Coup d’état - a sudden and decisive action in politics, especially one resulting in a change of government illegally or by force.
This is what McCabe said: Former acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe told CBS News that the Department of Justice discussed whether there was enough support from members of President Donald Trump's Cabinet, including Vice President Mike Pence, to assemble the group to invoke the 25th Amendment to remove the president from office. He also admitted that he ordered an obstruction of justice investigation into Trump in order to keep the Russia investigation alive after Trump fired former FBI Director James Comey.
McCabe went on to say that the idea that somehow Trump colluded with Russia "was something that troubled me greatly." He said the day after he met with Trump, he told the team investigating possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia to try to figure out what their next steps should be in order to keep the investigation going.
The 25th Amendment Section 4: Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.
The ability to discharge the powers and duties of his office is vague and that was the intention of the author. However, it is clear that the amendment was never intended to replace impeachment, nor was it intended to be used simply because of political differences. McCabe and members of the deep state had false suspicions that Trump had colluded with the Russian government based on a report they knew was false and was the result of a political opposition paper paid for by the DNC and Hillary Clinton with the intent of manufacturing false claims. McCabe and the deep state were well aware that nothing within that report was true, nevertheless, they used it to knowingly advance a false narrative.
The question that the DOJ should investigate once Barr becomes Attorney General is did McCabe and his fellow deep state members commit treason in their attempt to overthrow a duly elected President simply because they disagreed with that duly elected President politically. It was clear and evident that President Trump was very capable of discharging the duties of his office. It has become abundantly clear that members of the deep state within the DOJ and FBI had not been discharging their duties as fair and impartial servants of the government. This would be an excellent case to bring some clarity as to what the 25th amendment means when it says to discharge the powers and duties of the office.
THIS IS A STORY THAT DID NOT MAKE THE NATIONAL HEADLINES, AND IT SHOULD. INSTEAD WE HEARD ABOUT THE TWITTER BANTER BETWEEN DIFFERENT POLITICIANS, HOLLYWOOD CELEBRITIES, AND OPINION PUNDITS WHO CAMOUFLAGE THEMSELVES AS JOURNALISTS.
Our national debt now exceeds $22 trillion and it is growing. Our national debt has been declared to be a threat to our national security. The national debt continues to grow despite increasing revenue from taxes. In 2014 the United States Treasury collected an estimated $2,849,000,000. In 2018 the United States Treasury collected an estimated $3,752,000,000 from tax revenue. The 2018 number includes the Trump tax cuts, which resulted in greater income to the United States Treasury. Of course, this happens every time there is a substantial tax cut because of the increased revenues in business and increased personal income. When the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) claim a tax cut to the American public costs the United States Treasury income, it is a lie.
The Gross Domestic Product for 2018 is estimated to be $20.1 trillion. This is an increase of approximately $3 trillion dollars in the last 3 years. Despite the GDP growth and tax revenue growth the national debt continues to grow. This is because the spending continues to grow at an incredible pace. The requested budget by the Paul Ryan House, remember Ryan, the conservative budget guru which is a laugh out loud, was in excess of $4, 000,000,000,000. You do the math.
One per cent of $22,000,000,000,000 is $222,000,000,000; or one per cent of $22 trillion is $220 billion. That means that two per cent of $22 trillion is $440 billion. The rate on the ten-year treasury note in January 0f 2015 was 1.88%. The rate on the ten-year treasury note in January of 2019 was 2.71%. The rate on the one-year treasury bill in January of 2015 was 0.2%. The rate on the one-year treasury bill in January of 2019 was 2.58%. Because of the great economic conditions due to lower tax rates and less regulation, the projection is for that rate to go higher.
Our national expenditures will continue to grow because of increased interest cost and because of irresponsible government spending, waste, and fraud; and because NOBODY CARES. What we are seeing in Venezuela and we have seen in other countries such as Greece in the 1940’s, Germany in the 1920’s, and over 55 times in recent history, hyperinflation that devastates economies, countries, and families is the result. And yet, NOBODY CARES. When we hear that people deserve to receive more and more free stuff with more and more government spending, including such irresponsible claims that the world will end in 12 years unless we bankrupt ourselves to fight some imagined crisis as Global Warning. Global warning is a false narrative perpetrated by the Marxists and Globalists, (collectivists) in their effort to punish what they call imperialist nations and people, primarily the United States, and reward those they call oppressed nations and people. The sad thing is that it seems to be working. IF YOU TELL A BIG ENOUGH LIE OFTEN ENOUGH IT WILL BECOME FACT.
