Whatever Happened to Fight, Fight, Fight?

By Cliff Kincaid

The Maryland headline says it all: “Kilmar Abrego Garcia can remain a free man for the holidays, judge rules.” The alleged gang member and wife beater has beaten the Trump Administration. Trump won’t fight the judges. He is bending over backwards to accommodate them. Sad.

Meanwhile, he bent to the illegal drug lobby, funded by Soros, and wants to create the perception for our vulnerable youth that marijuana is medicine. Sad.

He blows drug dealers in boats to Kingdom Come, but traitors, seditionists, and assorted anarchists and communists run rampant through the streets, assaulting ICE agents.

Trump has lost his mojo.

Tripped up by his Attorney General’s mishandling of the Epstein Files, he has resorted to defending nude pics of Bill Clinton in Epstein’s hot tub. Whatever happened to investigating the mysterious “suicide” of Clinton lawyer Vince Foster? Or the “suicide” of Epstein himself?

Meanwhile, “affordability” has become our new “right,” under Trump and Mamdani.

John Hawkins notes that “affordability” has become “the latest political buzzword embraced by both Democrats and Republicans as the main issue for the 2026 Midterm Election.”

This is both a loser for Republicans and a scam. Hawkins notes, “As we approach the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence in 2026, we know the Founding Fathers must be totally appalled.”

We are not entitled to “affordability.” Hawkins explains, “There’s no way they would have believed the role of government was to guarantee the affordability of everyday goods and services. That’s something you’d find only in fascist, socialist, or communist totalitarian regimes.”

I can’t find the right to affordability in the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution. Can you?

If socialism is the idea that the federal government pays for something and makes it “affordable,” then we are already a socialist nation. This is why there are “entitlement” programs and why the federal government is so big. However, Medicare is paid for by payroll taxes from people making a living. So is Social Security. That means they are not “free.”

Under the government shutdown, we were told that SNAP funds were running out and people would not be able to eat. Why is the federal government feeding people in the first place? It is because we already have a socialist government in Washington, D.C. The government takes from one person to give to another. There are nearly 42 million Americans getting “food assistance.”

In another world, a truly capitalist one in which the federal government was not so big, churches and local governments would take care of the poor. But that does not further the socialist narrative.

I challenge people to compare the ten planks of the Communist Manifesto with what is happening in America. We are already down the road to socialism and communism.

The answer is not to throw around the words “socialist” and “communist” but to explain in a rational way why central state planning does not work, and why it is wrong to take from one person to give to another through force of government. One of the Ten Commandments is “Thou shalt not steal.”

Our founding documents affirmed the right to property, the “pursuit of happiness,” and did not authorize a federal income tax or “affordability” as a human right.

Socialism is ultimately based on the notion of the elimination of the bourgeoisie—the middle-class owners of property—as set forth in the Manifesto of the Communist Party, written by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. “This person must indeed be swept out of the way, and made impossible,” it says. This is the theory of class warfare.

Hence, in the name of saving the middle class, the middle class will be eliminated. This is the dirty secret of socialism.

In his book, Why Communism Kills: The Legacy of Karl Marx, Dr. Fred Schwarz argued that “The liquidation of the bourgeoisie is an essential step of the path to Communism. This is why Communism must kill.”

In his famous “Time for Choosing” speech in 1964, Ronald Reagan captured the essence and attraction of Marxism, saying, “We have so many people who can’t see a fat man standing beside a thin one without coming to the conclusion the fat man got that way by taking advantage of the thin one.”

American economist Henry Hazlitt said it a different way: “The whole gospel of Karl Marx can be summed up in a single sentence: Hate the man who is better off than you are. Never under any circumstances admit that his success may be due to his own efforts, to the productive contribution he has made to the whole community. Always attribute his success to the exploitation, the cheating, the more or less open robbery of others.”

That is the essence of the socialist campaign strategy. It will be a winner in New York City — and could succeed nationally — if conservatives do not challenge this philosophy and expose its dangerous flaws.

At a recent socialist conference in New York City, several of the Big Brains declared that “Medicare for All” is still a winning formula. They were too young to be on Medicare, and they clearly do not understand that Medicare does not cover the costs of medical and health problems experienced by senior citizens. That is why so-called “supplemental plans” are needed. Seniors pay for these plans out of their own funds.

Or perhaps they do know that “Medicare for All” does not work, and that it is destined to fail. When it does, more federal money is required.

That was the design behind Obamacare, the so-called “Affordable Care Act (ACA),” which is not affordable but is the reason the Democratic Party closed the federal government. They wanted more federal money for the ACA, the socialized medicine scheme launched by Obama.

There’s that word: “affordability.”

Gary M. Galles, a Professor of Economics at Pepperdine University, has written an article for the Foundation for Economic Education (FEE), describing the purpose and intent. He writes, “The case for Obamacare was, from the beginning, a compound of lies and statistics, which together transformed a bad idea into a seemingly good one for Democrat politicians.”

President Reagan opposed socialized medicine, but couldn’t stop the drift toward it. He tried to eliminate the federal Department of Education and failed. President Trump and the Republicans in Congress tried but failed to repeal Obamacare.

Socialism is winning. Can Trump stop it? Will he?

Hawkins says, “We now know the 2026 election won’t bring us any relief from the endless march of government to total domination of our lives. If President Trump were smart, he would reject the notion of ‘affordability’ altogether and call for Americans to take more responsibility for the conduct of their lives. No more reliance on government solutions that simply don’t work.”

Whatever happened to “Fight, Fight, Fight?”