Political Pistachio
By Douglas V. Gibbs
A survey of the landscape of American education today reveals a crisis that threatens not just academic achievement but the very soul of our country. Today, we are experiencing rapidly declining literacy rates thanks to ideological indoctrination. Our schools have strayed far from their original purpose, and leftism’s creeping incrementalism over the last century is the culprit responsible. The path forward requires us to return to the very foundation that made American education exceptional: faith in God and biblical principles.
The early American schoolhouse, with its iconic red paint and steeple-like bell tower, stood as a testament to a profound truth: education and faith were inseparable. The Bible was the textbook. The New England Primer taught children the alphabet using biblical verses. Hornbooks displayed the Lord’s Prayer. This was not only acceptable, it was the norm because the United States was a country steeped in conviction.
The early Americans understood what we’ve forgotten: literacy was essential primarily so citizens could read Scripture for themselves. This approach produced remarkable results: 90% literacy in New England by the end of the colonial period, making America the envy of the world.
Thomas Jefferson championed public education, but with crucial safeguards that have since been eroded. He believed the states, not the federal government, should fund education, with curriculum determined by local communities and parents. Jefferson understood that education was too important to be centralized in distant bureaucracies.
This philosophy dominated American education for nearly two centuries. Communities took pride in their schools, parents directed their children’s learning, and local values shaped the classroom experience. The system wasn’t perfect, but it worked because it respected the fundamental right of parents to direct their children’s education according to their beliefs and values.
The first major assault on this successful model came in 1899 when John Dewey introduced progressive education. Dewey’s philosophy shifted focus from academic excellence and moral development to socialization and experiential learning. Where traditional education emphasized knowledge and virtue, progressive education prioritized process over content and feelings over facts.
This transformation accelerated through the 20th century as communist sympathizers infiltrated education, systematically removing God, the Bible, and prayer from schools. The 1947 Supreme Court decision in Everson v. Board of Education established a “wall of separation between church and state” that appears nowhere in the Constitution, and used the unconstitutional concept of the Incorporation of the Bill of Rights to the States (allegedly in the 14th Amendment) to impose it on the States. By the 1960s, Engel v. Vitale and Abington School District v. Schempp had officially banned school-sponsored prayer and Bible reading.
The 1979 creation of the federal Department of Education marked the final stage of this hostile takeover. Centralized bureaucracy replaced local control, federal mandates crowded out parental input, and standardized testing replaced genuine learning. The results have been catastrophic.
Today, American students rank alarmingly low in international comparisons. High school seniors struggle to write complete sentences. Many students are unable to perform basic academic tasks. We’ve created a generation that can’t read but can recite leftist talking points about socialism’s supposed superior position versus capitalism – the latter a system that built the very prosperity they take for granted.
Perhaps most concerning is the complete abandonment of virtue within our culture, which as spilled over into education. Benjamin Franklin wisely observed that “only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become more corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.” Franklin understood what we’ve forgotten: liberty requires moral grounding.
When we removed God from education, we didn’t just lose prayer – we lost the framework for teaching virtue. Without an objective moral standard, schools became battlegrounds for anti-liberty ideologies. Some teachers now openly promote violence and racism. Politicians and leftists tell students that stealing is sometimes acceptable. Organizations like the Democratic Socialists of America are working to remove our constitutional safeguards while mocking Christianity and biblical values, and the younger generation is following their lead because they were trained to during their years in public education.
We’ve gone from a country that cherished virtue to one that mocks it. Is it any wonder we’re experiencing such social decay?
The solution to our educational crisis isn’t more funding or newer programs. It’s restoration. We must return to the principles that made American education exceptional in the first place.
We must dismantle the federal Department of Education and return control to the States and local communities. Educational decisions should be made by parents and teachers who know their students’ names, not by bureaucrats in Washington.
We must restore biblical principles to the classroom. No, that doesn’t mean establishing a state religion. It means acknowledging that the Christian tradition has always been the backbone of our culture and it provides the moral framework necessary for citizenship and character development.
We must prioritize basic skills over social engineering. Schools should focus on teaching students to read, write, calculate, and think critically rather than indoctrinating them with divisive failed ideologies.
As I often tell people, we can’t get our political house in order until we get our cultural house in order…and that begins with God. Our Founding Fathers understood that education without virtue produces clever devils. They built a system that produced literate, virtuous citizens capable of self-government, and the rigorous patriotic duties involved in keeping the republic.