We the people must show the deserved outrage toward the irresponsibility of those in government who totally disregard the NATIONAL DEBT that always ends in social devastation and financial collapse along with their climb on the bandwagon irresponsible claims about GLOBAL CHANGE, by electing reasonable and responsible people to congress.
The Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) party has been moving to the collectivist (Marxist, communist, socialist, progressive, Democrat – all virtually the same) for a long time. Many would say it started with Woodrow Wilson, took a gigantic step under the Franklin Roosevelt era, with another gigantic stop under the Obama regime. Some of us would say it had begun prior to Wilson, but that debate is for another time. The fact is that the Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) party of today is a full-fledged collectivist party singing the same song of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Mao, Castro, and Chavez. It is being pulled by different forces. Here is another movement with a different name but same polices as the current Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) party as outlined by its new darling AOC and the growing list of presidential candidates.
Bread and Roses was formed in 2018 and has declared its beliefs. The first statement is by its founder Jerome Segal and and the second is the platform of Bread and Roses form its website. As you can read, these could come from the declaration speech of any of the current Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) candidates and sounds much like the New Green Deal supported by the Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) Party.
A 50-State Party
Bread and Roses, more fully, Bread and Roses/Peace and Justice, is a new national party, with its first State party in Maryland. In August 2018, Bread and Roses delivered 15,000 signatures to the Maryland Board of Elections to qualify as a non-major party in Maryland. When qualified, we will have the right to place our candidates on the ballot in Maryland for all local, state and national elections in Novembers 2020 and 2022.
Bread and Roses is "socialistic" in its ideals, open to New Socialists and Non-Socialist alike. We use these terms "socialistic" and "New Socialists" to communicate both that the goals of socialism are central to our outlook, but also that we have new ideas with respect to public policy, that we are not wedded to big Government, and that we seek to develop a new political culture that is experimental and modest rather than dogmatic with respect to predictions of actual consequences of any effort to build a better world. We are not clairvoyant. We believe in keeping ones eye on ultimate goals and values, and being a society that learns, even from failure.
As to socialistic ideals, we embrace the social contract implied in "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs." Everyone should make a contribution, and be given an opportunity to do so. That contribution should be from ones deepest abilities, from potentials that one is able to develop to their fullest. And in exchange, everyone has right to fulfillment of core economic needs, regardless of income level.
Secondly, we believe that "The Job System," our basic economic framework, one that divides us into two groups: "the job creators" and the "the job seekers," is not an eternal fact of nature. It is a recent system, primarily the result of industrialization, and it has largely served its purpose. We are ready to move beyond the job system, and to transform what remains of it.
Our roots are broader than the Socialist tradition. We strongly identify with the "plain living, high thinking" traditions of America, whether the Quakers, John Adams, Thoreau, or the experimental utopian communes of the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries. We seek a socio-economic framework that is user-friendly to those pursuing The Alternative American Dream, one of modest consumption, economic security, and abundant leisure, sufficient to do the things in life that matter most.
Further, "Roses" is central to our outlook. Roses means different things to different people. Clearly, it means beauty, both in the urban and natural environment, a society With Beauty For All. More fundamentally, in saying "And Roses too" the women strikers in Lawrence were saying, "We are not just laborers, with basic needs for bread. We are also complex human beings, with complex needs for lives of meaning and richness." We agree. We believe that Renaissance is in America's future.
Finally, we are international in our orientation. We believe in an engaged America, but one that is true to its best self; one that seeks a world of peace in which human rights are respected, in which cultures are tolerant and in which oppression is checked by evolving international institutions, ones that will ensure: Never again, not to anyone, not to any people.
- Jerome Segal, founder
A democratic socialist world
Democratic socialists believe it’s impossible to have democracy or social justice under capitalism, an economic system that concentrates wealth and power in the hands of a few. We fight for a society without class, where decisions about what to produce, and how to produce and distribute it, are made democratically. We fight for a society where every person regardless of gender, race, or cultural background has the opportunity to develop to their full human potential.
