Posts Tagged ‘Ronald Reagan’

Just before the mid-term elections, we were told repeatedly how close each race would be, but that wasn’t the case, was it? It was an anti-Obama landslide. We rid our nation of Senators and others who refused to govern Constitutionally and listen to the will of the people. The reason we did this so convincingly is because there are still millions of men and women in America who believe in honor, integrity, and the freedom to pursue an honest living.

You may have forgotten, but in order to “save the Senate for the Democrats,” President Obama deferred the adverse financial impact of ObamaCare until 2015. Unfortunately for him, he still lost the Senate, but there will be a new wave of anti-Obama sentiment, making him even less popular. When people discover how much they will be paying for healthcare, the outrage will be overwhelming.

This means the Republicans will win the White House in 2016, regardless of who the candidate happens to be, despite what the political pundits may tell you.

With that in mind, we have a wonderful opportunity to elect a man or woman of character, rather than a lukewarm candidate who lacks conviction. We do not need to settle for anyone who is little better than the next Progressive the Democrats nominate.

The pundits will continue their handwringing, telling us only a moderate can win, but that’s not true. They were wrong a month ago, and they will continue to be wrong. Don’t believe them.

It’s time to champion a true conservative—someone we can trust—someone who will never usurp power the way Obama has. There are people like this—quite a few in fact. We have a unique opportunity to see who has the best ideas and who has strength of character.

At this time in 1978, Ronald Reagan was a dark horse, but he proved himself and achieved an overwhelming victory. The same thing should happen in 2016. So, remain strong and fervent in your belief that America is still the greatest nation on the earth. Together, we can recapture what has been lost, reestablish trust throughout the world, and deal with the corruption of Obama’s failed Presidency.

Jack Watts

Read Full Post »

From the moment Nidal Malik Hasan, a former United States Army psychiatrist, fatally shot thirteen and injured more than thirty others in the Fort Hood mass shooting on November 5, 2009, I knew we would be in serious trouble with Barack Obama as Commander-in-Chief. His militant refusal to call this a terrorist attack, which it definitely was, made it crystal clear Obama, and his Progressive cohorts, were unable to call a spade a spade. Their flawed worldview would not permit it. So, they engaged in revisionist history to rename it workforce violence, which it has remained ever since.

The problem with this is that it isn’t true, as anybody with an ounce of sense recognizes, which disqualifies his fawning press, who act as codependent enablers to this twisted worldview. Another example of this is Obama’s assertion that Islam has always played a key role in history, which it certainly has not, but the press lets his revisionism slide. It has become their fallback position.

The problem goes far deeper than this, however. It now threatens our survival as a nation.

As his core, Obama is a Progressive more than he is a Muslim. It’s a non-theistic worldview, but it’s not necessarily atheistic. To a Progressive, God simply isn’t important, as we saw when the Democrats booed His name being included in the Democratic platform several times during their last Democratic National Convention. Government is what is important to Progressives—not God’s will.

True to his Progressive principles, Obama has governed accordingly for six years. An essential component of Progressivism is that America has been on the wrong side of history since our inception, and the Judeo-Christian worldview is wrong, archaic, and intellectually indefensible. Those who champion American exceptionalism are worthy of being mocked, and that’s precisely what Progressives do, including the press. In the Progressive repudiation of our historical roots, they have repeatedly championed Islam as a religion of peace. As President, basing his policies on his Progressive beliefs, Obama has championed the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, the rebels over Khadafi in Libia, Hamas over Israel, and the swap of the Taliban Five for Bergdahl—the American deserter. Each of his ideological positions—all based on Progressive ideology—have failed. None of them have furthered American interests. Rather than admit his errors, Obama has double-downed on his ideological convictions.

The folly of Obama’s ways was broadcasted worldwide on You Tube, with the beheading of James Foley on August 20, 2014. This blatant, in-your-face attack on an American citizen graphically revealed the failure of Obama’s tepid leadership and his flawed worldview. Even worse, it reveals the Progressive worldview, where terrorism has repeatedly been redefined, is incapable of facing Evil head on. Progressives don’t believe in Evil, while those who are Evil are willing to die for their cause—just as long as it eventually brings about our destruction, Israel’s too.