The choice before us is clear: continue down the path of secular progressive education that produces ideological conformity but not competence, or return to the time-tested model that produced generations of knowledgeable, virtuous Americans who used liberty and the free market to forge America into the greatest country in history. For the sake of our children and our nation’s future, I choose the latter.
Only by restoring God to His rightful place in education can we hope to restore America to her rightful place as a beacon of liberty and excellence to the world.
— Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
The Petition Clause, found in the First Amendment, reads, “Congress shall make no law…abridging…the right of the people…to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” The concept was deeply rooted in English constitutional tradition and American colonial practice. It was not an abstract right to be heard, but a concrete, procedural mechanism for popular influence over the legislature.
The Declaration of Independence states, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”
The United States was not established to be a democracy. Throughout history, democracies have proven to be dangerous. They always devolve into oligarchies. The Founding Fathers understood that consolidating power into any single place is dangerous—and that includes power in the hands of the people. But at the same time, the voice of the people is the most important safeguard of a stable system of liberty. How do you create a government that derives its powers from the consent of the governed without allowing it to devolve into a pure democracy?
Democracy can only be present in a system in limited form without becoming destructive. The federal government, as originally designed, possessed only one office that was democratically elected—members of the United States House of Representatives. Senate officeholders were originally appointed by the state legislatures. The President was originally chosen by the electors, with no nationwide popular vote as we have today. Judges are appointed, as are other officers of the federal government. The people’s democratic voice was intended to be present only in the House of Representatives.
Then how, one might ask, does a government derive its powers from the consent of the governed?
The American System, in a sense, is a Frankenstein’s monster. It was formed not as an aristocracy, democracy, monarchy, theocracy, or any other pure form of government one might see elsewhere in the world or throughout history. It is a republic, meaning it is grounded in the rule of law, and it takes from each of those systems only their better qualities.
A pseudo‑aristocracy was established by giving the states a voice in the Senate. Democracy was satisfied by providing the House of Representatives to the people, whose members are democratically elected. Theocracy was avoided through the Establishment Clause, yet the Founding Fathers recognized the importance of Faith’s influence on government. Therefore, in the First Amendment, they also ensured that government could not pass laws prohibiting the free exercise of religion. The concept of religious freedom through the Free Exercise Clause helps maintain a Christian foundation, while the Establishment Clause prevents government from becoming a pure theocracy. And the advantages of monarchy were included in two ways:
- A President (but not a king) who possesses certain external authorities (like Commander in Chief and Foreign Affairs), yet is limited by law. His job is not to rule, but to execute the laws.
- A government that has the power to govern (rather than rule), but can be reined in by the republican attributes already mentioned, and through petition. Petition is the key component drawn from the long history of British monarchy, while also satisfying the key component that Jefferson wrote about in the Declaration of Independence: the consent of the governed.
“We the People of the United States,” the first words of the Preamble, are embodied in the God‑given natural right of petitioning the government for a redress of grievances.
The right to petition possessed a direct inheritance from English practice. The right to petition the monarch and Parliament was a long-established, if often perilous, tradition in England. It was considered a fundamental liberty, distinct from the privilege to vote. The English Bill of Rights of 1689 explicitly affirmed the “right of the subjects to petition the king.”
This is the beginning of the Introduction of the next book I am writing – a book that provides a history of the Petition Clause, and how we may resurrect it so that we may use it in today’s battle against tyrannical government. The new book, Petition the Government for a Redress of Grievances (The Forgotten First Amendment Right), should be available for purchase within the next couple weeks.
By Douglas V. Gibbs
I had a Class-A license in California. It was difficult to obtain. Everyone fails the air-brakes test on their first try. During their second visit for the test, most fail the skills test, which includes parallel parking on the blind-side between cones with a space to fit your trailer in only twenty feet greater than the length of your trailer. Then, there’s the drive-test. One tire, only one, on any turn, touching a curb is an automatic fail. Once you pass one of the three you are good on that section, but to complete the whole thing it took me a third visit to the testing grounds. I held on to that license for twenty years – using it to transport construction equipment on a flat-bed trailer, forty-eight feet long trailer (I believe, if my memory serves me correct), and then during the final six years I drove a transfer (sand and gravel truck). My brother continues to drive a big rig, but now his commercial driver’s license is in a different State. I let mine expire roughly a decade ago, and I have since retired from the construction industry.
Driving a truck is a different experience. It’s a special skill, and it must be taken seriously because while you are on the road behind the wheel of a big rig, other lives are essentially in your hands. I remember when I went to get my license, I felt sixteen again. Sure, eventually my skill of driving a truck became not much different than driving my car – but in the beginning, it was a pretty steep learning curve.
So, looking back at my time behind the wheel of one of those bad boys, I have to ask myself: How is it that people who don’t have the skills, don’t have an understanding of the language, and can’t even read the street signs are able to acquire these licenses? And California, the State with among the toughest standards when I got my license roughly thirty years ago, is one of the culprits handing out these licenses to illegal aliens like they are candy.
You’ve seen the news items and videos of the illegal alien truck drivers making poor decisions, and in some cases killing travelers on the roadway. The one most of you may recall was in Florida, where the California-licensed driver made a U-Turn on a highway, and killed those who slammed into the trailer during the maneuver. Obviously, it’s a problem giving licenses to illegal aliens. Even if they weren’t illegal, the very fact that they don’t possess the skills, don’t care about our laws, and can’t even read the street signs ought to be a grave concern for folks out there on the roadways.
So, President Trump decided the problem must be solved. If you’re not even supposed to be in the country in the first place, which means you broke the law to get into the country, you should not be able to possess a driver’s license – much less a commercial (Class-A) license.
In response to Trump trying to resolve the problem, Twenty-one states and Washington, D.C., are effectively telling the Trump administration that they are more concerned about protecting the identities of illegal aliens than keeping American drivers safe on the roads.
Twenty-two lawsuits have been filed to keep the Department of Transportation from obtaining the identities of illegal aliens who have obtained commercial driver’s licenses.
And, let’s be clear: What the Trump Administration is requesting is not unreasonable or out of the ordinary. Every administration since 1988 has had access to the basic database in question. But, because they hate Trump, and they hate his immigration policies, state AGs are doing what they can to stand in the way of the Department of Transportation to access those records so that the Department may enforce the rules of the road. They would rather stand in the way of the process and make it easier for dangerous illegal immigrant truck drivers to operate a big rig. Their hatred for Trump, and their desire to protect criminal aliens, is more important than the safety of the lives of drivers on the road. They would rather violate a long-standing rule and put your family in danger on the road so that they can protect unqualified illegal drivers on the road who are causing senseless crashes.
It’s insane, to say the least.
While the Democrats have been going out of their way to protect illegal alien drivers, Americans have been dying on the highways. The Department of Transportation provided the actions it is taking to keep the country safe.
- Revoked over 30,000 illegally issued commercial driver’s licenses across non-compliant states.
- Removed nearly 10,000 fraudulent or unqualified CDL training providers from the federal registry.
- Enforced strict English Language Proficiency standards, placing over 26,000 non-compliant operators out of service to ensure every driver on American highways can read road signs and communicate with law enforcement.
- Closed the non-domiciled CDL loophole, cutting off unvetted foreign operators tied to dozens of fatal crashes.
But, that is just a tip of the iceberg. How many more drivers are there out on the road who needs to be taken off the road? Those drivers are not above the law, and neither should be the States attempting to protect them.
— Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
The prophet Daniel warned of a coming deceiver who would “speak pompous words against the Most High” and “persecute the saints of the Most High,” while initially appearing to bring peace and prosperity to a world desperate for both. In our current era of unprecedented deception, where truth is increasingly called falsehood and falsehood is celebrated as truth, we would be wise to heed this warning. The deception has become so profound that twenty-five years after 9/11 – an attack most attribute to Islamic extremists – New York City now has a Muslim mayor who has suggested America brought that tragedy upon itself. We witness the bizarre spectacle of figures like Hassan Piker proclaiming solidarity with Islam while simultaneously championing causes diametrically opposed to Islamic teachings. Most strikingly, when Israel responded to the October 7, 2023 attacks, the deadliest day for Jews since the Holocaust, the world somehow managed to frame the Jewish state as the aggressor committing genocide against people who openly vow their annihilation.
This brings me to what I believe was a significant error by Pastor Jack Hibbs in a video I recently watched.
Let me be unequivocally clear: I hold Pastor Jack Hibbs in the highest regard. I have never previously found myself in disagreement with his teachings. We’ve met on several occasions, most recently last November when I served as title sponsor for a pastor’s appreciation breakfast in San Diego where he was the keynote speaker. We shared breakfast and conversation for perhaps twenty minutes. Nearly half of the attendees from my Constitution Class in Chino, California are members of his congregation, and my wife and I have worshiped multiple times at Calvary Chapel Chino Hills, which he so faithfully leads. Pastor Hibbs is an exceptional teacher, a devoted shepherd of God’s Word, and a compassionate man whose impact on both faith and constitutional understanding in America has been profound. I am deeply grateful for his ministry.
Nevertheless, I must respectfully challenge a statement he made in that recent video.
“Will Israel be accepting a Muslim antichrist? I don’t think so,” Pastor Hibbs stated with conviction.
Like all of us, I cannot claim to know the future with certainty. However, I have studied deception extensively; its methods, its effectiveness, and its devastating consequences. I understand through observation and history how masterfully Satan employs deception to achieve his ends. Consider our current reality: Tel Aviv ranks among the world’s most homosexuality-friendly cities. A mere two decades after “Never Forget” became our national mantra regarding Islamic terrorism, a Muslim mayor presides over New York City. We see homosexuals and transgender activists marching in solidarity with “Palestine,” while feminists praise an ideology that, in places like Afghanistan, proudly denies education to girls and common rights to women. We witness Christians embracing false doctrines like preterism and replacement theology, while openly homosexual individuals lead churches in God’s Name. In this climate of spiritual and moral confusion and insanity, I cannot definitively declare that Israel would never accept an openly Muslim world leader. In fact, given Satan’s track record of deception and the current political and cultural landscape, I would argue that a Muslim global leader operating with Israel’s blessing is not as improbable as many might assume.
Again, I do not claim special insight into eschatological events. While I believe Islam will play a key role in the end-times, I don’t know who the antichrist will be or if he’s Muslim, Gentile, a mixture of both, part Jewish, or something else entirely. I am neither a prophet nor a prophecy expert. But as a constitutionalist, historian, and political observer who has spent decades studying how deception operates in human affairs, I have learned one fundamental principle: when it comes to Satan’s deceptions, never say never.
— Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
Let me be blunt. What we witnessed in Massachusetts isn’t just politics anymore. We saw a celebration of death that can’t be anything other than downright evil. Democratic Governor Maura Healey signed away Massachusetts’ gestational limits on abortion, making it the 10th state to permit the procedure up to birth. But it wasn’t the signing that was most chilling, however. It was the reaction of those gathered to witness this historic moment.
As Healey put pen to paper on what they deceptively call the “Prioritizing Patient Access to Care Act,” the room erupted in applause and smiles. Liberal women packed the room and gleefully cheered as she effectively legalized the termination of healthy, pain-capable unborn children right up until the moment of birth. These weren’t solemn faces confronting a rare medical emergency – they were beaming, laughing, and celebrating as if they’d just won the lottery.
This represents everything our Founding Fathers feared. The Constitution was established to “secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity” – not to authorize the destruction of that posterity. Life, liberty and property. When the Declaration of Independence proclaims that all men are “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,” with “Life” listed first among them, it wasn’t suggesting these rights apply only after exiting the birth canal.
“Governments, in general, have been the result of force, of fraud, and accident. After a period of six thousand years has elapsed since the creation, the United States exhibit to the world the first instance, as far as we can learn, of a nation, unattacked by external force, unconvulsed by domestic insurrections, assembling voluntarily, deliberating fully, and deciding calmly concerning that system of government under which they would wish that they and their prosperity should live.” – James Wilson, November 26, 1787 in remarks in Pennsylvania ratifying convention.
“With consistency, beautiful and undeviating, human life from its commencement to its close, is protected by the common law. In the contemplation of law, life begins when the infant is first able to stir in the womb. By the law, life is protected not only from immediate destruction, but from every degree of actual violence, and, in some cases, from every degree of danger.” – James Wilson, Signer of the U.S. Constitution, and defender of the Constitution at the Pennsylvania Ratification Convention.
Jeremiah 1:5, KJV … Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.
Psalm 139:13-14, KJV … 13For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb. 14I will give thanks to You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Wonderful are Your works, And my soul knows it very well.
This law in Massachusetts allows abortions at any point in pregnancy based solely on the “professional judgment of the physician” – a loophole so wide you could drive a hearse through it. The previous law already permitted abortions after 24 weeks to preserve the life or health of the mother or in cases of severe fetal diagnosis. But that wasn’t enough for the radical left – they demanded the right to terminate healthy babies of healthy mothers right up until birth – an eventuality those on the pro-life side have been telling everyone all along was someday coming if we didn’t stop the barbaric practice of abortion.
As believers, we cannot ignore the spiritual dimensions here. The Bible warns us in Isaiah 5:20: “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil.” Watching these women celebrate the legalized killing of unborn children brings this verse to life in horrifying clarity.
This isn’t healthcare as they try to argue – it’s child sacrifice dressed in medical scrubs. The ancient Canaanites threw their children into fires to appease false gods. Today, we dismember them in the womb to appease the god of convenience. The method may have changed, but the evil remains the same.
Remember when pro-abortion advocates told us they just wanted abortion to be “safe, legal and rare”? Those days are long gone. The Democratic Party has moved far beyond that reasonable-sounding position. Now they hold signing ceremonies, pose for photographs and applaud as abortion protections are expanded deeper into pregnancy.
Massachusetts now joins Alaska, Colorado, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington, D.C., as jurisdictions with no statutory gestational limit. Ten states where a full-term baby can be terminated for any reason. Ten states where the most vulnerable among us have no legal protection whatsoever.
What we’re witnessing is the logical endpoint of a movement that treats abortion as both medical necessity and political sacrament. The cheers at the State House, the smiling faces, the applause – all point in the same direction: a culture that has decided some human lives are disposable right up to the moment of birth.
Late-term abortions often involve a gruesome process where the baby is fatally poisoned in the womb and then delivered dead. They can also involve an abortionist crushing and dismembering a baby before its delivery, pulling the baby out piece by piece. This isn’t a medical procedure – it’s barbarism. And to celebrate it? To cheer it? To applaud it? That’s something else entirely.
As conservatives, as Christians, as constitutionalists, we cannot remain silent in the face of such evil. The Rule of Law is grounded in natural law and the Laws of Nature and Nature’s God – not in the whims of politicians or the applause of crowds. When our government legalizes the killing of the most vulnerable, it has abandoned its most fundamental purpose: to preserve life.
Governor Healey and those cheering her on will one day stand before a Holy God. I don’t think they’ll be cheering then. But until that day comes, it falls to us – those who still believe in the sanctity of life and defend the defenseless. Those of us willing and able to call evil by its proper name.
What happened in Massachusetts wasn’t just a political victory for the pro-abortion movement. It was a spiritual battle lost, a line crossed that should never have been approached. The demons were indeed clapping in the background. And America – if we don’t turn back soon – will reap what we’ve sown.
— Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Marxist Transformation Seeks to Destroy America and Western Civilization
By Douglas V. Gibbs
The United States faces an unprecedented ideological challenge as socialist and communist movements gain institutional power within American politics. Unlike historical leftist movements that operated outside mainstream political structures, contemporary socialist organizations like the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) have successfully infiltrated the Democratic Party, achieving electoral victories and policy influence while maintaining a deceptive public posture regarding their ultimate objectives. These movements have transitioned from incremental socialism to revolutionary communism, explicitly rejecting core constitutional principles while employing sophisticated deception strategies to partially mask their radical agenda.
Historically, American socialist movements have maintained careful distance from communist terminology and imagery due to communism’s association with authoritarian regimes and historical atrocities. However, this strategic distinction has eroded, and the more the radicals of the Democratic Party claim they are not really socialists, the more they act like they are. And, they are even becoming more comfortable with the term communism.
Figures like Hassan Piker, who has become an increasingly visible spokesman for DSA’s political network, openly declares hostility toward America, stating “America deserved 9/11” and “I don’t have any sort of patriotism in my heart for America.” Piker’s call to “kill those mother*****rs and murder those mother*****rs in the streets” and “Let the streets soak in their f****ng red capitalist blood” demonstrates an embrace of revolutionary violence previously confined to radical communist fringes.
Piker further declared “my favorite flag is Hezbollah” while sitting with an LGBTQ+ flag, illustrating the ideological incoherence and anti-American alignment characteristic of contemporary leftist extremism.
Beyond rhetoric, policy proposals from socialist-aligned officials reveal systematic efforts to dismantle constitutional governance structures. The Democrats have long criticized the Electoral College, but how their young revolutionaries are calling for completely destroying the 238-year-old guard against the excesses of democracy. Socialist leaders also openly advocate for destroying the Senate, which would fundamentally alter the bicameral structure designed to protect state interests and disallow pure democracy.
Kamala Harris has promised to “pack the court” if elected, a call common among her Democratic Party brethren, undermining the judicial branch’s independence and changing it into a policy-making operating at the behest of the latest ideological power to demand its compliance.