The world we live in violates any reasonable standard of justice and decency. But moral outrage is not enough to change the world. Democratic socialists also have a strategy to break the power of capitalists and the bosses who do their bidding: we see a united, militant working class as the leading force for radical social change.
The vast majority of people in our society—those who are separated from the means of production and have to sell their labor to survive—are part of the working class. Their exploitation by capitalist bosses means that they have the greatest interest in fighting for a socialist society. And at the same time, workers’ position within the machinery of capitalism gives them the power to disrupt business as usual, win concessions, and transform our society. This is why everything we do as an organization must be aimed at reviving the once-strong link between socialist politics and the working class. A unified, global working-class movement can transform our society and undermine racial and gender oppression, combat police brutality and mass incarceration, challenge the United States’ role as an imperialist policeman, ensure rights and justice for migrants, and build an ecologically sustainable economy.
MARX, ENGELS, LENIN, MAO, CASTRO, CHAVEZ, HOPKINS HESS, OBAMA, JARRETT, HOLDER AND ALL OTHER COMRADES WOULD STRONGLY AGREE AND HAVE STATED THE SAME IN DIFFERENT STATEMENTS AND POLICIES THEY HAVE SUPPORTED.
That the Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) party advocates collectivist (Marxist. Communist, socialist, progressive, Democrat – all virtually the same) ideals is now an unquestionable statement. FDR enabled his friend Joseph Stalin to dominate Eastern Europe even though Winston Churchill fought against this horrible policy pushed by members of the United States Communist Party, Hopkins and Hess, within the FDR circle. The evils of Communism were then recognized but accepted by Eisenhower, Kennedy, Nixon and others up until Ronald Reagan said no more. The Soviet Empire, made possible by FDR and his communist dominated inner circle, collapsed. Even though the Soviet Empire collapsed, the Marxist philosophy continued and is alive and well in the United States today. It is in fact the philosophy under which the Democrat (Marxist/Progressive) Party operates today. Comrade Obama, a dedicated communist, along with his comrade’s Jarrett and Holder ignited the philosophy and greatly aided it in becoming the central theme of the current Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) Party.
This is so evident that President Trump directly denounced this evil of collectivism (Marxism, communism, socialism, progressive, Democrat – all virtually the same). Other presidents have also directly denounced collectivism, but never in the context that did President Trump when he stated that despite the efforts of the collectivist dominated Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) Party, the United States must reject this false promise of “Hope and Change” that has failed every time it has been tried.
The new voice of the Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) Party Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (M/P, N.Y.) and Ed Markey (M/P., Mass.) introduced a Green New Deal bill that, in addition to using government coercion and the typical wealth redistribution of the collectivist movement through the false claim that the United States must be transitioned to an entirely new renewable energy economy in ten years, promises to provide “economic security for those unable or unwilling to work.” A false narrative is being used to create a manufactured crisis in order to bring about the overthrow of capitalism and completely transform the United States to a communist society. The economic security of those unable or unwilling to work is exactly what Marx meant when he said from each according to their abilities to each according to their needs. This platform has been endorsed by the leadership of the Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) Party including those who are now or are planning to announce their candidacy for the presidential nomination.
“For as soon as the distribution of labour comes into being, each man has a particular, exclusive sphere of activity, which is forced upon him and from which he cannot escape. He is a hunter, a fisherman, a herdsman, or a critical critic, and must remain so if he does not want to lose his means of livelihood; while in communist society, where nobody has one exclusive sphere of activity but each can become accomplished in any branch he wishes, society regulates the general production and thus makes it possible for me to do one thing today and another tomorrow, to hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon, rear cattle in the evening, criticise after dinner, just as I have a mind, without ever becoming hunter, fisherman, herdsman or critic.”
