The Radical Takeover of the Democrat Party

The Democrat party is in the midst of a great battle and while the pundits recognize that something is going on, none of them seem willing or able to explain the nature of the conflict. At root, the battle is a battle between Liberals and Radicals.Take the issue of rights. Conservatives believe that everyone has equal rights, no matter their sex or race or ethnic background or religion. Liberals also believe in equal rights, but they believe that equal rights should lead to statistically equal outcomes.  Conservatives accept that giving people equality of opportunity and rights does not guarantee equality of results, but Liberals see inequality of results and assume that there has been some injustice. Therefore, Liberals push for affirmative action, quotas, and other artificial mechanisms, which they hope will create statistical equality. This inevitably replaces one injustice with another.

Radicals are not interested in equality of rights or even statistical equality of results. Radicals believe that all history is the history of class struggle: the rich oppressing the poor, those of European ancestry oppressing those of African ancestry, men oppressing women, heterosexuals oppressing gays, lesbians and transgendered, America oppressing developing nations. It is not enough for the oppressors to stop oppressing and offer equality of opportunity and rights, or even equality of results. According to the Radicals, the oppressors have enjoyed “privileges” that the oppressed have been denied. This privilege consists in belonging to the privileged oppressor class. So even if you personally have never engaged in a single act of racism, sexism, or homophobia, the fact that you are a white, heterosexual male means that you have benefited from being a member of the oppressor class and therefore you are guilty and you deserve to pay.

Justice for the Radicals is forcing oppressors to pay through humiliation, through the destruction of their institutions (like the Boy Scouts), and monetarily through reparations. According to the Radicals, America is an oppressor nation because it is rich and other nations are poor. For Radicals, the economy is a zero sum game. They don’t understand that the American system created wealth. For them all wealth is stolen from the oppressed. Of course, in countries where Radicals have gained control and eliminated the rich, no wealth is created and everyone accept the ruling Radicals is poor (for example, Cuba).

For the Radicals, America is the great Satan, the incarnation of evil; therefore even if America engages in military activities to free other people from oppression, America is wrong and deserves to lose. On the other hand, for the Radicals, terrorists are oppressed and therefore their actions are justified.

Another issue on which Radicals and Liberals part ways is the question of tolerance. For the Conservative, tolerance means allowing other people to speak their minds even when you believe they are wrong. For Conservatives people have rights, but opinions have no rights. It is perfectly acceptable to criticize foolish and dangerous opinions and to believe that you are right and other people are wrong.

Liberals are also for tolerance, but they tend to fall into moral relativism. Liberals believe that not only are all people equal, all opinions are equal. They don’t actually believe this, what they really believe is that moral relativism is the only truth, and anyone who believes that it is possible to make judgments is dogmatic, bigoted, or narrow minded.

Radicals, when they are not in power, vociferously defend their right to freedom of speech, and scream intolerance when, after they have been allowed to speak, someone criticizes their extreme statements. However, when in power Radicals shut down the speech of anyone who disagrees with them. If they don’t have the outright power to censor, they send out goon squads to scream, bang pans, and threaten to riot in order to assure that no voice but their own is heard. We see this occurring in universities that used to be bastions of Liberalism, but have fallen under the control of the Radicals. While persons with extreme Radical views are hired and receive tenure, Liberals who question Radicalism are marginalized, and Conservatives are banned outright. Conservative speakers are denied the opportunity to speak — they are either not invited to speak or are shouted down when they try to speak. 

Although to conservatives Hillary Clinton is an extreme Liberal, she is still a Liberal. On the other hand, Barack Obama has spent his life in the company of Radicals. Rev. Wright’s Black Liberation Theology is the epitome of Radicalism, as is Fr. Pfleger’s ideological distortion of Catholic social teaching. William Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn are unrepentant Radicals. 

Barack Obama claims to want to bring people together, but there is not a single example of his reaching out to Conservatives. On the other hand, in spite of the embarrassment they have caused him he has consistently refused to denounce the Radicals in his past, and frankly if he did it now we would have to assume that he was acting out of political expedience not from a real recognition of the danger to our democracy posed by his friends’ Radical views.

In the 1960s Conservatives drew a hard line between themselves and the extremists of the Right – KKK, Neo-Nazi. Liberals, on the other hand, made common ground with Radicals. They now face the prospect of a Radical takeover of the Democratic party. The only way the Liberals can save their party and ultimately save America is to vote for John McCain.

[CE Editor's note: This opinion column does not represent an endorsement by Catholic Exchange of John McCain.  This is a reprinted column that we believe may be of interest to our readers and the author of this column is not affiliated with Catholic Exchange.]

By

Subscribe to CE
(It's free)

Go to Catholic Exchange homepage

  • digitaldeacon

    Amen!!!!

  • noelfitz

    Is it a mortal sin to vote for Obama? Will those who consider voting for him be condemned to the fires of hell for all eternity?

    I believe the former Dean of Law at CUA, Professor Douglas Kmiec, recently was denounced from the pulpit and refused communion because he is an Obama supporter.

    Should those who intend voting for Obama not receive Communion to avoid compounding their guilt?

    To me the American Catholic Church is in schism, between those who believe it is a mortal sin to be a Democrat and those who do not believe this.

    When the Pope was in the US Communion was given to all who approached the altar.

    In CE some time ago it was pointed out that in Protestantism there are different opinions, but in Catholicism there is truth, Catholics know right from wrong and what is to be believed.

    Have the US bishops, in a unified way, clarified the sinfulness of voting for Obama or of upholding the right to vote according to conscience?

    God bless,

    Noelfitz.

    ______________________________________________________________
    IN NECESSARIIS UNITAS, IN DUBIIS LIBERTAS, IN OMNIBUS CARITAS.
    ______________________________________________________________

  • Richard Bell

    Noelfitz;

    I heard that Kmiec was refused communion beause he refued to back down from his scandalously public support of abortion.

    It is not that voting for Obama is sinful, it is that voting for a politician that publically supports the grave evil of infanticide, when there is an alternate candidate that affirms a universal right to life, is a failure of conscience.

    If Obama maps to the infanticide supporter, and McCain maps to the alternate, it is hardly the USCCB’s fault. If the only interpretation of pastoral voting advice is not to vote democrat, it is the fault of the Democratic policy platform.

  • dorothy761

    Noelfitz- I think the Catholic church is becoming to liberal with Fa. Pflagler and the president of DePaul university. The commencement address welcomed alluh with the catholics.I wanted to walk out! There were more muslims than I have ever seen at a school.This is taking space where a catholic could attend. The catholic schools should require religion at all catholic colleges. The church will end up losing the followers if they don’t. My brother and brother in law have left for protestant churches much more conservative.Concerning Obama most of my friends think he’s a fake and has no substance either with religion or strong enough to run a country. Catholics should think twice before they vote for Obama because I don’t think his values are the values the catholics have.One thing I do know he was not with his mother when she died that tells me a lot!

MENU