Dear Hillary Supporter

If you can read this and have an open mind, then there is hope . . . please read the following.

Congratulations on your impending achievement.  If Hillary is elected, it will place America on the threshold of Orwell’s 1984.  How’s that for progress on behalf of the progressive movement?

Progressivism is socialism.  Throughout the recent past, socialism endeavored to defeat its opponent:  advocates of individual liberty, limited government, and a free market. Socialists believe in collective liberty, a strong central government in the form of statism, and a government-controlled economy.  As the evidence of history tells us, socialism is not sustainable.  It inevitably morphs into in the form of communism or fascism (yes, that’s right—fascism is a far left manifestation of left of center socialism).

Have you wondered why the left-of-center modern liberal now prefers to be called a progressive?  It’s a seductive term.  Many of my good friends who claim to be progressive think it means an advocate for progress, a better education, a better quality of life, and so forth.  Progress in this case is a noun.  American progressives believe in progress as a verb, to progress toward utopia this side of eternity, which is very consistent with Marxist socialism.  Nobel prize-winner Joseph Schumpeter shared this observation in his book, Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy: 

In one important sense, Marxism is a religion.  To the believer it presents, first, a system of ultimate ends that embody the meaning of life and are absolute standards by which to judge events and actions [e.g., the anthropomorphic explanation for climate change]; and, secondly, a guide to those ends which implies a plan of salvation and the indication of the evil from which mankind, or a chosen section of mankind, is to be saved.  We may specify still further:  Marxist socialism also belongs to that subgroup which promises paradise on this side of the grave (1950, p. 5).

To drive home the religious essence of Marxist socialism, Schumpeter went on to say:

The religious quality of Marxism also explains a characteristic attitude of the orthodox Marxist toward opponents.  To him, as to any believer in a Faith, the opponent is not merely in error but in sin.  Dissent is disapproved of not only intellectually but morally.  There cannot be any excuse for it once the Message has been revealed (1950, p. 5).

So, is there any evidence of this thinking in America?  Absolutely!  Let me offer some examples.

First, progressives, starting with Ted Kennedy, pushed for open borders with the assumption that the Democrat Party would win over more constituents thanks to generous government subsidies.  When the Sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona attempted to enforce federal laws dealing with illegal immigrants, he was sued for this by Obama’s Justice Department.  In this case, it is a sin to enforce federal law.  Many of these illegal immigrants ended up in inner cities run by Democrats-- modern slave plantations.

Second, Dinesh D’Souza, a legal immigrant from India and naturalized American citizen is now a felon without the right to vote.  D’Souza’s mistake?  He contributed more than the law allowed to a political campaign—in the range of $20,000 above the limit.  The candidate was a friend and there was no quid pro quo.  This contribution pales when looking at the millions of dollars given to campaigns of other candidates.  Check out the millions to Clinton’s campaign at OpenSecrets.org.    But, this was not D’Souza’s real crime.  His crime was exercising his First Amendment right to criticize Democrats and the Obama regime.  In his book, Hillary’s America:  The Secret History of the Democratic Party, D’Souza said:

   … I spent eight months in overnight captivity [federal prison in San Diego, CA] for my sins against the Obama administration.  My crime was exceeding the campaign finance laws by giving $20,000 over the campaign finance limit to a college pal of mine who was running for the U.S. Senate.  I didn’t do it to get anything in return; I did it simply to help an old friend.  For this, I found myself at the receiving end of the full force of the U.S. government.

But, since no one in American history has been prosecuted—let alone incarcerated—for doing what I did, I should be allowed to suspect that my real crime was in exposing President Obama in my film 2016:  Obama’s America and my books The Roots of Obama’s Rage and Obama’s America.  Obama hated my film, vituperatively attacking it on his website barackobama.com, and a few months later, the FBI was knocking on my door (2016, p. 23).