― Karl Marx, The German Ideology
“The ends always justify the means” has been the axiom of the collectivist (Marxist, communist, socialist, progressive, Democrat – all virtually the same) from the beginning of time. When this is the code by which you live, you can always justify putting politics above principle. Harry Reid stood on the floor of the Senate and declared that he had it from good sources that Mitt Romney had not paid taxes for ten years. After it had been proven beyond any doubt that Reid had lied, he justified his lie by saying, “he didn’t win.” Obama stated that you can keep your plan if you like it, you can keep your doctor if you like them, knowing this was a lie. Obama justified his lie by saying that all would now have coverage, which also turned out to be a lie.
When Brett Kavanaugh was about to be confirmed to be a Justice on the Supreme Court, Diane Feinstien leaked damaging information to the public that, without any proof or collaborating statements or evidence, Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted a young lady while they were both in high school. Other salacious claims were made by others about Kavanaugh as well. The Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) immediately called for the nomination of Kavanagh to be withdrawn explaining that all women must be believed, that the witness sounded truthful, and that just suspicion and not evidence was enough to have the nomination withdrawn.
Justin Fairfax, Lieutenant Governor of Virginia, has been implicated in a case of sexual abuse that took place during a Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) convention in 2004. The same Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) who called for the head of Kavanaugh are now protecting Fairfax claiming that the principles of rule of law must be followed. The Governor of Virginia has been implicated in a racist incident and many of the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) had called for his resignation. These calls for resignation have also been withdrawn.
Governor Northam is a member of the Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) Party. If he were to resign, Fairfax would become governor. Fairfax is a member of the Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) party. If Fairfax would be forced from office, the next highest elected official, the Attorney General would become governor. That would be Mark Herring, a member of the Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) party who just revealed he had also done blackface while in school, just as Northam had done. The next in line to be governor would be the speaker of the House of Delegates — currently Republican Kirk Cox.
The first three in line to be governor of Virginia are all Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) who have admitted to doing blackface or are implicated in a sexual assault case, all actions for which Marxist/Progressives have said in the past that just the implication disqualifies the individual from serving in public office. If they were a party that believed in principles, the next governor would be a Republican. That is the incorrect ends, according to them so principle will be cast to the wind and politics will prevail. Remember, THE ENDS ALWAYS JUSTIFY THE MEANS. POLITICS OVER PRINCIPLES. These are the standards by which collectivists (Marxists, communists, socialists, progressives, Democrats, all virtually the same).
It was a very interesting and revealing evening. Both President Trump and the response by Stacy Abrams gave better than respectable deliveries. The close of the State of the Union by President Trump was an inspirational call to patriotism to everybody, regardless of political party. It was very well crafted and very well delivered.
There were, however, very telling moments that showed a great divide that must be bridged for the good of the country. President Trump had just referred to the devastation currently taking place in Venezuela brought about by the socialism started by Chavez and continued by Maduro. President Trump then did something I do not remember any President doing in any speech, much less the State of the Union, when he declared that the United States must never succumb to that evil that is socialism. Those on the right stood and cheered while those on the left sat with no clapping and with angry looks on their faces.
Abrams in her response, while being divisive in her rhetoric, called for social programs through government, just as Chavez did in Venezuela, as the solution for any and all problems, real or perceived. She also used the same call that has been used by collectivists (Marxists, communists, socialists, progressive, Democrat – all virtually the same) always. That is that they are the party of the people and all should be allowed to vote with no restrictions including being a United States Citizen or an illegal alien, whether dead or alive, or whether voting once or numerous times. Elections of this nature are easily manipulated and bring about the results of those willing to manipulate an election as we saw throughout the country but especially in California in 2018. This type of election manipulation has always ended with people becoming servants, serfs, and slaves to a Marxist tyrannical state.
The other telling moment during the State of the Union was when President Trump called upon congress to pass a law that prohibited the killing of a baby after that child had been delivered. That a President would have to even do this in the United States is appalling. The reaction by those on the left was nothing short of atrocious. Again, they sat, no applause, frowns on most of their faces, but a despicable smirk on the face of Chuck Schumer. My reaction was to wonder if this was the same smirk Josef Mengele had on his face as he did his “experiments”. Schumer’s smirk was nothing short of demonic, as I would imagine was Mengele’s.
