Definition of INCESTUOUS
1: constituting or involving incest; 2: guilty of incest; 3: excessively or improperly intimate or exclusive

Incestuous (definition 3 above) is the word that comes to mind when discussing the political philosophy and actions for individuals and groups with names like George Soros, Andy Stern, Van Jones and John Podesta, along with the Center for American Progress, Media Matters, Move-On.org, the Tides Foundation, Huffington Post, Democracy Alliance and a whole host of other organizations that are funded by or associated with, financier/billionaire George Soros. (There are too many to list here) But today we will focus on the Center for American Progress (CAP), run by John Podesta, a Clinton administration insider. CAP advises the President on numerous political matters and is as left leaning as they get. George Soros keeps it well funded and George Soros has direct access to the White House. So far, he has been there four times we are told. Now it’s possible that he and the President only talk about basketball, but it is highly unlikely.

Let’s get back to CAP They just recently put out a position paper on November 15th, 2010, entitled “To Advance Progressive Change“, recommending to the president of the United States of America (the anointed puppet of the progressive movement) on actions he can take in the wake of the drubbing the Democrats took at the polls on November 2nd, 2010, in order to continue the implementation of their socialist agenda, in spite of the fact that it was their socialist agenda that resulted in the drubbing in the first place. They are simply ignoring the conservative message delivered at the mid term elections. We won’t go into the details of the report but we have provided a link to it HERE.

Podesta opens the report with:

“In the aftermath of this month’s midterm congressional elections, pundits and politicians across the ideological spectrum are focusing on how difficult it will be for President Barack Obama to advance his policy priorities through Congress. Predictions of stalemate abound. And some debate whether the administration should tack to the left or to the center and compromise with or confront the new House leadership.”

“As a former White House chief of staff, I believe those to be the wrong preoccupations. President Obama’s ability to govern the country as chief executive presents an opportunity to demonstrate strength, resolve, and a capacity to get things done on a host of pressing challenges of importance to the public and our economy. Progress, not positioning, is what the public wants and deserves.”

“The U.S. Constitution and the laws of our nation grant the president significant authority to make and implement policy. These authorities can be used to ensure positive progress on many of the key issues facing the country through: • Executive orders • Rulemaking • Agency management • Convening and creating public-private partnerships • Commanding the armed forces • Diplomacy”

Podesta reeks of arrogance as do most folks on the liberal side, thinking that they know what is best for all mankind and by God, they aren’t going to take NO for an answer, even if that NO comes from a large majority of the American people. They are right no matter how many people say that they are wrong, or how many freedoms you have to give up, or how many taxes you have to pay to fund their being right.

But let’s talk about Executive Orders that Podesta thinks Obama should employ, as there is and has been considerable question as to their constitutional authority. Article 1, Section 1 of the U. S. Constitution says: “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.”

Nowhere in Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution, wherein it discusses the powers and duties of the President, does it say anything about Presidents MAKING law, which is what most contemporary Executive Orders do. Nevertheless, Executive Orders have been used by every President since George Washington and it has been generally accepted that the authority of an Executive Order has been construed to come from Article I, Clause 1 of the Constitution. If you read the Clause, to extend it to Executive Order authority is a REAL stretch. Most concerns around Executive Orders are that they could lead to a dictator. Here are two links that discuss this issue.

• The Impact of Executive Orders on the Legislative Process: Executive Lawmaking?E – William Olsen, Cato Institute

• Executive Orders A Blueprint for Dictatorship? – Tanya L. Green, J.D., Concerned Women for America

Rule Making authority, on the other hand, comes from the President controlling the federal bureaucracy, as the President’s cabinet is made up of directors (called, Secretaries) of most, or all of the massive federal agencies, such as the Environmental Protection Agency. Abuse of the federal bureaucracy by the President is not only a real possibility, it is a reality. If a President can’t get his pet legislation passed by the Congress, all he (or she) has to do is to direct the director (Secretary) of a federal agency to promulgate a “rule”, which has the same effect as a law passed by Congress. Or if that doesn’t work the President just issues an Executive Order. So much for Article I, Section 1 of the U. S. Constitution.

