep and wide is the Communist Party USA’s support for Hillary Clinton?

It’s unambiguous. It’s 100 percent. And it’s uncompromising.

A new editorial on the party’s home page calls any thoughts about voting for the Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein or not voting for the top of the Democratic ticket “a flawed strategy.”

The CPUSA, birthed by Josef Stalin’s pocketbooks and sustained through the fall of the Soviet Union by KGB subsidies, is all in for Hillary.

The party is also excited about America’s corporate press jumping on the bandwagon with support for its candidate.

“Unprecedented early endorsements of Clinton have appeared in the Washington Post and Houston Chronicle, which described Trump as a ‘danger to the Republic,'” the editorial states with approval. “Many refer to Trump as an extreme authoritarian or worse, as a fascist.”

On the other hand, the Democrats meet the political litmus test with flying rainbow colors:

“The message from the DNC was the polar opposite. It reflected the broad electoral coalition backing Clinton, including the labor movement, African American, Latino, Asian and other communities of color, women, the LGBT community, youth, environmentalists, immigrant and disabled rights advocates.”

However, the CPUSA is concerned that not all ‘progressives” are on board for Clinton.

“But there are still some progressives, including some Bernie or Bust activists, who refuse to support Clinton,” the editorial says. “They deeply despise her ties to Wall Street and call her a warmonger and a liar. They see nothing positive in Clinton, her historic candidacy or the Democratic Party platform. They dismiss the broad electoral coalition, including the labor movement, that is backing Clinton and that has shaped the platform, a coalition with obvious leverage. To them, she is as bad as Trump.”

It continues: “Some are voting for Green Party candidate Jill Stein to ‘send a message.’ Still others hope a Clinton defeat provokes a crisis in the Democratic Party leading to its break-up.”

 Jill Stein of the Green Party

Sounding like a press release from the DNC, the Communist Party editorial explains: “This is a flawed strategy. First, like it or not, we have a two party system. One of the two major parties will win and govern. If this were a parliamentary democracy different tactics would be called for.”

“To call for a vote against Clinton is to separate oneself from this electoral coalition,” it states.

Not only do the Communists want Hillary to win, they want her to win big, explaining “mandates are real. This election will be a national referendum on racism, misogyny, homophobia, xenophobia and Islamophobia. The aim should be a landslide defeat of Trump and a decisive rejection of hate. The election of Clinton as the first woman president would make history. A landslide would not end sexism, but it would represent a mighty blow just as the election of President Obama was a blow against racism. It would advance democracy. A landslide makes it more likely that GOP congressional and state legislative majorities can be ousted and an end put to the politics of obstruction. Most people tend to vote straight ticket.”

“A landslide will give added weight to the progressive platform adopted at the Democratic Convention and give encouragement to appoint progressive Supreme Court justices,” the editorial continues. “It would be added pressure against backsliding on opposition to TPP and other trade deals. It will put public opinion and the movements in a better position to pressure against Clinton’s tendency toward military adventurism and policies of regime change.”

Again, the CPUSA warns off against voting Green.

“Voting Green Party separates activists and voters from these key forces,” the editorial says. “One cannot credibly engage in mobilizations of labor, civil rights, women’s organizations, LGBT community, and environmentalists while also advocating voting Green Party.”

The Communist Party “press” was out in force at the Democratic National Convention in full support of the Dems and their nominee from the beginning.

Joseph Farah, the founder of WND.com and a former revolutionary communist himself in his youth, said the CPUSA’s coverage was so effusive in its enthusiasm it put MSNBC to shame.

“Back in the day when Stalinists Gus Hall and Angela Davis were regularly nominated by the party as presidential and vice presidential candidates every four years, the U.S. Communists actually had beefs with the Democrats,” he said. “But, in recent years, the party ceased those efforts in favor of a united front with the Democrats, with whom they have very few differences, if any.”