You might ask, “Do we have anything that’s strong enough to withstand this Evil assault upon our nation?” The answer is simple and obvious: Of course, we do. We have our Judeo-Christian heritage that has always recognized Evil for what it is and stood up to it effectively, including World War II.

When I was pursuing my Ph.D in international politics at Emory in the late 70s, the prevailing belief of my professors—all Progressives—was that America was in irreversible decline. With Jimmy Carter as President, my heart sank, believing this was true. Then, Ronald Reagan—like the rise of the Phoenix—came out of the West and ushered in a generation of American strength and prosperity.

Now, with Obama at the helm, we are being told the same thing. America’s days are dwindling, which even evangelicals accept as the fulfillment of their Premillennial worldview, but it isn’t necessarily so. In fact, it shouldn’t be so.

Regardless of what the future holds, we must stand up to the Evil of Islam and confront their Jihadism head on. To do this, we need a leader who embraces the historical foundation of our Judeo-Christian heritage and not one who repudiates it in favor of the wishful thinking of Progressivism.

Not much is at stake—just our survival.

Jack Watts

Read Full Post »

I remember this time in 1979, when the 1980 Presidential election was beginning to heat up. I was in a Ph.D. program at Emory University in political science, and we were being told that the United States was in irreversible decline—that our best years were behind us. In academia, this belief was nearly universally espoused.

Jimmy Carter was in The White House, gearing up for his reelection bid. In Iran, the diplomats and staff in our embassy were being held hostage, inflation was in double digits, gas lines were long, and interest rates were well over 20 percent. After the Watergate scandal, with the Vietnam War still a vivid memory, Americans were weary of Washington politicians, but Carter looked like he would win a second term because the Republicans couldn’t seem to get their act together.

Some supported Ronald Reagan, who was considered a rightwing extremist like Barry Goldwater. The traditional belief was that if nominated, his candidacy would ensure a Carter victory, which would mean four more years of poor leadership. Because I accepted this theory as accurate, I initially supported Howard Baker, the Tennessee Senator—a centrist Republican like Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford. He looked like a safe bet and someone who could actually defeat Carter, but Baker was unimaginative and as exciting as walls that are painted taupe.

As I listened to Ronald Reagan, however, who was depicted by the media as an old, less-than-intelligent cowboy with wild, grandiose ideas, his heartfelt passion for American exceptionalism captivated me. His love for America matched mine, and I started to believe his vision for a prosperous future, which was to lead the western democracies into the twenty-first century. At Emory, I was the only one in the political science department who felt this way, so I did battle routinely with my fellow graduate students and professors.

As it turned out, the rest of the country, except for the intelligencia, staunch Democrats, and those on the dole felt the same way, and Reagan won an impressive victory, which was accompanied by a landslide victory four years later. As it turned out, Reagan ushered in a quarter century of prosperity, while winning the Cold War.

As the New Year begins in 2012, the parallels with 1980 are astounding. The liberal media continues to champion the failed policies of President Obama, just like they did with Jimmy Carter, and the theme of America’s irreversible decline is once again the clarion message being heralded by the liberal media. Our debt is unsustainable, while President Obama believes he is at least the fourth best President Obama in our history. Plagued by unpopular wars and national ennui, our future looks bleak once again.

As I look at the field of Republican aspirants, it reminds me of this time thirty-two years ago. Romney resembles Howard Baker—a safe bet and a man who will say or do anything to win the White House. The candidate with vision and passion is clearly Newt Gingrich, but the scorched earth criticism of his past by his fellow contenders may derail him; that is, unless people rally to his cause—just like they came to Reagan’s defense. My advise to Newt is to stop whining, stay focused on his vision for America, which resonates with millions, and keep on apologizing for being an ass for all those years. Americans will forgive anything, except for arrogance and cover-ups. I like that about us.

Traditional wisdom says that Romney—the man with money and the Presidential looks—will win the nomination, but I hope that’s not true. I would definitely vote for him against Obama, but I would need a Viagra to muster the energy to do so. If Newt’s the nominee, I’ll work tirelessly for his election—just as I did for Reagan, when I wore a younger man’s clothes.

Read Full Post »