That the United States President would be compelled to call for the United States to refute socialism and to not participate In the Satanic practice of infanticide is frightening. We can only hope that the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) will take a moment from their hateful criticism of President Trump and reflect on three of their most dangerous positions; their demand to murder babies from the time of conception to sometime (not defined) after their birth, to fundamentally transform the United States into a socialist society, and to insist on having open borders with no distinction between legal citizen and illegal alien.
The United States was founded on the basis that law and not a king would be our ruler; we would be a nation that adhered to rule of law and not arbitrary law as it is when a country is ruled by a monarch or dictator. What the King, the Emperor, the Czar or dictator says is the law. The King, the Emperor, the Czar, or dictator are not a protector of the people but a protector of themselves. If the King, the Emperor, the Czar, or dictator suspects some action, even if there is no real basis for the suspicion, or if the King, the Empower, the Czar, or the dictator does not like somebody and wants to punish them, they can proceed with that punishment, even if it meams manufacturing evidence for some kangaroo court. This is commonly referred to as arbitrary law or tyrannical law.
The founders were so insistent that arbitrary law or tyrannical law not be practiced in the United States they added the Fourth Amendment to the Bill of Rights which made it a part of the United States Constitution. The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides that "[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
The ultimate goal of this provision is to protect people’s right to privacy and freedom from unreasonable intrusions by the government. However, the Fourth Amendment does not guarantee protection from all searches and seizures. The government must have probable cause before a warrant is to be issued. Probable cause is defined as a reasonable belief that a person has committed or will commit a crime. For probable cause to exist, a police officer must have sufficient knowledge of facts to warrant a belief that a suspect is committing a crime. The belief must be based on factual evidence, not just on suspicion.
Notice, within the definition of probable cause, just a suspicion is specifically precluded as would be distrust of or dislike for an individual or the policies of an individual. Suspicion and dislike are applicable under arbitrary law but not under rule of law.
What we are witnessing in the United States is the total breakdown and disregard for rule of law by the deep state of the United States Government and the Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) Party. The Russian investigation was begun on suspicion and dislike. An investigation was not made into the Clinton Foundation, the Uranium Sale, and the disregard for classified information by Clinton. Probable cause has been shown time after time.
Recently, the Trump Inauguration Committee received a subpoena from the US Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York because Trump’s inaugural committee raised a truly astonishing $106.7 million, double the previous record set by Barack Obama’s 2009 inaugural, and there have long been many questions about where that money came from, and where it went. This is suspicion and dislike for an individual and the policies of the individual. This is a textbook case of arbitrary law and a clear violation of the Fourth Amendment.
The Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) have told us over and over that they want to change the Constitution of the United States or at least consider it a living document so it can mean what they want it to mean. They have already done so by violating every section of the Constitution and every right guaranteed to the people under the Bill of Rights. We, the people, must understand that we are no longer a country that adheres to rule of law but are now a tyranny under the rule of a tyrannical ruler, The Dictator of the Proletariat or the Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) Party.
Soak the rich? Americans say go for it. Surveys are showing overwhelming support for raising taxes on top earners.
Surveys are showing overwhelming support for raising taxes on top earners, including a new POLITICO/Morning Consult poll released Monday that found 76 percent of registered voters believe the wealthiest Americans should pay more in taxes. A recent Fox News survey showed that 70 percent of Americans favor raising taxes on those earning over $10 million — including 54 percent of Republicans.
A plan from first-term Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (Marxist/Progressive Democrat NY) to slap a 70 percent marginal rate on income earned over $10 million clocked in at 59 percent support in a recent Hill/HarrisX poll.
FDR proposed a 100 percent top tax rate. Roosevelt told Congress in April 1942, “no American citizen ought to have a net income, after he has paid his taxes, of more than $25,000 a year.” That would be about $350,000 in today's dollars.
Karl Marx called for a heavy progressive or graduated income tax in the Communist Manifesto.
In the Critique of the Gotha Program Marx addressed the ages old question, “What is fair”. Marx concluded that what was fair was, “from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.” All proceeds would go to the state who would then distribute based on what they determined was the need.
Sen. Bernie Sanders, on the cusp of a likely campaign for president, introduced legislation to vastly expand the reach of the federal estate tax.
His bill would raise $2.2 trillion by applying the tax to the riches of "the top 0.02 percent of Americans," according to Sanders' office. It would apply to the estates of those who inherit more than $3.5 million, compared to the $11 million threshold that exists now.