The Communist Party was so eager to endorse Barack Obama for re-election, it couldn’t wait until 2012. It did so a year before the campaign officially got under way. The party was jubilant in 2008, when Obama won his first race for the presidency.

Saul Alinsky

Hailing Barack Obama’s win as a victory for the “working class,” the Communist Party USA called on the president-elect to carry out his promises, including his noted commitment to “spread the wealth.” An editorial by the People’s Weekly World, the official newspaper of the party, said the victory was for “workers of all job titles, professions, shapes, colors, sizes, hairstyles and languages.”

In 2009, President Obama’s leadership was “one of the best opportunities that Americans have had in decades,” declared a civil-rights activist addressing an overflow crowd at a gathering sponsored by the official newspaper of the Community Party USA.

The party was never disappointed by Obama. Here’s how it critiqued Obama’s final State of the Union Address earlier this year:

“In his final SOTU address, President Obama projected a bold vision for a more socially and economically just nation while appealing to the hopes of the American people. … President Obama pointedly rejected right-wing-Republican policy solutions including repeal of Obamacare, aggressive military buildup and action, tax cuts to the wealthy, blocking common-sense gun control … He also rejected efforts to exploit the fears of the American people using hate, anti-Muslim bigotry, racism and division.

“The challenges facing the nation and planet are immense: climate crisis, massive concentration and inequality of wealth, growing poverty and declining wages, joblessness, including skyrocketing unemployment in the African-American community, over $1 trillion in student debt, a crumbling infrastructure, underfunded schools and social services, lack of affordable housing, a frayed retirement security system, etc.”

David Kupelian, managing editor of WND.com, had this to say earlier this year in a commentary on the shrinking divide between the two parties: “Amazing as it may seem, Barack Obama has dragged the entire Democratic Party so far leftward over the past seven-plus years that today’s Democratic Party has become almost indistinguishable from the Communist Party.

“If that sounds hyperbolic to you, just stop reading right now and pull up the CPUSA’s website,” he added. “Spend some time reading and digesting it. Try to discern any major differences between the Communist Party’s concerns, sensibilities and solutions – on issues from ‘gay’ rights, to unfettered immigration, to renewable energy, to wealth redistribution, to condemning cops as racist, to universal health care – and those of today’s Democratic Party.”

Hillary Clinton’s association with radical thought dates back to at least 1969, when Obama was just 8 years old, himself a protégé early on of Frank Marshall Davis, a loyal Communist Party activist. Interest has been largely fueled by Clinton’s suppressed and later released 92-page senior thesis for Wellesley College offering an extensive, largely positive critique of Saul Alinsky and his work.

Clinton’s 1969 Wellesley College senior thesis was titled “There Is Only the Fight … : An Analysis of the Alinsky Model.” The thesis received attention when it was released after the Bill Clinton presidency. According to reports, in early 1993, the White House requested that Wellesley keep the thesis on “Rules for Radicals” author Saul Alinsky confidential and not release any copies.

Clinton was said to have met with Alinsky several times in 1968, when she was writing her thesis. In her most recent memoir, Clinton wrote that she rejected a job offer from Alinsky to instead attend law school.

Read the history of the attacks on marriage and the family, from the days of Karl Marx and Margaret Sanger to those now pushing for mandatory recognition of same-sex “marriage,” in “Takedown: From Communists to Progressives, How the Left has Sabotaged Family and Marriage.”

Last year, WND found that long after Alinsky’s death in June 1972, a group Clinton co-chaired maintained a working relationship with Alinsky’s main community organizing outfit, the Industrial Areas Foundation, or IAF. The partnership extended into the 1990s and yielded influence over the education policy of the Bill Clinton presidency, it can now be disclosed. Founded by Alinsky in 1940 and run by him until his death, the IAF is a national community-organizing network established to implement Alinsky’s expansive organizing agenda. After Alinsky’s death, the IAF was taken over by his longtime associate and designated successor, Ed Chambers, who became the group’s executive director.

Dick Morris, a former top political adviser to Bill Clinton both as governor of Arkansas and as president, noted to WND that education reform “is the key issue Hillary Clinton used to propel herself independently to the forefront of Arkansas politics during Bill’s governorship.”

“The revelation of how closely linked her efforts were back in the 80s – and have been since – to an Alinsky radical front group is deeply disturbing and expands our understanding of Hillary’s fundamental radicalism and commitment to the new left of Saul Alinsky,” Morris said.

David Horowitz, whose parents were members of the Communist Party and who himself became a leader in the new left movement of the 1960s and 1970s before rejecting it, said the revelation is significant though not surprising.

“When radicals set out to fundamentally transform a society, the first institution they attack is the educational system which under their influence becomes a system of indoctrination in radical ideas,” he told WND.

Interestingly, the Communist Party USA has not changed its stripes in any significant way. It hasn’t walked back its 100 percent commitment to Communism. What has changed is the Democratic Party.

The drift leftward hit warp speed beginning in the 1990s, according to Farah. That’s the year Bernie Sanders was first elected to Congress and founded the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

“One of his first actions in Congress was to found the Congressional Progressive Caucus, which was partnered with the Democratic Socialists of America,” recounts Farah. “No surprise there, because most Americans have no idea of what the Congressional Progressive Caucus and the Democratic Socialists of America are really all about.”

Farah reported on the antics of the caucus in 1998.

“Back then the Congressional Progressive Caucus shared a website with the DSA,” he wrote. “In other words, these two organizations, one government-funded and the other a tax-exempt nonprofit, were of like mind and on the same page politically. What I found back then was astonishing – even for me. On this shared website, that was quickly scrubbed after I exposed it, was a collection of songs I can almost hear Bernie, Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank and other members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus singing in harmony. One of my favorites back then – was ‘Red Revolution’ sung to the tune of ‘Red, Red Robbin.'”

Here are the lyrics as they still appear on the Congressional Progressive Caucus website as captured by the Wayback Machine: (The original site was scrubbed within hours after it was exposed by WND)

When the Red Revolution
brings its solution
along, along

There’ll be no more lootin’
when we start shootin’
that Wall Street throng

Wake up you proletarians
Don’t act like seminarians
Expropriate barbarians
Build a workers’ republic

Exploitation and degradation
you won’t find here
Surplus value and capital will disappear

I’m just a Red again,
saying what I’ve said again,
When the Red Revolution … da, da, da, da
brings its solution … da, da, da, da, da
along

“How do these people get away with denying they are redder than a robin’s breast while singing songs like this – and printing them on the Internet?” asked Farah incredulously.

The song list also included lyrics to “Are You Sleeping, Bourgeoisie,” sung to the tune of “Frere Jacques.”

Are you sleeping, are you sleeping,
Bourgeoisie, Bourgeoisie,
And when the revolution comes,
We’ll kill you all with knives and guns,
Bourgeoisie, Bourgeoisie

“For those not trained in the lingo of communism, the dictionary definition of ‘bourgeoisie,’ is, and I quote: ‘(in Marxist theory) the class that, in contrast to the proletariat or wage-earning class, is primarily concerned with property values,'” wrote Farah. “If you’ve got property, if you’re part of the middle class, these people not only want to raise your taxes, they want to kill you with knives and guns!”

Source:   WND
__________________

Edited by John R. Houk

The Realistic Observer posts everything in bold text. Honestly I find that annoying thus I took away most of the bold text. I indented the short verse prose in the post.

The Realistic Observer Homepage

American Left can be seen in Nazi History

John R. Houk

© May 27, 2016

I have noticed over the years that Lefties (aka Liberals, Progressives, Left Wingers, Moonbats, etc.) have smeared Conservatives as Nazis or Hitler-equivalents. The irony is Hitler’s Nazism was a Left Wing Movement that employed the nationalist-corporatism of Fascism which is ultimately State control of the industrial complex.

Karl Marx’s Communism envisioned Industrial workers rising up in revolt over the means of production and who controls those means. Which ultimately played out of State ownership of everything from property to the industrial complex under the illusion that the people (aka workers or the proletariat) controlled society’s living conditions and the mode of production. In essence the State assumed the role of the people by proxy.

Nazism was not so much interested in the illusion of who controls production as much as every citizen serves the needs of the State paying homage to the elites of State that made the lives of true citizens prosperous. Consider how the word Nazi Party gained its appellation:

Acronym Finder

What does NSDAP stand for?

NSDAP stands for Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (NAZI Party)

ONLINE ETYMOLOGY DICTIONARY

Nazi 

1930, noun and adjective, from German Nazi, abbreviation of German pronunciation of Nationalsozialist (based on earlier German sozi, popular abbreviation of "socialist"), from Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei "National Socialist German Workers' Party," led by Hitler from 1920.

The 24th edition of Etymologisches Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache (2002) says the word Nazi was favored in southern Germany (supposedly from c. 1924) among opponents of National Socialism because the nickname Nazi, Naczi (from the masc. proper name Ignatz, German form of Ignatius) was used colloquially to mean "a foolish person, clumsy or awkward person." Ignatz was a popular name in Catholic Austria, and according to one source in World War I Nazi was a generic name in the German Empire for the soldiers of Austria-Hungary.

An older use of Nazi for national-sozial is attested in German from 1903, but EWdS does not think it contributed to the word as applied to Hitler and his followers. The NSDAP for a time attempted to adopt the Nazi designation as what the Germans call a "despite-word," but they gave this up, and the NSDAP is said to have generally avoided the term. Before 1930, party members had been called in English National Socialists, which dates from 1923. The use of Nazi Germany, Nazi regime, etc., was popularized by German exiles abroad. From them, it spread into other languages, and eventually was brought back to Germany, after the war. In the USSR, the terms national socialist and Nazi were said to have been forbidden after 1932, presumably to avoid any taint to the good word socialist. Soviet literature refers to fascists.

The Wikipedia entry for “Nazi Party” goes into greater detail if you are interested. At Wikipedia the focus is more on nationalism combined with racism more than Socialism.

Either way, Nazism and Communism were political vehicles to control the masses under the direction of an elitist oligarchy.

Matt Barber has written an essay that I located on Constitution.com highlighting that Adolf Hitler was an anti-Christian pretending to be a Christian with Left Oriented Socialism in the backdrop.

Who does that sound like today in 21^st century America? Since Barber doesn’t mention any modern day similarities, allow me to name a couple:

·       Barack Obama

·       Hillary Clinton

JRH 5/27/16

Please Support SlantRight 2.0

*******************

No, Hitler Was Not a Christian… He Was More Like Modern-day “Progressives”.

By Matt Barber [webpage lists him as Guest Columnist but at the end the essay attributed Barber]

May 26, 2016

Constitution.com

“[T]he only way of getting rid of Christianity is to allow it to die little by little.”

– Adolf Hitler

Yes, there have been evil men who have done evil things in the name of false Christianity. To a limited degree, Adolf Hitler was one such man. Still, and as even he frequently admitted outside the public eye, he was no Christian.

As a counterweight to stigma associated with the tens of millions slaughtered in the 20th century alone under the atheist regimes of Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, et al., the secular left is quick to thunder, “But what about Hitler? He was a Christian!”

Bad news, kids. Herr Führer was your guy, too.

“I shall never come personally to terms with the Christian lie,” Hitler confessed (audio transcribed in “Hitler’s Table Talk” [1941-44]). “It would always be disagreeable for me to go down to posterity as a man who made concessions in this field [to be labeled a Christian].”

Did Adolf Hitler ever call himself a Christian? Certainly. He did so, and as he would later admit, for the singular purpose of disseminating political propaganda.

“To whom should propaganda be addressed?” he wrote. “It must be addressed always and exclusively to the masses. … The whole art consists in doing this so skillfully that everyone will be convinced that the fact is real.”

The Nazi Germans of the 1930s and ’40s are not alone in swallowing Hitler’s Christianese-peppered puffery. Today’s secular- “progressive” establishment likewise bandies about a handful of carefully crafted Hitlerian quotes released for public consumption. His “pro-Christian” proclamations in “Mein Kampf” and elsewhere, for instance, were universally a perversion of biblical Christianity leveraged for the sole purpose of justifying the extermination of the Jewish people.

“My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter,” he wrote. “In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge [the Jews] to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. … For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people.”

That was the extent of Hitler’s plastic “Christianity.” The Bible, always taken out of context, served as a twisted weapon to justify the mass slaughter of over 11 million Jews, Christians, disabled people and other “undesirables.”

In reality Hitler insisted, “In the long run, National Socialism and religion will no longer be able to exist together.”

What Brutal Hitler and Softer Modern Day Progressives Share in Common

Sounds an awful lot like today’s American church-state separatists. Roger Baldwin, founder of the ACLU, for example, held, “I am for socialism, disarmament, and, ultimately, for abolishing the state itself. … I seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class, and the sole control of those who produce wealth. Communism is the goal.”

Indeed, the ACLU’s promotional materials similarly advocate anti-Christian intolerance and mirror Hitler’s directive that, “Socialism and religion will no longer be able to exist together.” “The message of the Establishment Clause is that religious activities must be treated differently from other activities to ensure against governmental support for religion,” imagines the “American” so-called “civil liberties” union.

That’s viewpoint discrimination and it’s unconstitutional.

This is secular socialism in a nutshell. It’s a religion, and its devotees, be they Nazi Germans or American Leftists, are Communist Manifesto-thumping fundamentalists.

“There is something very unhealthy about Christianity,” Hitler opined. “As far as we are concerned, we’ve succeeded in chasing the Jews from our midst and excluding Christianity from our political life. … The heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming of Christianity. Bolshevism is Christianity’s illegitimate child. Both are inventions of the Jew. … Christianity is an invention of sick brains: one could imagine nothing more senseless.”

Indeed, Hitler’s robust anti-Christian hatred lives on beyond the death of the Third Reich. Modern-day progressives like Hillary Clinton, though, tend to take a kinder, gentler, more surreptitiously totalitarian approach: “Rights have to exist in practice – not just on paper,” the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee recently said in the context of some phantom “right” to exterminate undesirable infants. “Laws have to be backed up with resources and political will. And deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed.”

Yikes. “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.”

While Hitler was more direct, he nonetheless shared Hillary’s secular socialist vision: “We’ll see to it that the Churches cannot spread abroad teachings in conflict with the interests of the State. We shall continue to preach the doctrine of National Socialism, and the young will no longer be taught anything but the truth.”

Sound familiar? Progressive “truth,” of course, invariably means Christian torment.

Hitler, borrowing from socialist icon Karl Marx, said that all Germans must “free themselves from the drug of Christianity. Let’s be the only people who are immunized against the disease.” Marx, a hero to the secular socialist left, famously called religion, “the opium of the people.”

Hitler a Christian? No chance.

Anti-Semitism, Islam and a Dash of Darwin

Moreover, like the preponderance of today’s similarly anti-Semitic secular progressives, Hitler, too, was an apologist for Islam. As America’s own Dear Leader has done, Hitler partnered with Iran, present-day “Palestine” and other Islamist regimes in the shared goal of eliminating the Jews:

“The world had fallen into the hands of the Jews, so gutless a thing was Christianity!” he fumed. “Then we should in all probability have been converted to Mohammedanism, that cult which glorifies heroism and which opens the seventh Heaven to the bold warrior alone. Then the Germanic races would have conquered the world. Christianity alone prevented them from doing so!”