But we digress. The subject of this article is the “Progressive” agenda and how it is all about subjugation of the American people. The agenda has four (4) distinct strategies:

1) Buy off a large segment of the American people with “promises” from the public treasury to make them dependent on the government and secure their undying loyalty and their vote so that progressives remain in power. (A man will very seldom bite the hand that feeds him)

2) Use compassion, guilt and propaganda to get the rest of the population to agree to strategy number 1.

3) Create or use crises (climate change, environmental catastrophes, natural disasters) as a rationale for their actions.

4) Exceed the limits of all constitutional authority to accomplish numbers 1, 2 and 3. (i.e. unconstitutional legislation, bureaucratic rule making, or court decisions that have no basis in the intent of the Founders of the Constitution.)

Unfortunately, buying someone off strips them of their dignity, their pride and their self-worth, provided they had any in the first place. Duping people into acceptance of a wrongful action by resorting to irrational compassion, strength-robbing guilt, telling outright lies and exploiting crises to gain power, is not only corrupt but should be a crime, punishable by heavy fines and lengthy jail times. But exceeding one’s constitutional authority is treasonous and acts of treason should be subject to expulsion, if not death, because treason from within is so heinous and so damaging, it will destroy a nation if allowed to persist.

But the Progressives’ agenda, encompassing social justice, radical environmental protection and benign global governance, is just a dodge. The real agenda is absolute control over all the people, using executive power, specific directed legislation, arbitrary judicial decisions and unstable monetary policy as the mechanism to achieve that goal. The elite have learned that they don’t need to use guns any more to conquer a nation. All they have to do is to manipulate the system and make the people think that it is all legal.

The Progressives’ enemy is free, independent and self-reliant people who think for themselves, are cognizant of what goes on around them and dig into and investigate the actions of those that govern them, in the context of the governors’ legal authority. They recognize corruption when they see it and want to right a wrong when it presents itself. In their hearts these people are free in mind and spirit and question and then challenge those who would attempt to rob them of that freedom. Many of those freedom-loving individuals took the time to vote this November, in order to bring a halt to a growing national cancer …… the Progressive agenda.

But for over 100 years Progressives have been quietly building an infrastructure in the American society, based on their four (4) strategies and that infrastructure is now fully embedded in the culture and the legislative and legal system. To uproot that infrastructure and render it impotent is going to be a monumental task and they know it. They still think they have power and from all indications, they still do. Globalists like Soros, Rockefeller, Rothschilds, other national and international money changers and power brokers and the all-complicit American government, are working in concert to tear down America and American sovereignty, re-distribute her wealth and resources to the rest of the world and rob us of our liberty and they are doing it with malice afore thought. Their goal is to subjugate all the peoples of the planet under world government, where just a few of the elite rule, from the top down.

In short, Progressivism and the advance of “Progressive Change”, as promoted by the Center for American Progress and supported by academia, the press and a large segment of those in government, is, by any other name, subjugation.

Subjugation, according to the dictionary means, “1) to bring under control and governance, as a subject; or 2) to make submissive.” Subjugation is the antithesis of freedom and liberty, but it is the Progressives’ prime objective.

Which are you? A submissive subject under the control of a government who has broken its sacred bond with the people, or instead are you a free spirit with certain unalienable rights that are a gift from your creator and you are willing to defend those rights with your life, your fortune and your sacred honor, as were those who sacrificed it all to give birth to your freedom?

© Copyright November 20, 2010 – All Rights Reserved

~ The Author ~
Ron Ewart is the President of The National Association of Rural Landowners and nationally recognized author on freedom and property rights issues. Ron may reached for comment via email at r.ewart@comcast.net.