In this final episode of the Conservative Conscience for 2016, Daniel lays bare the truth about the so-called Palestinian cause. The entire historical, legal, and geographical case for why there is no such thing as a distinct Arab “Palestinian” entity entitled to any land west of the Jordan River is recounted in this long episode.
It is incontrovertibly clear from a legal and historical standpoint that Israel has just as much of a right to exist in its so-called post-1967 borders as it does in its pre-’67 borders. It is also patently obvious that from a geographical, moral, and security standpoint that anyone advocating a two state solution is implicitly denying Israel’s right to exist in any capacity. Israel has already surrendered 94% of the land it acquired in a defensive war against its existence – The Sinai Peninsula and Gaza. Anyone promoting an Arab Muslim state in the remaining 6% that would gut the heart of the tiny Jewish state – especially in light of the fact that Muslims control a land mass 640 times greater than Israel – is either woefully ignorant or supports something much more sinister.
It's time to get the facts straight: there already is an Arab Palestinian state – Jordan. The two-state solution was carved out in 1922 in the last legally recognized agreement delineating boundaries of nation states. Arabs got 77% of the Mandate for Palestine, which was all the land east of the Jordan River, while Jews got the land to the west of the river. History doesn’t lie.
"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people." [PLO official Zahir Muhsein, interview with Dutch newspaper Trouw, March 31, 1977.
"The truth is that Jordan is Palestine and Palestine is Jordan." [King Hussein, December 1981 interview with A - Nahar Al – Arabi]
“What you call Jordan is actually Palestine.” [Yassir Arafat, 1974 interview with New Republic]
Starting things off on this episode of the Conservative Conscience, Daniel gives a rundown of examples showing the establishing winning more control in the nascent Trump administration. What was once a promise to drain the swamp is looking more and more like an exercise in making the worst elements of the swamp great again. While it’s important to fight for a few key conservative victories that are within reach, we must also voice our concerns early and often about harmful policies and personnel. We can’t afford to wait six years to pushback against “our own party” like we did during the Bush years.
Next, we move onto our latest update on judicial tyranny. There is no way to sugar-coat this. The federal courts pose an imminent threat to our republic. It’s worse than ever. The courts are destroying our culture, inclinable rights, Constitution, and system of government. They have already redefined marriage and now are redefining human sexuality. This is broadly consequential and is not just about bathrooms. And judicial tyranny is not going to change simply with the election of Trump – unless we get the administration to engage in battle with the courts. Simply appointing a few conservative judges, most of whom will uphold existing anti-constitutional “precedent” anyway, is like spitting in the wind.
In this episode, Daniel gives a background on Marbury v. Madison and shows how judicial review is very different from judicial supremacy or judicial exclusivity. All branches of government have a say in constitutional interpretation because, as John Marshall observed, they all swear an oath to uphold the supreme law of the land, which is the Constitution, not the courts.
Using the latest cases surrounding transgenderism, Daniel demonstrates how the other branches of government can cut the legs out from under bad court decisions by using their legitimate powers to counter the court’s abuse of its power. Unless the Trump Justice Department, Congress, and the states begin pushing back against the courts, they will nullify every common sense policy we enact on a federal and state level beginning in January, thereby rendering the election moot.
“Judicial supremacy/exclusivity + one directional stare decisis + unelected life tenures + living and breathing Constitution = an equation of tyranny King George himself never envisioned.”
“The several departments being perfectly co-ordinate by the terms of their common commission, neither of them, it is evident, can pretend to an exclusive or superior right of settling the boundaries between their respective powers.” ~ James Madison, Federalist #49
Are we going to wait six years to hold Republicans accountable like we did during the Bush years? Are we going to lose our intellectual honesty and back everything a Republican administration does just because the Democrats are also hypocrites? Didn’t we swear to ourselves we wouldn’t repeat the mistakes of the Bush years?
In this episode of the Conservative Conscience, Daniel reveals that he is getting bad vibes about many aspects of the transition. So many Bush “globalists” are being brought on board and the Reince Priebus establishment faction appears to be winning over Trump on many key decisions.
Consequently, now more than ever we must not get sucked into defending bad policies and choices just because Democrats did the same or worse. It’s time to pull this administration back towards the grassroots rebellion at every opportunity we get so we can have an administration that stands on its own veracity.
You will never find Democrat administrations with a single major player who harbors conservative views on a single issue. Yet, somehow we take it as a given that in a Republican administration the most powerful cabinet pick, Secretary of State, could be given to someone who is pro-common core, anti-sanctions, pro carbon tax, anti-energy independence, and a leader in the homosexual agenda. Now we hear that John Bolton might not be picked for Deputy Sec. of State, while liberals such as Elliot Abrams and Richard Haass are being considered instead. This is part of a pattern of choosing the path to least resistance. Kris Kobach was passed over as DHS Secretary and likely as Deputy as well for the same reason.