Third, when Catherine Engelbrecht applied to the IRS for 501c(3) status for her organization, True the Vote, she was harassed by not only the IRS, but four other federal agencies.  See her testimony here.  This case was related to a full throated effort by the IRS to suppress the conservative voice.  Lois Learner of the IRS pleaded the Fifth Amendment and destroyed evidence.  She has since retired with a full federal pension.

Fourth, the progressive’s new religion, climate change, is justification for a modern inquisition.  Democratic attorneys general now seek prosecution of those who are “nonbelievers” or deniers.  It is inconsequential that these deniers acknowledge climate change.  The sin is that they disagree with the science in terms of causes (i.e., anthropomorphic related to the use of fossil fuels).  For background on the case against Exxon Mobile see here.

Fifth, many Democrats have no problem lying, denying, or engaging in any other means of obfuscation.  Clinton was a staff member of the Democrat-led U.S. House Judiciary Committee that investigated Watergate and pushed for impeachment of Richard Nixon.  This was a great victory for the Democrat Party—the party of intellectual and moral superiority.  We have since learned that Clinton was fired for dishonest practices.  But, this is nothing compared to the broader collusion that took place among political partisans within the judiciary.  A recent book by Geoff Shepard, The Real Watergate Scandal:  Collusion, Conspiracy, and the Plot that Brought Nixon Down, builds a disturbing case based on newly released documents of illegal collusion.  Prosecutors colluded with judges (trial and appellate) to deny Nixon and his aides due process under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments.  This was payback.  As Shepard argues, it was Nixon, as a member of the House Judiciary Committee that led the investigation and eventual prosecution of Alger Hiss for spying.  This action inflamed east coast Democrats because, not only was Hiss a member of the Harvard club, he was also a darling of the Democrat Party.  But, since the Watergate scandal took place over 40 years ago, Hillary supporters would be inclined to say, “What difference does it make?”

Sixth, dirty tricks that are either illegal or bordering on illegal are fully condoned by Democrats.  For a disturbing example, view a Project Veritas investigative piece here.  As expected here is the reaction from the White House.  This is consistent with the pattern to diminish the truth revealed in other investigations, such as selling baby body parts under the umbrella of Planned Parenthood.  Snopes, in an attempt to debunk the credibility of Project Veritas by citing liberal media sources, does not refute any of the evidence provided in their investigations.  Lie, deny, obfuscate.  Trump is demonized for locker room banter 11 years ago.  He did not deny it and apologized for it.

Seventh, while the mainstream media only acknowledges Wikileaks references about the Clinton Foundation, there is much more to be understood.  Peter Schweizer presents disturbing evidence of pay for play in his book Clinton Cash.  The book is summarized in a free, hour-long documentary here.
  
          Finally, the progressive media intentionally distorts reality—similar to scenes in Orwell’s 1984.  Perhaps one of the most egregious images was the one created to make it look like Trump was mocking a disabled reporter.  This is not what happened.  With a little research, the truth paints a completely different picture.  See the evidence here.  Or, the media downplays reality as a shield for their progressive champion.  Wikileaks reveals the real story in this case, where, on behalf of Clinton, Podesta explained how progressives infiltrated the Catholic Church with “supposed Catholic organizations.”  Read a disturbing summary of these efforts here.

I could go on and on.  But, hopefully this is enough to appeal to your capacity to reason.  Progressives claim to be open-minded.  Yet, when confronted with facts contrary to their preferred narrative, they typically will not take the time to examine them.  So, they tend to be mired in myth and folklore created by the progressive conditioners that have sufficiently conditioned them.  C. S. Lewis wrote about this dynamic in The Abolition of Man.

If you are one of the few with an open mind to have gotten this far and still support Hillary after reading these arguments, I can only conclude that you are so thoroughly duped that you are beyond recognizing the truth; or that you don’t care about the truth; or, that you are as corrupt as Hillary and beyond redemption.  If Hillary gets elected, may God have mercy on all of us for allowing a once Judeo-Christian grounded America to slouch into a secular-humanistic and tyrannical oligarchy.