Hitler also parroted the godless ideology of modern atheists. Like so many of today’s secular progressives, he was an avowed materialist, neo-Darwinian evolutionist and hardhearted God-denier: “When understanding of the universe has become widespread, when the majority of men know that the stars are not sources of light but worlds, perhaps inhabited worlds like ours, then the Christian doctrine will be convicted of absurdity.”

“Christianity, of course, has reached the peak of absurdity,” he said. “And that’s why one day its structure will collapse. Science has already impregnated humanity. Consequently, the more Christianity clings to its dogmas, the quicker it will decline.”

Two thousand years and still waiting.

And so Hitler endeavored to assist “natural selection” and, as he wrote in “Mein Kampf,” “establish an evolutionary higher stage of being.” He placed his hope in Germany’s youth because they were “absolutely indifferent in the matters of religion.”

A beloved Hitler Youth marching song captured the Führer’s heart on matters of Christ and Christianity:

We follow not Christ, but Horst Wessel,
Away with incense and Holy Water,
The Church can go hang for all we care,
The Swastika brings salvation on Earth.

Today’s progressive “social justice” warriors are angling for a dystopian, Swastika-free repeat. Their hope, too, lies in the youth (witness the socialism-fueled anarchist insurgence occurring on college campuses nationwide).

Like then, progressive secular socialists endeavor to rule the world.

And “Christianity alone,” to update Hitler’s own words, will “prevent them from doing so.”

Matt Barber is founder and editor-in chief of BarbWire.com. He is author of “Hating Jesus: The American Left’s War on Christianity,” a columnist, a cultural analyst and an attorney concentrating in constitutional law. Having retired as an undefeated heavyweight professional boxer, Matt has taken his fight from the ring to the culture war. (Follow Matt on Twitter: @jmattbarber).

________________________

American Left can be seen in Nazi History

John R. Houk

© May 27, 2016

________________________

No, Hitler Was Not a Christian… He Was More Like Modern-day “Progressives”.

Copyright © 2016 The Constitution. All Rights Reserved.

Honor and Sacrifices

Here is an awesome Memorial Day message from Justin Smith that honors veterans who lost the lives defending American Rights. Justin then deftly moves to criticizing the Obama Administration’s moral destruction of American military capability through the President’s Foreign Policy decisions.

JRH 5/24/15

Please Support SlantRight 2.0

******************************

Honor and Sacrifices

By Justin O. Smith

Sent: 5/23/2015 5:29 PM

"God and the soldier doth all men adore in time of war and not before; when the war is over and all things righted, God is forgotten and the soldier slighted." -- signed by the 16th Regiment of Foot on January 30, 1770

Freedom is the most precious thing to all men and women, and since the Civil War, millions of Americans have placed their lives in harm's way in the defense of God, family and freedom, with over one million making the ultimate sacrifice during the course of several wars from WWII, Korea and Vietnam to the present wars in the Middle East. The empty seats at family gatherings bear witness to this sacrifice by these honored dead, and we the living must be resolved that these soldiers "last full measure of devotion" and their lives were not sacrificed in vain.

Today Americans, who love this country see far too many others, malcontents, more than willing to sow the seeds of strife and discord, as they trample on the American Flag and dishonor the memories of those heroes we honor each Memorial Day. These fallen soldiers would least understand the twisted logic of these anti-American fascists, since our fallen often laid down their lives on the field of battle to stop the enemy from burning their flags, fighting to the death rather than suffer disgrace at the hands of their enemy.

On the foreign front and without any virtue, Obama has dishonored all U.S. Armed Forces members, those living and those killed in action, and their many sacrifices, through Middle East policies that have allowed the Islamic State to grow into a real security threat to America. His hasty withdrawal from Iraq, aimed at keeping a campaign promise, has been a direct factor in the fall of much of Iraq, including Ramadi, and this in turn ensures more long wars of attrition yet to come.