Finally, we show how Democrats never surrender their principles even when they lose power. Why do we surrender ours when we win? John Kasich won’t even fight for a pro-life bill because he refuses to stand up to the legal profession, yet liberals have no problem thwarting federal immigration law.
“When you lack an ideological rudder, you will choose the path to least resistance every day of the week. When you surround yourself with people who likewise lack a burning passion for conservatism, they will accentuate that reluctance to fight in every situation.”
Trump has made his decision on the big cabinet post — secretary of State — and it’s ExxonMobil CEO, Rex Tillerson.
There is no way to sugar-coat this: Tillerson is a disastrous pick. Those who share the mentality of transnational corporate leaders like Tillerson are pre-conditioned to supporting the foreign policy establishment mindset on critical issues so as not to upset the applecart and what’s good for business.
While much of his issue portfolio is a blank slate, what we know about him and his past comments are disturbing. These concerns go beyond his ties to Russia, which in fact, should not even be the primary focus of his confirmation hearings. The real concern cuts to the core of what conservatives are looking for in any department head, especially the State Department.
Trump should have appointed a secretary of State who regards the current State Department with as much disdain as Scott Pruitt regards the EPA. The problem we have at the State Department is not a management crisis. We have a moral and intellectual problem with the State Department that has persisted for decades. It stems from a deep-rooted culture of moral relativism and an “America-last” mindset. As such, we needed a man with a strong ideological rudder who understands the issues, is on the right side of them, and willing to bust up the entire State Department structure and the global foreign policy apparatus.
Both sides of this debate are too consumed with Russia — pro and con. Some of the new pro-Russia “conservatives” are praising Tillerson just because he’s close to Putin. Opponents, such as Lindsey Graham and John McCain, are voicing concerns solely because of his ties to Russia. However, there are many other foreign policy issues that are important.
For example, is a man with his background really the type of person to oppose refugees, a Palestinian State, cooperation with Saudi Arabia, and the Muslim Brotherhood? Where does he stand on political Islam? Where does he stand on the Iran deal and reinstating sanctions? Does he support backing “Syrian rebels” in the Syrian civil war, helping Iran in Iraq, or our current involvement in Libya? What would he do about the 15-year disaster in Afghanistan?
To be fair, these are all questions that must be answered by any nominee, but traditionally we’ve had some sense of direction from the nominee before the Senate confirmation hearings, which don’t take place until the administration is already up and running.
And although we know nothing about where Tillerson stands on these issues, he is absolutely not the type of person who would fight the inveterate players and insufferable mentality within the system that stands opposed to America’s interests. That is why people like James Baker, Condi Rice, Bob Corker, and Robert Gates — the embodiment of the problem with foreign policy — are enthusiastically supporting him.
In that respect, nominees for secretary of State are much like Supreme Court picks. Given the one-directional gravitational pull and inertia towards liberalism within the legal profession, unless someone has absolutely demonstrated a record as a solid originalist willing to buck the system, he will wind up being a David Souter. There is no middle ground. Likewise, with foreign policy, if someone has not demonstrably opposed the Baker/Condi views on open borders, Palestinians, and political Islam, he will be part of the problem.
The most important quality in politics is a strong and fierce ideological conviction to fight the moral relativism in global affairs. Other qualities are important but useless if someone is lacking that ideological rudder to row upstream in this environment. Even someone who is inherently neutral on these issues will wind up downstream in the cesspool of the global foreign policy establishment, much less someone with the connections, mindset, and “pragmatism” of a major transnational CEO.
Tillerson’s past comments in support of Common Core, a carbon tax, the homosexual agenda at the Boy Scouts, and TPP are not mere distractions to his foreign policy views, as some might suggest.
First, we must remember that the State Department has been used as a conduit to support social liberalism for years. But more foundationally, they reveal an establishment mindset that would preclude him from bucking the trend on issues that are clearly within the scope of secretary of State, such as refugees, Syria, Palestinians, Saudi Arabia, and the Muslim Brotherhood.
Tillerson is likely the first nominee for secretary of State ever who has absolutely no political — much less foreign — policy experience. Some supporters laud this fact as a symbol of an “outsiders’” administration. However, these people don’t understand what it means to be a true outsider or insider. There is no greater outsider than one who worked in the system, understands the issues and the politics, and swam upstream to fight the ideology of the political establishment. Conversely, there is no greater insider than someone who never officially worked in the field but subscribes to and is connected to the very essence of the system.
There is nothing inherently wrong with having no official diplomatic experience, if he understands the issues and policies, and most importantly, subscribe to the right ideology and is willing to fight the global elites to change course on the critical issues.
I’d take a guy like Andy McCarthy as secretary of State any day of the week, even though he never worked in the State Department. But Tillerson is not exactly an Andy McCarthy.
