Has America Passed the Point of No Return? Have Progressives Finally Won the Future?

John Hinderaker at Powerline has a rather sobering post today:  Why Is This Election Close?

John believes that the country may have passed a point of no return.  He writes:

On paper, given Obama’s record, this election should be a cakewalk for the Republicans. Why isn’t it? I am afraid the answer may be that the country is closer to the point of no return than most of us believed. With over 100 million Americans receiving federal welfare benefits, millions more going on Social Security disability, and many millions on top of that living on entitlement programs–not to mention enormous numbers of public employees–we may have gotten to the point where the government economy is more important, in the short term, than the real economy. My father, the least cynical of men, used to quote a political philosopher to the effect that democracy will work until people figure out they can vote themselves money. I fear that time may have come.

Hinderaker quotes Andy McCarthy at National Review, who implicitly believes that the Gramsci vision has been realized, that the "long march through the institutions" has been accomplished, and that a large part of our country's culture and institutions, namely the media and academia, are in the firm control of the Left.  What's worse, is that the Republican establishment cannot fight them because it has accepted the Progressive framework, not arguing for its abolishment, but only that it be better executed.  McCarthy writes:

It has always been possible to run against elite opinion and win — if you make a compelling counter-case...Today’s Republicans do not. Indeed, they cannot, because they have accepted the progressive framework. Their argument is not that the welfare state, deficit spending, federalized education, sharia-democracy promotion, and the rest are bad policies. Their argument is not that Washington needs to be dramatically downsized. It is that progressive governance is fine but needs to be better executed.

My friend Lawrence Auster at View From the Right has long argued the same thing -- that the Republican establishment seeks a slightly different approach to liberalism, but not its defeat.  This is a very pessimistic view, but no doubt it contains a lot of truth.

If we do indeed lose the nation to another four years of progressive destruction, it may be time to consider some radical alternatives, e.g. a new political party, state nullification of unconstitutional laws, and even secession.

Read Hinderaker's article here.

Read McCarthy's article here.

Politico's Garbage Journalism: Andrew McCarthy Dissects Jonathan Martin's Biased Reporting on Herman Cain

Lawrence Auster at View From the Right writes:

POLITICO'S GARBAGE JOURNALISM

Andrew McCarthy takes apart Politico's Jonathan Martin for his outrageously partisan and dishonest reporting on (or should I say, his creation of) the Cain sexual "harassment" imbroglio. Partisan, because his record suggests that he would never have published such a damaging yet vague story about a Democrat. Dishonest, because Martin knows who the source of the story is, yet he is withholding that information, while allowing various conflicting charges to fly around which he is in a position to resolve, but which he declines to resolve, by continuing to withhold the truth.

You can read McCarthy's article at this link, and it is a very worthwhile read.

Andrew McCarthy: "Not a Perversion of Islam, But Islam"

Today at National Review Online Andrew McCarthy again speaks truth about the world's worst religion, Islam. He articulates the fact that violence by Islam against apostates and infidels is not a perversion of Islam, but obedience to its clearly stated doctrines.

The massive self-deception of the Western world on this question is mind-boggling.  Very few on either the left or the right want to admit this truth:  the terrorists are not perverting Islam, they are practicing it.

There are many pundits who continue embarrassing themselves by claiming the terrorists have "hijacked a religion," but this is pure nonsense.  Sean Hannity is one of these self-deceiving bunko artists, and I wish I could give him a good shake to wake him up.

There are far leftists who make it their personal religion to defend the most odoriferous evil.  The Southern Poverty Law Center is one of these.  They recently have attacked Pamela Geller for her anti-Islamization activities, asserting that opposition to a violent ideology is somehow "racist."  When the masses of conquered infidels (you and me) are once again led to the public square to be beheaded by twos, Mark Potok and Morris Dees will holding the scimitars of our executioners.

Fictitious Islam vs. Real Islam: Time to Stop Kidding Ourselves

Ever so often we have a break-through moment when we see things in a new light.  Understanding floods our brains and we replace a faulty paradigm with a better one.  I think this article does that for me.  It's time to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan.  Our "nation-building" missions there are a fool's errand.  After all the blood and treasure invested, we will be left with what we started with:  a barbarian society ruled by sharia law.

We must devise better strategies for dealing with the Islamic threat.  Ending Islamic immigration into the U.S. would be a first step; isolating the Islamic nations would be a second step; and making a concerted effort to become energy independent would be an important third step.

Andrew McCarthy on "Imagining Islam":

If only the fantasy were true: If only there actually were a dominant, pro-American, echt [genuine] moderate Islam, an ideology so dedicated to human rights, so sternly set against savagery, that acts of terrorism were, by definition, “un-Islamic activity.” Imagine an Islam that, far from a liability, proved an asset (indeed, an indispensable asset) in combating the threat against us. Imagine that we could accurately call the threat mere “extremism” — no “Islamic” (or even “Islamist”) modifier being necessary because the “extremists” truly were a tiny, aberrant band, fraudulently “hijacking” a great religion.

Such an Islam, over nine long years, would have risen up and made itself heard. It would have identified by name and condemned with moral outrage the imposters purporting to act in its name. It would have honored America’s sacrifice of blood and treasure in the liberation of oppressed Muslim peoples. It would have said “thank you” to our troops. It would have joined America, without ambiguity or hesitation, in crushing terror networks and dismantling the regimes that abet them. It would not have needed trillion-dollar American investments to forge democracies; it would naturally have adopted democracy on its own.

What excruciating truths have we yet failed to grasp on this ninth anniversary of 9/11? The first is that such an Islam does not exist. The second is that, despite this fact, American foreign and domestic policy continues to proceed as though it does exist — and as though it were the only real Islam. That is, nine years after Islamists made their commitment to our destruction as unmistakable as possible...our national-security strategy is still steeped in fiction.

Read it all here.

Andrew McCarthy - "The Islamist Threat is Worse Than You Think"

I found another website worth mentioning and linking to. It's called SANE (Society of Americans for National Existence). They have posted an article by Andrew McCarthy of National Review entitled Beyond Terrorism: The Islamist Threat is Worse Than You Think.

In this article McCarthy describes and refutes the sophomoric beliefs that Jihad is a "peaceful, inner struggle" rather than a violent one, and that Sharia (Islamic law) is compatible with our western laws and, therefore able to be accommodated.

McCarthy describes our western angst in refusing to acknowledge that it is Islam itself that is the threat. He writes:

Because America is a beacon of religious freedom, we’ve limited our focus to operatives who plot and execute acts of terror; the ideology fueling this savagery is not our concern — lest we betray our first principles and smear every Muslim as a terrorist. This disposition is suicidal, for at least three reasons. First, Islam is not merely a religion. It is a comprehensive socio-economic and political system, which believers take to be ordained by Allah, its elements compulsory and non-negotiable. While those elements include tenets we would regard as a religious creed, these tenets constitute only a fraction of the overarching Islamic project.

McCarthy makes a lot of sense in this article. He dispels a lot of popular nonsense about the so-called "Religion of Peace."

Via: Creeping Sharia
Via: SANE