Scores of U.S. soldiers died defending Ramadi and hundreds more were wounded between 2006 and our final withdrawal, and about a week ago the world sat by idly watching as Ramadi fell to Islamic State fascists, who immediately murdered over 500 people and set the exodus of 25,000 Iraqis in motion; during their two month advance on Ramadi, these Islamofascists have forced 147,000 Iraqis to flee to refugee camps.

The images of Ramadi falling to the Islamic State and their black flags being raised has sent a chill through many Americans who fought in Iraq. They are more than disgusted that their sacrifices have seemingly been made in vain, for nothing.

General Douglas McArthur once noted that "Duty, Honor, Country" reverently dictates what each of us ought to be and can be, in regards to finding courage, faith and hope in the face of any crisis. Too many on the Left and too many in the top echelons of the U.S. military, including General Martin Dempsey, no longer seem to have a good grasp on the meaning of these words.

Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey is politicizing the U.S. Armed Forces, and he has become Obama's echo chamber. He didn't send extra security to Benghazi, because he "never received a request"; he never saw evidence of Iran's military fighting in Iraq, even though Iranian Quds Forces have been in Iraq for most of the decade and 20,000 Shiite Popular Mobilization Forces have been there since last year. Dempsey's habit of parroting Obama's policies has resulted in a consistent record of failure.

During October 2014 Dempsey said, "We have a crisis in Iraq" (The Long War Journal), but by November he was telling troops in Baghdad that ISIS is "a bunch of midgets," and several years would be needed to defeat them -- several years to stop Obama's "JV team".

This past April, Gen. Dempsey suggested that Ramadi is "not symbolic in any way" and losing it would not be a major setback, even though it is only 75 miles from Baghdad. Dempsey stated, "I would much rather that Ramadi not fall, but it won't be the end of the campaign should it fall."

Debbie Lee, the mother of the first Navy SEAL killed in Iraq and in Ramadi (awarded the Silver Star), was furious over Dempsey's remarks, and she penned an open letter that read in part: "I am shaking and tears are flowing down my cheeks as I ... listen to the insensitive pain-inflicting comments made by you in regards to the fall of Ramadi. My son and many others gave their future in Ramadi. Ramadi mattered to them. Many military analysts say that as goes Ramadi so goes Iraq." (Iraq is already lost).

Lee went further: "You, sir, owe an apology to the families whose loved ones' blood was shed in Ramadi ... whose bodies were blown to pieces by IEDs and bullet holes leaving parts and pieces behind ... Ramadi mattered to them. ... You and this administration have minimized that Ramadi could fall. Now you are minimizing that it is falling, but you Sir WILL NOT minimize the sacrifice my son Marc Lee made or any of our brave warriors." (The Daily Beast - 5/20/15)

Considering that America has already seen too many of Her Sons and Daughters return home in body bags and without arms and legs, lost in a war that was brought to them unasked for and undeserved -- enough blood to last a lifetime and then some -- Can anyone now honestly say that the mission in Iraq was worth it?

America can honor Her soldiers by praying for peace and working towards peace through strength, because we have seen the deepest wounds and scars of war, as Arlington Cemetery grows. We understand that wars often come at a time chosen by our enemies, but we do not want to fight twelve year wars ever again. We simply want our Armed Forces fully prepared to properly defend Our Beloved America on two fronts and, if pushed to war, to fight to win devastatingly quick.

With the war tocsins sounding across the globe, Obama and the Progressives are destroying the leaven which binds together the entire fabric of our national defense system, and a million ghosts are rising from their white crosses in Arlington Cemetery thundering the words "Duty, Honor, Country.

By Justin O. Smith

________________________________

Edited by John R. Houk

Links are provided by the Editor.

© Justin O. Smith