As Mark Levin asked last week, if this is just about making deals across the world why not appoint the CEO of 7-Eleven? Indeed, we’ve come a long way from the days of John Jay, Thomas Jefferson, and Edmund Randolph as Secretaries of State.
Unless conservatives get positive answers on some of these critical questions, they should not vote to confirm Tillerson. We don’t need another Bob Corker, albeit with closer ties to Putin.
It’s exactly one month into the world of President-elect Donald Trump. In this episode of the Conservative Conscience, Daniel assesses the first month of policies, statements, and cabinet picks and tries to glean a sense of direction from the nascent administration. There appears to be a lot of promise as it relates to military, national security, terrorism, and immigration. On the other hand, there are challenges ahead for fiscal conservatism, with the notable exception of regulatory reform.
The task for conservatives is to come forward with an aggressive positive agenda that speaks to the strengths of Trump and channels some of the misdirection into good constitutional policies. As it relates to the bad economic policies, conservatives will have to stop him from doing further damage.
The key is to focus Trump on national security and the border and distract him from his other big government ideas. Take a page out of Madison:
“The operations of the federal government will be most extensive and important in times of war and danger; those of the State governments, in times of peace and security. As the former periods will probably bear a small proportion to the latter, the State governments will here enjoy another advantage over the federal government. The more adequate, indeed, the federal powers may be rendered to the national defense, the less frequent will be those scenes of danger which might favor their ascendancy over the governments of the particular States.” [James Madison, Federalist #45]
In middle of a national debate over Islamic refugees, a Somali refugee committed a terror attack in Columbus, Ohio, last week, thereby proving the veracity of those who are concerned by the current resettlement program. Meanwhile, the daughter of a top EU-official was brutally raped and murdered in Germany by an Afghani refugee. Yet, political leaders from both parties are awfully silent on the refugee issue. Even Trump has failed to mention it beyond a quick Facebook post.
In order to get the facts right on refugee resettlement, Daniel invited Leo Hohmann of WND to discuss his new book, Stealth Invasion: Muslim Conquest Through Immigration and the Resettlement Jihad, with the Conservative Conscience audience. Scheduled for release next month, this book chronicles all of the new information on refugee resettlement and how it is transforming some of our small communities, subverting our culture, and endangering our security. This is about more than just preventing the next terror attack, but slowing the growth of a subversive culture that will undermine our way of life – similar to what is happening in Europe today. If you want to be armed with the facts on the refugee issue, Leo Hohmann is the go-to man.
On Refugee Contractors: “As far back as 2000, David M. Robinson, a former acting director of the refugee bureau in the State Department, described the insidious power of the contractors as follows: The agencies form a single body [that] wields enormous influence over the Administration’s refugee admissions policy. It lobbies the hill effectively to increase the number of refugees admitted for permanent resettlement each year and at the same time provides overseas processing for admissions under contract to the State department. In fact, the federal government provides about ninety percent of its collective budget. If there is a conflict of interest, it is never mentioned.” [Chapter 8 of Stolen Sovereignty]
There are always a lot of policy initiatives, suggestions, and complaints offered to a new administration. Inevitably, conservatives will be disappointed with some of the Cabinet choices and some of the policies of any administration. But conservatives have an obligation to hold the Trump administration to two iron-clad campaign promises: stopping harmful immigration from the Middle East and repealing Obamacare.
In this episode of the Conservative Conscience, Daniel expresses some concerns about the potential direction of this Administration, particularly on fiscal issues. In the long run, many of those issues will have to be solved through an Article V Convention of the States because Republicans – both in Congress and the Administration – will never deal with them properly. But in the short run, the issues of refugee resettlement and Obamacare must be dealt with on a federal level. Daniel explains how they can be addressed immediately, why they must be the first priorities for conservatives, and how Trump must make no excuses to shirk the mandate he has been given to act upon those issues.
There are some particular problems as it relates to repealing Obamacare. Many Republican leaders are signaling their intention to keep the coverage mandates and just repeal the funding mechanisms of the law (individual mandate, subsidies, taxes). This is a big mistake and will ensure that Obamacare is never repealed and premiums remain sky high.
There will be a number of other important issues bubbling to the surface with a new administration, but Obamacare and refugees are the issues for which conservatives must lay it all on the line.
On Obamacare: “The coverage mandates of Obamacare are not the stuffing or cranberry sauce. The coverage mandates are reflective of the Turkey itself.”
On Immigration: “Under § 212(f) of Immigration and Nationality Act, “whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.” This power is universal, enforceable at the will of the president, and applies any time for any circumstance.”
What is the true meaning and origin of Thanksgiving? It’s the same true meaning and origin of our founding, Declaration and Constitution. As Ronald Reagan wrote in his 1986 Thanksgiving Day proclamation, “no custom reveals our character as a Nation so clearly as our celebration of Thanksgiving Day,” as it is “Rooted deeply in our Judeo-Christian heritage” and “underscores our unshakeable belief in God as the foundation of our Nation.”
Thanksgiving, perhaps more than any other day or custom, when one truly understands the meaning and origin of the day, reveals just how divorced this country has become from its foundation. In this episode of the Conservative Conscience, Daniel goes through the history of Thanksgiving as a day of fasting, prayer, repentance, and beseeching God for his blessings and how it is inextricably tied to our founding as a nation.
Yet, when reflecting upon the true meaning of Thanksgiving one can’t help but feel sorrow over the dramatic change in the character of our nation. Our most sacred heritage has been ruled unconstitutional by the unelected courts. Even conservatives misunderstand the role of the courts and are ignorant of the true imminent threat they pose to our society – from district level to Supreme Court. Daniel explains his opposition to one of the most highly touted conservative replacements for Justice Scalia because that individual clearly doesn’t understand the role of the federal judiciary or our heritage embodied through Thanksgiving.
"Give thanks unto the Lord, for He is good." [Psalms, 107:1]
“Men, in a word, must necessarily be controlled either by a power within them or by a power without them; either by the Word of God or by the strong arm of man; either by the Bible or by the bayonet.” ~ Robert Winthrop, former Speaker of the House, 1849
“Let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.” ~ George Washington, Farewell Address
“[a] day of joyful thanksgiving to God for the bounties of His providence, for the peace in which we are permitted to enjoy them, and for the preservation of those institutions of civil and religious liberty which He gave our fathers the wisdom to devise and establish and us the courage to preserve. Among the appropriate observances of the day are rest from toil, worship in the public congregation, the renewal of family ties about our American firesides, and thoughtful helpfulness toward those who suffer lack of the body or of the spirit.” ~President Benjamin Harrison, 1891 Thanksgiving Proclamation
“I advise that on this day religious exercises shall be conducted in the churches or meeting places of all denominations, in order that in the social features of the day its real significance may not be lost sight of, but prayers may be offered to the Most High for a continuance of the divine guidance without which man’s efforts are vain, and for divine consolation to those whose kindred and friends have sacrificed their lives for country.” ~President William McKinley, 1899 Thanksgiving Proclamation
10th Circuit Sodom and Gomorrah Court’s Ruling (see page 9 for wickedly hilarious rules of standing)
As excitement is building among conservatives over some of Trumps solid cabinet picks, especially as it relates to immigration and national security, the concerns over the size of the federal government and the abuse of our Constitution and inalienable rights is more potent than ever. We must focus on making state governments relevant again and one of the most systemic ways of achieving that goal is to promote the Convention of the States Project.
In this episode of the Conservative Conscience, Daniel is joined by Mark Meckler, co-founder of the Convention of the States Project, to discuss Article V conventions, an idea long championed by CR’s Editor-in-Chief, Mark Levin. Have you been wondering how the process works, why it is so important, and the long term benefits we can secure from pursuing Article V? Mark Meckler breaks down the facts and swats down some of the misinformation concerning the process. He also updates us on the state of play in the states and how they can come pretty close to meeting the threshold for a Convention in the coming year.
Remember, if you think this problem can be solved in Washington, you haven’t been reading enough of Conservative Review. Meckler lets conservative activists know how they can get involved in a long term project that will actually secure enduring victories for the Constitution.
Did you think congressional Republicans would be emboldened by the election results to change their tepid ways of doing business? Think again. They actually elected the same failed leadership and focused on a ridiculously banal agenda for their first week back after the election.
In this episode of the Conservative Conscience, Daniel focuses on the opportunities that lie ahead for conservatives. What should conservatives focus on in the coming months and what should they leave for future administrations or to the states?
Daniel explains why tax reform is not something we should expend all of our capital on now because it is not a triage item and we usually wind up making things worse whenever we touch it with this crop of Republicans. It’s better to deal with that issue wholesale through a Convention of the States and repeal of the 17th Amendment.
Rather we should focus on 3 categories of issues: 1) immediate triage items that we have a mandate to change, such as Obamacare, religious liberty, refugees, and open borders (get your copy of Stolen Sovereignty for a blueprint) 2) systemic governmental reforms, such as judicial reform and term limits –issues that are easy to message and 3) devolving core functions, such as transportation, education, and welfare back to the states.
By empowering the states and focusing on systemic reforms, conservative can form a permanent firewall in state governments. We call them rainy day reforms, political victories that will last for us even when Democrats inevitably win back the federal government.
Meanwhile, there will be opportunities to work with the Trump administration on foreign policy, national security, and immigration while hopefully steering their focus away from some of their liberal domestic policy agenda.
“We must use this narrowing window of electoral viability to focus on rainy day reforms so that we are never one election away from losing our liberty.”
“Everyone talks about entitlements except for the one true entitlement – that we are all entitled to a republican form of government, irrespective of who wins an election. This is our Constitution and our inalienable rights. We shouldn’t have to be one Supreme Court justice or one court decision away from losing our Constitution. Time for wholesale judicial reform.”
Important Show Links
At every turn, we must asses how we can best make lemonade with the lemons that God presents us with. In this episode of the Conservative Conscience, Daniel dissects the exit polls, returns, and down the ballot races to demonstrate why Republicans have a huge mandate on policy. At the same time, there is an imperative that they use it because there is also counter data to show that Democrats are still very much on their way to building their permanent demographic majority in presidential years, despite last night’s results.
Daniel delves into the false GOP narrative about the need to be liberal on immigration and how last night’s results vindicate our view both from a policy standpoint and from an electoral viability standpoint.
As always, Daniel continues to make the case for judicial reform and how we must use this win as an opportunity to create an enduring firewall in state government against future national wins for Democrats.
While everyone is focusing on the horse race and polling ahead of Tuesday’s election, Daniel takes the opportunity to discuss some foundational causes and righteous battles that must go on irrespective of who wins the election.
In this episode of the Conservative Conscience, Daniel demonstrates why some conservatives are absolutely wrong to assert that the Supreme Court is deadlocked 4-4, suggesting that all we have to do is block Hillary from appointing a bad justice (or have Trump, if he wins, fill Scalia’s seat with a good justice). The court is in fact at least 5-3 liberal on most important issues. Between the lower courts being lost forever, Kennedy being with the Left on the most consequential societal issues, and Roberts being unreliable and also reluctant to overturn lower courts, we have long lost the judiciary. We need to make fight for wholesale judicial reform otherwise the Left will get what they want anyway.
Daniel also delves into Obamacare and how it could permanently destroy Democrats as long as we continue our movement outside the Republican Party to destroy the leviathan even if Hillary wins.
Remember, the Republic will not rise or fall on this election alone but on whether we acquiesce to the unpopular tyranny or commit to new strategies in fighting for the same principles.
“The Constitution is the ultimate stare decisis.” Clarence Thomas
So much of the “conservative” media is bankrupt and they have successfully dumbed down our voters by focusing on nonsense and ignoring what is important. In this episode of the Conservative Conscience, Daniel focuses on what is truly important, irrespective of who wins this election. There is an imperative to change directions within this movement, but fortunately, there is also an amazing opportunity.
If Hillary wins, she will, by far, be the most unpopular president to enter office from day one. Now is the time for state governments to fight back and permanently grab back power from the usurpations of the federal bureaucracies and courts. Daniel goes through the cases of Joe Arpaio in Arizona and Judge Roy Moore in Alabama to demonstrate how individuals are standing up to federal usurpation, but they can’t succeed because the pathetic Republicans in the state won’t stand with them. They are left out to dry. On the other hand, if we actually had a true Freedom Party in control of state governments with all its elected officials singing on the same tune, there is not much the federal government can do to enforce its usurpations. States are enforcing federal usurpations against their own people. That must end if we are to restore our republic, and a Hillary presidency will actually provide us with such an opportunity.
It’s time for our movement to think out of the box and think systemically or we will continue repeating the mistakes of the past.
"When you point at the moon, the idiot looks at the finger." - Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, Founder & President, American Islamic Forum for Democracy
“For as the sound of the thorns under the pot, so is the laughter of the fool, and this too is vanity.” [Ecclesiastes, 7:6]
This episode’s sponsors:
preparewithcr.com – Build your emergency food supply for only $99.
The political world is agog with buzz over Donald Trump’s refusal to affirmatively accept the outcome of the election results up front. Some have suggested this is a threat to the foundation of democracy and the peaceful transfer of power. Although Trump has a penchant for expressing valid points in the worst way imaginable, there is actually a very big problem of voter fraud, exacerbated by the courts, which is covered up by the media and the political class.
In this episode, Daniel demonstrates why it is, in fact, the courts that are a threat to the peaceful democratic transfer of power. They nullify everything the political branches enact, even when those laws are in accordance with the Constitution. It is the judiciary that does not respect the outcome of elections. Now, in the growing trend of courts mandating voting anomalies promoted by George Soros, they are undermining the integrity of the elections.
To be clear, voter fraud is not enough to account for landslide losses caused by terrible GOP candidates, but they absolutely do taint close elections and down-the-ballot races that are often decided by small vote margins. The courts are crushing the states and preventing them from protecting against voter fraud and are bastardizing the Constitution to create super rights for Democrat voters simply because they are deemed ethnic or racial minorities.
Daniel concludes by once again reiterating the only path forward to blocking judicial tyranny and voter fraud is to start a new party that is consistent and principled on federalism in a way that would gain the respect needed to push back against the current system.
“When people get used to preferential treatment, equal treatment seems like discrimination.” ~ Thomas Sowell
Talk about just desserts! A conservative, one who could actually make frustrated voters in both parties proud, is running as a Democrat against a RINO who loves rubber stamping Democrat policies. Live by the Democrats, die by a Democrat!