The core natural right after Life and Liberty, Private Property, is now something that ought to be confiscated, according to these new American communists. New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani claims he will confiscate private property if landlords are deemed “poor custodians of their own property.”
Private Property, and anything else one might possess, is classified as wealth, so all of it is being targeted for confiscation. California’s Proposition 40 would impose “a one-time 5% tax on the accumulated wealth of California residents worth more than $1 billion,” effectively converting private property into public resources through majority vote.
Each of the core institutions are targets. The socialists rising in the ranks of the Democratic Party are calling for destroying the Pentagon, prisons, the police and our borders. They propose taking over utilities, and breaking up or absorbing corporate agriculture with government owning all major industries.
Perhaps most concerning is the systematic deception employed to obscure revolutionary objectives. This manifests in several ways: Socialist candidates consistently hide their radical agendas during campaigns, only revealing them after securing office. As noted, “socialist candidates (as opposed to registered socialist activists) hide their communist-adjacent agendas during elections. But once in office and drunk with power, they find socialism too wishy-washy and go full communist. Abdul El-Sayed’s campaign exemplifies this approach: after winning Michigan’s Democratic Senate primary, approximately 100 YouTube videos documenting his radical positions were made private, including content suggesting “replacing the Second Amendment with a constitutional guarantee to health care” and dismissing border concerns. Other candidates have had past statements also dug up. Each of them laughed about it and either said something completely the opposite in response, or joked that they’ve grown over time.
The greatest use of deception is through language itself. Mamdani claims to be a “democratic socialist” while advocating “the abolition of private property.” The term “defund the police” is presented as resource reallocation rather than law enforcement elimination.
Language and policies regarding illegal aliens is also very disconcerting. Undercover recordings reveal how illegal immigration is exploited for political gain. DSA official Diana Moreno stated: “You don’t have to have papers to have power,” explicitly acknowledging the use of undocumented immigrants as political assets. This strategy mirrors historical communist tactics of importing dependent populations to create revolutionary constituencies.
If one simply looks at history, it is clear that the American socialist movement is simply replicating patterns from historical communist regimes, despite their catastrophic human costs, and what is on the horizon if they were to gain power is chilling.
Mao’s revolution: “The victims were kneeling down beside cheap coffins, their hands tied behind their backs with wire. About six security police moved nonchalantly along, shooting them in the back of the head.” Contemporary leftist rhetoric advocating violence against capitalists echoes this revolutionary methodology.
Historical communist regimes systematically eliminated opposition through show trials and purges, which today would be a short step up from the lawfare against Donald Trump and his supporters (including January 6). Mamdani’s public list of nearly 1 million New York homeowners with official warnings to 17,000 property owners represents a modern variant of this tactic, as well, creating “enemies of the people” lists for political targeting.
Mamdani’s property tax scheme reverses the presumption of innocence, making “almost 20,000 New Yorkers… automatically presumed guilty of being house-hoarding, capitalist leeches who owe the exploited classes tens of thousands of dollars a year in reparations, unless they can prove themselves innocent.”
Wealth confiscation schemes like California’s Proposition 40 violate equal protection principles by targeting specific groups for punitive treatment. Constitutional principles and our natural rights don’t depend on whether the victim is sympathetic. Property protections, natural rights, and a free society means little if government applies benefits of the law only to people whom the majority likes.
We must also understand, this is not some grassroots movement in America. It is emerging after over a century of internal infiltration and influence, with even today the reality of internal revolutionary activity supported by foreign subversion networks. This concern is amplified by Piker’s praise for Hezbollah and anti-American rhetoric, which align with foreign adversaries’ interests in destabilizing American society.
The evidence points to an America facing an existential internal insurrection and invasion from socialist and communist movements employing sophisticated deception while systematically working to dismantle foundational institutions. Unlike historical leftist movements that maintained at least rhetorical allegiance to American constitutional principles, contemporary socialists are pursuing revolutionary transformation with explicit anti-American objectives – and with each passing day they are becoming less shy about admitting it and operating out in the open.
This development requires urgent recognition and response from patriotic, U.S. Constitution defending, Americans.
We must:
America stands at a constitutional precipice, facing a coordinated effort to replace its founding principles with revolutionary communism. Only through clear recognition of this threat and organized constitutional defense can this blessed Union of States preserve its foundational liberties and governmental structures.
— Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary