Show Us The Results
Why contributions dry up
By Dorothy Anne Seese

Just about every website around is asking for donations or support from sales, right on up to Drudge's site with its 700 million hits a year.  If my Flagship website weren't hosted gratis by an Australian netfriend from his personal server (he is a superprogrammer type) then either Flagship would be gone, or I'd be crying for donations also.

What's the problem?  From what I see and hear, it's a matter of results.  People contribute not just to read what's going on, but what's happening as a result of all the smoke and flame on the pages of our various e-zines (liberal and conservative).  I'm as guilty as any of the other writers in aiming my articles toward "what's wrong in our country" but it hasn't sparked any activity that I'm aware of among right-wing conservatives who would like to see our country return to constitutional government.  Regardless of what the people want and what the writers write, the government moves on like an explorer space probe that once released from earth, may send back signals but it responds to no commands from earth.

We need to have more reporting on results of conservative efforts, if there is any amount of it to report.  If there isn't we need to know why.  Is it really a lack of money?  Or is it just that a small number of us regret losing America to the globalists of either of the "major parties" (which are two faces of a single coin) while the majority of Americans are asleep or want a bigger government for bigger socialism?

Conservatism has never been popular compared with liberalism for one reason:  the abundance of the few "lucky guys" like Bill Gates and Co. emphasizes the merits of luck, of being in the right place at the right time with the right stuff ... and the rest, the majority of us, just plug along for what purports to be a living wage, constantly fighting the war against inflation, higher taxes and diminishing returns, cyclical recession, and company changes due to mergers, new technology and public demand.  Conservatism doesn't seem to offer the "security" of the liberal agenda, a spoof that's worked for years because folks don't realize there is no security.

Take the infamous 911.  At 6 a.m. Eastern Time, New York had Twin Towers and alarm clocks were ringing to alert folks that it was Tuesday morning, time to get to the job.  By 10 a.m. Eastern Time, the United States was on a wartime footing from which it has never recovered.  What happened to the general sense of "security?"  Americans came with their security certificates in hand to deliver them up to the federal government in exchange for any kind of "security" that the government could deliver.  What did it deliver rather than security?  A system of controls that has put us one pen stroke from martial law, border to border, coast to coast.

In the midst of all this flame and smoke, horror and heroism, grief and glory, flag-waving Americans rallied to get that turbaned guy who is now of not much concern to our government, Osama bin Laden.  The president received emergency powers from Congress equaling or exceeding anything FDR had during World War II.  We're on a wartime footing even though Congress has declared no war on any nation.  We're at war against ideologies, perhaps religious fanatics, but most decidedly against the right of sovereign nations to rebel against being brought under the control of global governance.  Now Iraq is the villain, even though to this point, Iraq hasn't launched a missile against Israel or perpetrated any direct, overt acts against the United States.  We're just at war against "evil" and the great "might be a threat" groups.

Who has risen up in America to speak for the conservative cause?  A bunch of alternative media journalists and columnists who see that this nation is just participating in the great global governance agenda for the elitists who want control of earth, water, oil, gas, and the world's population (including the right to determine who lives, who dies and who comes to power).

We have no real results to show for our efforts.  Can we keep asking for support when there is no effort to unify conservatives, setting aside internecine differences as to religion and third party affiliations to form a party or a movement with the strength to make itself heard in Washington?  We can ask, but we shall not receive a great deal until our people see results, and it's difficult to tell them that the results are up to them and not us.  We can write ourselves blue in the face, but it's the people themselves who have to take the initiative to form the citizens groups to confront the issues, both foreign and domestic.

We have a lot of hurting people in this nation who need to know that conservatives aren't out to throw grannies in the street, close down Social Security for those who put into the system for decades, or take away the children from the poor.  In fact, it's the liberals who do these very things, and then cry about "victims" as if liberal agendas helped the poor.  No, liberal agendas create elitists and thrive off victim classes, which is why they continually and relentlessly support their continuation.

If you doubt that the liberal agenda supports the continuation of victims classes, look at who belongs to the liberal elite:  Rockefellers, Ford, Carnegie, names of the super-rich of an earlier America that was free.  Their huge amassed fortunes support taking away what incentive there is to exploit opportunity in America, and create serfdom for the victim classes, and control for the elite.

Who supports the American Civil Liberties Union?  I'd like to know.  Their sources of income might prove very interesting, although the money is probably funneled through a lot of vague sources.  A significant portion of their membership is comprised of lawyers, and if anyone can create loopholes, it's the lawyers.

Constitutionalists would like to see some results.  Among those, and this is my hobby horse, is the creation of a major media broadcast network to publicize the conservative voice.  No one seems inclined to come forth with the money to support that either.

One reason past tyrants and dictators have seized the media first is that people generally will believe the "news" as reporting the truth.  And yes, millions of Americans still tune to the major networks for their news, although the number is growing smaller since the alternative internet media came into its own.  Nevertheless, we in the internet media risk the danger of being shut down as "anti-American" unless our position as patriotic, constitutional Americans can be vindicated.

"Show us the results"  is the cry of many a conservative reader.

No ... conservatives out in cyberland ... you show us some results.  Otherwise, we who write are spitting in the wind, risking our names and safety so that you can read, agree and wish, but do nothing.

You show US the results.

Back to column Home