Art Halvorson, a career Coast Guard Captain and businessman, was able to get on the ballot as a Democrat to challenge Rep. Bill Shuster (R-PA) in Pennsylvania’s 9th District. After coming within 1,000 votes of knocking off the corrupt Chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee in the Republican primary, a number of Democrat voters wrote in Art’s name for the Democrat nomination (no candidate filed to run as a Democrat in this heavily conservative district). Thanks to Pennsylvania law, Halvorson was able to get on the ballot as a Democrat, even though he is challenging Shuster from the right.
In this episode of the Conservative Conscience, Art and Daniel discuss the fresh opportunity, unencumbered by party ID, to reach all voters with common sense ideas packaged in a candidate who lives the life of a conservative. Could this set the tone for the next few years and demonstrate how conservatives can forge a new path ahead without the baggage of the comatose Republican Party. You won’t want to miss this episode with a candidate who is not only a true conservative but a refreshing servant of the people. You won’t believe what Art does at the end of the episode – not something you typically hear from a congressional candidate in a general election!
This week on the Conservative Conscience, Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore joins Daniel Horowitz to discuss the judiciary, his suspension for defying the Supreme Court’s ruling on marriage, and our Stolen Sovereignty.
The Supreme Court’s Obergefell decision created the right to gay marriage from nothing and now the free conscience objections to gay marriage of religious institutions are being trampled upon by the federal government.
“All across our country, we’re seeing a deprivation of a right given by God because the Supreme Court created a right and is mandating that everyone conform to it,” Justice Moore explained.
The Founding Fathers of the American Republic could never have envisioned a time where forces would try to deprive the people of a God-given right to grant a special class of people a right that hasn’t existed in the history of all humankind. Horowitz and Justice Moore discussed the history, meaning, and role of the judiciary and what can be done to reclaim power from a rouge Supreme Court.
For How Much Longer Will Conservatives Exemplified the Definition of Insanity?
In honor of Columbus Day, Daniel makes the case for charting a new course and creating a new party and a new movement. At this point, the outcome of this election is pretty clear, like it or not. We can spend the next thirty days just sullying our souls defending the indefensible and lose anyway or we can start planning for what we can do and be proud of.
The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again in anticipation of a different result. Nothing will change if we treat this GOP loss the same way and just keep banging our heads against the wall with this failed party. As miserable as a Hillary victory is, it is the reality that will soon confront us and we must harness the opportunities that it will provide us in charting a new course. The entire debate about Trump has been a big distraction and doesn’t even speak to the foundational problems we are experiencing. We must all unite instead of blaming each other after November 8. The way to unite to break free of this false choice between Trump (who will be gone by then) and the establishment. Hence, it’s time for a Freedom Party.
Are you pessimistic? Daniel explains both the imperative for starting the new party and the unique opportunity we have for success.
This episode’s sponsor:
preparewithcr.com - Build your emergency food supply for only $99.
In this episode of the Conservative Conscience, Daniel discusses how the corrosive modus operandi of so many in the conservative movement has allowed them to focus exclusively on nonsense and ignore the most important story of the week. Judge Roy Moore stands alone in his battle for marriage, the Constitution, federalism, and state sovereignty, yet the conservative media couldn’t care less that he was wrongly suspended.
Daniel goes on to explain just how severely the judicial crisis is plaguing our nation and how only a society of beta males would allow it to happen. He further offers insight, using the Alabama case study, as to why state courts are better suited to handle cases dealing with social questions and why the federal judiciary must be denuded of any power over such political questions.
“When you become entitled to exercise the right of voting for public officers, let it be impressed on your mind that God commands you to choose for rulers, "just men who will rule in the fear of God." The preservation of government depends on the faithful discharge of this duty; if the citizens neglect their duty and place unprincipled men in office, the government will soon be corrupted; laws will be made, not for the public good so much as for selfish or local purposes; corrupt or incompetent men will be appointed to execute the laws; the public revenues will be sqandered on unworthy men; and the rights of the citizens will be violated or disregarded. If a republican government fails to secure public prosperity and happiness, it must be because the citizens neglect the divine commands, and elect bad men to make and administer the laws.”
[Noah Webster, History of the United States (New Haven: Durrie & Peck, 1832), pp. 336-337]
“Neither the Founding generation nor their children nor their children's children, right on down to our grandparents' generation, were so passive about their role as republican citizens. They would not have accepted-did not accept-being told that a lawyerly elite had charge of the Constitution, and they would have been incredulous if told (as we are often told today) that the main reason to worry about who becomes president is that the winner will control judicial appointments. Something would have gone terribly wrong, they believed, if an unelected judiciary were being given that kind of importance and deference. Perhaps such a country could still be called democratic, but it would no longer be the kind of democracy Americans had fought and died and struggled to create.” ~ Larry D. Kramer, The People Themselves: Popular Constitutionalism and Judicial Review (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004), 228.
This episode’s sponsor:
preparewithcr.com - Build your emergency food supply for only $99.
The difference between today’s professional conservative movement and the Democrats is a difference between 100 degrees of post-constitutional Sodom and Gomorrah vs. 95 degrees. In this episode, Daniel discusses how the Republican party at a presidential level, a congressional level, and conservative media level engages in a fake fight with the Left when it really matters and how it debases who we are and moves the contours of political debate inexorably to the Left and into the gutter.
Amidst all of the salacious political fights and personal attacks the “conservative” media likes to focus on, they don’t even realize how they have already agreed to the Left on so many policy issues of substance. Which is why they have nothing left but to discuss whatever the liberal media thinks is important, albeit complain about it.
Much of the conservative media, which is permanently stuck on the culture of the lesser of two evils, downright defends evil so long as they can point to media bias and the Democrats being even worse. Hence, fornication is tolerated, so long as you don’t get an abortion from it; transgenderism is lovely so long as you are part of a “conservative LGBTQFU group”; Marxism is fine as long as it doesn’t go to illegals; cradle to grave socialism is needed but we just disagree with Democrats over the “amounts and numbers.”
Isn’t it time we created a new vehicle we that can actually stand on its own veracity and merit?
This episode’s sponsor:
preparewithcr.com - Build your emergency food supply for only $99.
Patriot Mobile – your conservative mobile service provider.
Every constitutional conservative is caught up in the emotion over Cruz’s late decision to endorse Donald Trump. In this episode of the Conservative Conscience, as always, Daniel moves beyond the convention wisdom, false choices, and binary narratives placed on our plate by the general media. In Daniel’s opinion, this was a very bad political decision on the part of Cruz, but at the same time he breaks down why he understands the decision and the pressure that was brought the bear on the Texas champion. It was bad strategy, but does it erase everything he’s done until now?
We go deep into politics to show how this is much bigger than Cruz, Trump, or any one individual. The ancillary lessons of what led up to this decision are more powerful than the decision itself. And it all leads to the same conclusion: rather than praising Cruz (if you are pro-Trump) or disowning him (if you are anti-Trump), this must serve as a lesson for why the entire two party oligarchy is irremediably broken.
Daniel explains why it’s not worth it for like-minded individuals to tear each other down over disagreements in strategy, especially when we are all confronted with such an existential crisis. This goes beyond Trump and Hillary, it is a reflection of the entire system. We must pray and work together to address the sources of these ills rather than argue about the strategy of how to deal with insufferable symptoms with no good options and from a position of weakness.
This episode’s sponsor:
preparewithcr.com - Build your emergency food supply for only $99
In this episode, Daniel and Joe explore how moral relativism and the lack of a true party with moral conviction shifts the political landscape dramatically to the left over a short period of time. With no sense of measure, balance, proportion, and context liberals use moral relativism to focus national attention on emotional narratives that are completely divorced from the important macro-narrative that drives a given policy.
Nonetheless, once liberals successfully use their false narratives to legitimize the most radical policies, Republicans accept much of their premise and stake out the right goal post of an issue only a few levels away. This in turn permanently shifts the contours of the debate to the far left and delegitimizes anything beyond those contours, even if it was a view held even by Democrats just one generation ago.
This episode’s sponsor:
preparewithcr.com - Build your emergency food supply for only $99.
The voters are demanding that the political class protect our sovereignty and security. Yet, both parties are out to lunch. While Democrats are refusing to even acknowledge the problem of Islamic jihad, their opponents are unwilling to expose their willful blindness. All Republicans care about is jailbreak and other harmful or vacuous policy ideas. They continue to refuse to use the budget bill to defund Obama’s refugee program.
In this episode of the Conservative Conscience, Daniel explores the recent terror attacks through the prism of a real principled Republican Party. What would a party that is truly committed to our nation’s security do in response to this week’s jihad?
Daniel outlines a number of ideas that will protect our homeland, address the threat doctrine of the enemy, and respect the constitutional constraints. These are all common sense ideas that are not only good policy but reflect good politics as well. Many people think it will take a massive terror attack, God forbid, for the people to wake up and vote against the cultural Marxists and apologists for Islamism. The problem is even if such an event occurs and the majority of the country undergoes a catharsis, there is no political party that can capitalize on that sentiment.
“Republicans could win a landslide election if they made it a referendum on this issue alone!” Daniel declared on this week’s episode of the Conservative Conscience podcast. “Democrats are on the hook for this issue,” he continued. The people want security but neither party will give it to them.