For estates worth more than $1 billion, the tax rate would be 77 percent on inheritance over that amount. The first $3.5 million of any estates would be exempt from the tax.
Karl Marx called for the abolition of all rights of inheritance, or a 100% death tax, in the Communist Manifesto. The Marx reasoning was that all assets rightfully belong to the collective or the state and not to an individual. The 100% death tax was just returning the assets to their rightful owner, the collective or the state.
The United States was founded on the principle that everyone had an equal opportunity to pursue their happiness. The individual was not to be limited by their social position at birth; nobility or serf. Equal opportunity did not mean equal results. Equal opportunity did not mean that happiness was to be defined by the state.
The collectivist (Marxist, communist, socialist, progressive, Democrat – all virtually the same) takes the position that the definition of happiness and the results of the quest for happiness by the individual is to be not only approved of by the state but is to be defined by the state based on what the state believes to be fair and just.
The United States is in the midst of a tremendous clash of ideals, should the individual decide what their life and thoughts are to be or should the state determine what is best for all and then dictate to the individual what their life and thoughts are to be.
History has proven that the road of individualism, that road upon which our nation was founded, leads to prosperity and freedom for all while the road of collectivism (Marxism, communism, socialism, progressive, today's Democrats - all virtually the same) leads to social decay and financial collapse. The road to collectivism is called the road of Hope and Change, the road of social justice, the road of fairness and equality, and yet it always ends in tyranny.
JUST WHAT IS FAIR - INDIVIDUALISM OR COLLECTIVISM
Please Freedom Loving Americans, do not fall into this trap; the same trap into which Tucker Carlson has fallen.
Fox News host Tucker Carlson said he believes Congress should pass legislation banning kids from owning smartphones, citing research showing that smartphone use is harmful to children's development.
Carlson compared the hypothetical ban to age restrictions for purchasing cigarettes, saying that smartphone addiction in children can even be life-threatening.
"Smartphone use makes your kids sadder, slower, and more isolated, and over time, can kill them," Carlson said
The issue is not the use of smartphones. I have no reason to argue with the study Carlson quotes. The harm smartphones seem to be causing could be spread to areas beyond those sited by Carlson. The issue is; whose responsibility are these children, the parents or the governments.
The collectivist (Marxist, communist, socialist, progressive, Democrat – all virtually the same) have advocated from their inception that children are the responsibility of government and not the parents. The collectivist takes this position because they know the responsible party will also be the party whose principles and ideals the child is most likely to absorb as their own.
This is the reason the collectivist movement has always advocated for child care from the earliest possible age. Yes, the collectivist claims their intentions are altruistic, but history shows their intentions are to be able to indoctrinate the child into believing that collectivism is good, and individualism is bad.
The American public has come to accept that the government has a larger and larger role in the upbringing of a child while the role of the parents is less and less. This is exactly what Marx and Lenin advocated. Marx and Lenin understood that to bring about the classless society they desired, conformity of the people to the collectivist ideology was critical. If they controlled the child, they could bring about their desired classless and conforming society. If the parents played the intended role of the parent, children would grow and have different ideas on the role government should play in society. This freedom of thought results in is a society with differing beliefs. This is critical for individualism, a society of free and independent people, and it is death to those aspiring for the collectivist society that must be totally conforming and totally equal.
What Carlson is advocating is another step to lessen the critical role parents should be playing in their child’s growth and augmenting the role of government. The position of replacing the role of the parent by increasing the role of government is detrimental to a free and independent people and aids the Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) movement to fundamentally transforming the United States into a Marxist totalitarian state.
Carlson should be using the study to alert the parent to the negative aspects of the overuse of smartphones by their children and encouraging the parents to play their intended role in molding their children and maintaining the family as the primary unit for the development of children.
The role of government must be a limited role if we are to be a free and independent nation. Our founders did not include the raising of children as one of the powers of government. The raising of children was one of the powers that were retained for the people per the 10h Amendment. We the people, must play our role while the government must play its limited role per the constitution if we are not to be fundamentally transformed into a Marxist totalitarian state under the control of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat.
Write something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview.