PART 3 The CFR Wants Us to Meet Vivek Ramaswamy
So, now we have Vivek Ramaswamy running for the presidency of the United States of America and the Council on Foreign Relations posts a blog about it and the world swoons over yet another shiny new object.
Now that the celebration is well under way, I guess it’s time for the party pooper to arrive and start tearing off the wrapping paper that covers the yet unknown contents in the box, maybe bursting a couple of balloons along the way as we vet out some of Vivek’s policy positions.
It is true, as the CFR blog post states, that “Ramaswamy is short on specifics about how he would rebuild the supposedly splintering e pluribus unum.” The article goes on, “He is clear on what he opposes. He thinks, for example, that affirmative action is a ‘national cancer.’ Indeed, he says that his first step as president will be to cancel Executive Order 11246, which has been in place since 1965 …” (bolding mine). This action (in my humble opinion) wouldn’t do much good since affirmative action has been a wedge issue since the earliest known weaponized usage of the combination of two perfectly good words “affirmative” and “action” ... and it wasn’t in 1965.
According to an article posted on the Smithsonian Magazine, written by Jackie Mansky (first published on June 22, 2016, updated on November 1, 2022), Shirley J. Wilcher. the executive director of an organization called ‘American Association for Access, Equity and Diversity’ states that “Most prominent among the early sightings of the phrase “affirmative action” is its presence in the National Labor Relations Act of 1935. Better known as the Wagner Act, the legislation established the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and collective bargaining.”
There is plenty to pick apart in that paragraph, but that is not the subject of this commentary. The point that needs to be made here is that this candidate for the United States presidency is coming out of the gate in a horse race galloping right into a quagmire of controversy that can, and no doubt will be used to demonize the Republican Party, which only makes sense, if in fact one of the underlying goals is to further fracture the Republican Party, making way for usurper joe to be reelected, even if the political machine is somehow stopped from stealing future elections.
Why not focus on a whole host of legitimate, immediate issues that would benefit all Americans, such as gaining an understanding of the American Republic, learning about and finally following the United States constitution, securing our borders from outside invasion, arresting people who burn, loot and bomb American buildings, derail trains, murder our children in schools or parishioners in church (thereby securing our country from inside insurrection)?
Rather, Mr. Ramaswamy says: “We are in the middle of this national identity crisis where we have celebrated our diversity and our differences for so long that we forgot all the ways WE’RE REALLY JUST THE SAME AS AMERICANS”
What exactly does he mean by “We’re really just the same as Americans?”
Does he mean that Hindus are just the same as Christians?
And, what is this national identity crisis that we are in the middle of, and might it be that this so-called crisis is media generated?
In the same CFR blog post Mr. Ramaswamy clearly states that he RECOILS when he is described as a conservative. At that point, he might have realized that he made a faux pas and he covers by saying: “Not that there’s anything wrong with being a conservative. It’s just not how I would describe myself.”
I’m sure it’s not.
The blog post also states that “Ramaswamy’s announcement was notable in.. one large... aspect... he never mentioned the Republican Party or past Republican presidents in his announcement.” (excerpted and rephrased for usage here – original meaning still intact).
I can only guess why not. Is it because he is running on the right side of the Uni-Party to help usher in the one world government that globalists salivate over and that the Bible predicts in the Book of Revelation?
Or am I being an unfaithful Christian to even challenge Mr. Ramaswamy’s motives?
Speaking of faith, when I mentioned that Vivek's faith allegiance is not to the one true God of Christianity but to the Hindu gods, I was told my ideas were akin to nazism, to which I responded that I did not attack any religion (nor was I suggesting that anyone should ever face extermination for their religious beliefs, God forbid). I am simply questioning the meaning of the religious test in our Constitution.
I was also told that “Hindus are really nice people” to which I replied that our constitution doesn’t say that only really nice people can run for president, it says that persons who run for the presidency must be natural born citizens who must swear an Oath to protect and defend the United States constitution. So my legitimate question remains, “Can a person who holds allegiance to the many Hindu gods put his hand on a Holy Bible and swear allegiance to the US Constitution?”
And by the way, it’s not just "putting your hand on a Bible, affirming your belief in the constitution" that matters.
The overarching question is, “What does the US constitution mean to you?”
Do you understand the American Republic? Do you understand the Declaration of Independence and the multiple grievances that early Americans expressed against an overwhelmingly powerful king of England?
I ask because to think that 21st century Americans have any less of a duty to Protect and Defend America than the early settlers did is to forget one of the great sayings that Sir Edmund Burke wrote in his book entitled Reflections on the Revolution in France, 1790, when he said, "People will not look forward to prosperity who never look backward to their ancestors." (The other notable saying from Sir Edmund Burke is that “The only thing necessary for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing”).
So to think that America was not founded on a belief in the one true God of Christianity is as wrongheaded as believing that the country of India was not founded on Hinduism, the country of Iran was not founded on Mithraism and Islamism, and the country of China was not founded on Confusianism,Taoism and Buddhism.
I am reminded that vetting out a presidential candidate should be as American as loving mom, loving country and loving apple pie, and I so ask, “Why do Americans always seem to have to deny our roots, our heritage and our God?”
The time has come that we stop being stopped by the tactics of denial, distraction, diversion, distortion and denigration, and we start being true defenders of our American Republic, so that our children may know Liberty.
Janice Daniels, April 29, 2023
NOTE: The views in this commentary represent the work of its author Janice Daniels. They are a good faith effort to provide information easily obtainable on the internet. These views do not necessarily reflect the opinions of other MCU Directors or Members. The use of images is protected by The Fair Use Section 107 Copyright Act of 1976 .