So what would a sane Republican Party do? Well, here are some common sense ideas:
1) Ban the Muslim Brotherhood
2) Pause Refugee Resettlement
3) Allow states to block refugees
4) Strip jihadist fighters of citizenship
5) Exit-entry visa tracking
6) Build the fence (or wall, if that strikes your fancy)
7) National reciprocity for concealed carry
8) Force DHS to deport the million or so with outstanding deportation orders
9) Place restrictions and extra monitoring of travel to dangerous countries
The Intellectual Dishonesty of the 2 Party System
Happy Constitution Day!
Sadly, our Constitution has been shredded to pieces, and in this episode of the Conservative Conscience, Daniel uses current events to demonstrate why the inherent intellectual dishonesty of our party system is the culprit for the constitutional crisis.
George Washington’s final warning to America was that political parties would sow the dissolution of the republic, encouraging people to take refuge in a faction, irrespective of whether it worked harmoniously with the founding values. Unfortunately, this is what we are seeing with all too many pseudo-conservatives who are willing to change who they are to comport with the Republican leaders of the time – be it Trump or someone else.
Daniel dissects how Trump’s new socialized child care and maternity program, and the disturbing support from some prominent conservative figures, is a teachable moment of Washington’s premonition. There are numerous other problems with this plan, the politics surrounding it, and what it represents. Daniel discusses just how far left the party and the “movement” have moved since Reagan and even the Clinton-era, all because of the hopeless binary political game.
Daniel directly addresses those on the right who want to ditch the Constitution and conservatism and how it is rooted in a false political premise. The danger is that Republicans and conservatives will not only enshrine the existing Obama-era levels of government growth, but feel compelled to permanently adopt a slightly less offensive version of all the new Democrat policies.
Either way, until we break out of this mess, people will check their intellectual honesty at the door of party politics. The only difference is that whereas Democrats check their intellectual honesty at the door to comport with their ideology, Republicans check their intellectual honesty at the door to comport with their falsely perceived electoral viability, which ironically means agreeing to the very same Democrat values, albeit with less enthusiasm.
Key Quote from George Washington’s Farewell Address:
“This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.
The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.”
Here is Why Obama’s Approval Rating is Climbing
GOP’s September Agenda: Turning Touchdowns into Interceptions
In this episode of the Conservative Conscience, Daniel explains how Republicans take winning issues and turn them into losing issues. Ever wonder why Obama’s approval rating is soaring to levels not seen since 2009, despite his treasonous acts on a daily basis, despite Obamacare, refugees, open borders, the Iran debacle? Daniel gives a full presentation by taking listeners through the panoply of issues in Congress right now to demonstrate how Republicans are serving as an advancing force for Democrat policies.
If a tree falls in the forest, who is to know? If Republicans refuse to litigate the case against Democrats and harness critical leverage points to spawn a national discussion on refugees, criminal aliens, the internet giveaway, Obama’s funding of Iran and supporting Al Qaeda overseas, etc., then the media narrative will only focus on mundane issues, thereby allowing Obama to escape public criticism.
Daniel explains that whereas Democrats embrace confrontation as a means of promoting their agenda, even when it’s unpopular; Republicans abjure confrontation even when it is politically advantageous for them. Whereas Democrats harness all their talent, time, and treasure to plot how to paint Republicans as extreme and out-of-touch; Republicans expend all their political capital giving cover to Democrats, avoiding such counter opportunities, and make Democrats look good. This dichotomy is completely unsustainable for our Republic.
Buckle your seat-belt, because in this half-hour-episode Daniel goes rapid fire through numerous policy issues and political intel that will make it abundantly clear this party is irreparably broken. To follow along, here are some useful articles.
Joining the Conservative Conscience podcast this episode is Joe Miller. Joe is a conservative constitutionalist from Alaska, who is running against Lisa Murkowski, one of the worst Republican senators in terms of her #LibertyScore. Joe beat Lisa in 2010 in the GOP primary, only to have her mount a write-in bid, joining with liberals, to beat him in the general election.
Joe is a strong believer in local control and state sovereignty over its internal affairs, and although he is running on the Libertarian ticket, he does so while adhering to all of his conservative principles. The Libertarian Party in Alaska is different than that at the national level, and actually more resembles the principles espoused by members of Congress such as Mike Lee, Ted Cruz.
“We have no choice but to engage,” reasoned Miller on why he is running. “We that have opportunity to influence have no choice … it is an imperative. If we don’t get things switched around, we’re not gonna have a country in a decade.”
When asked how he plans to take his conservative message to the broad electorate, Miller said he will stress the commonalities Alaskans have from all over the political spectrum. “The message of local control resonates with everyone,” said Miller, especially in Alaska.
Miller also touched on the idea that a real fix for America may necessitate a new party, and that his candidacy could spark such a movement. “It could be a catalyst to future action,” said Miller. “It certainly would destabilize the establishment, or the duopoly, as I call it.”
Joe Miller is the only true conservative running for the U.S. Senate this year who is not already in Congress.
**Production Note: The statement from Murkowski's senior judiciary staff was "child pornographer" not "child molester."