Replies

I can add a little more, sure, and note, I did not put in my customary links, but I would be happy to provide further info on any point if I can.

The author claims that the 1930s were the Red Decade and that somehow things magically changed when Pearl Harbor was bombed, at which point, the author suggest using patriotic and the right interchangeably, came back into fashion.

That is ahistorical.

The Right of the 40s and through the mid-50s viewed Pearl Harbor as an act of Deceit by FDR whose administration was filled with Stalinists (Reds in the authors parlance) in an effort to get Japan to attack the United States rather than invade the Soviet Union from the West through Siberia.

The Hollywood of the 1940s was riddled with Communist sympathizers (useful idiots) who happily went to work for Uncle Joe in propagandizing the war effort. Even Frank Capra was investigated by Hoover's FBI for Communist themes in the very popular 'Its A Wonderful Life.' All that really happened was that the goal of the Communists changed and coincided with that of the Democratic party.

I mean, half of Europe was given to Stalin after the efforts of a Communist spy, Alger Hiss, advised the President to do so. The secrets of the bomb were handed over to the Stalinists by the very people hired by the US taxpayers to build it.

After the war, the Right was sold-out in 1948 and forced to back in current parlance, a RINO, Dewey, who supported the socialist New Deal programs. Truman then launched a half-hearted war in Korea where he hamstrung the General MacArthur in fighting to a conclusion.

In 1952, a very anti-New Deal, anti-war, anti-defect, anti-Big Government candidate of the Right Taft was sold out by the Wall Street RINOs for Ike. Ike did take on an anti-Communist Nixon as the VP, but Nixon was not actually a conservative, but simply an anti-Communist who leaned to the Right. Ike did a fairly good job for 8 years of course, but he instated no reforms and when he left office he warned against the "Military Industrial Complex" in his farewell address.

For the next 20 years, the Warren court and leftists in Hollywood attacked every social standard from the West in a search of the egalitarian ideal.

The Republicans and the culture sold out the ancient English custom and concept of Property Rights with the 1963 Civil Rights bill and then pretended to be surprised that it quotas and Nixon's implementation of Affirmative Action caused so much anger. The Warren Court destroyed the last vestiges of the Republic's judicial system with Miranda and the Roe V Wade case that still haunts us.

There was a brief respite in 1980, but Reagan had to take on the RINO of his time, George Bush as a VP, and when Reagan was elected he started appointing Ford and Nixon hold overs rather than the outside "radicals" that got him there. Then the assassination attempt from the son of a George Bush for President contributor---but that is another story.

Reagan did a great job in fixing the welfare state, rebuilding a military that was completely obsolete and lowering taxes for a couple of years until he went back on that in 1983 and raised taxes, but he also had no effect on reducing the size of government. Still, he brought down the Soviet Union with nary a shot and should be remembered in the pantheon of great world leaders and great Americans.

9/11 was the end result of a trillion dollar centralized intelligence agency that could no longer function, like the Old Soviet Union. Rather than dismantle the system and look to solve the problem internally (armed passengers, tighter borders, and firings/pension strippings of government hacks) the central government set off to slay a foreign monster that may or may not have had anything to do with 9/11 and debt financed the whole thing, similar to LBJ's reign.

Meanwhile, gays can now marry, and doctors will have to kill the baby while still in the uterus rather than in the birth canal-- and conservatives call it a victory.

Meanwhile, gays can now marry, and doctors will have to kill the baby while still in the uterus rather than in the birth canal-- and conservatives call it a victory.

Which is worse, gays and women allowed a choice or the fiscal collapse which the U.S. is rushing towards (with just as much republican responsibility as democrat)?

Seems to me that the impact on us is far greater with a fiscal collapse (if you doubt a collapse, just look at the numbers - social security, medicare, national debt, economic demographics, projected entitlements, etc.).

A nation's strength (and therefore its security) is ultimately founded in its economy - with a fiscal collapse, we are in much greater peril than with social controversy and moral fluctuation.