Indivisible Guide: What Few Are Pointing Out


Have you heard of the Indivisible Guide? Before I start, let me provide some disclosure: I am not a Tea Party Member or a Republican, so I write the following from a somewhat outside perspective; somewhat. I believe the party system is oftentimes a joke and like Washington warned it would, it has torn the fabric of our great nation. That being said, I do consider myself to be a conservative at times but also find myself to be somewhat liberal on some issues. I guess that’s the beauty of being a “free-thinker”.  I share this so that you can hear the following for what it truly is. What you decide at the end is your business but I plan on being extremely blunt – because it’s needed.


Conservatives have a fight on their hands; that’s for sure. A “call to arms” has been issued by the left and their emboldened followers are beginning to respond by the thousands, if not millions. Conservatives need to understand that their participation in the political process has only just begun and they need to understand that there is an inherent danger by those that blindly follow the radical and often ignorant direction from the Democrats. As a point in case, let me introduce to you the Indivisible Guide.

Have you heard of the Indivisible Guide yet? If not, here is your wake-up call. Its official name is Indivisible: A Practical Guide for Resisting the Trump Agenda and according to reports, the guide has been downloaded or viewed over 1.7 million times and inspired more than 5,000 local groups (with another 2,000 groups waiting to be verified). Here is their promotional video.

Note its purpose: to help the Democrats take action on issues such as preserving the Affordable Care Act (which is illegal – especially since the legislation originated in the Senate and not the House) and challenging the Trump administration’s immigration policies – which coincidentally sound a lot like Obama’s original immigration policies (or Harry Reid’s) but is now considered racist because a Republican wants it even though most Latino voters actually support Trump’s immigration policies?

So what kind of “action” does Indivisible want to take? Well, so far their actions revolve around disrupting town halls held by Republican lawmakers so that they can’t get anything done. Sure, they will suggest that they do not advocate aggressive or disruptive behavior publicly, but a simple read through the guide will give you a completely different impression. They have already claimed “success” in places like Utah, California, Pennsylvania, Indiana, Michigan, and Nebraska and suggest that they are far from done. So what does “success” look like for the Indivisible movement? Let’s see…

Now, I am all about passionate discourse, and it’s true that not every Indivisible involved town-hall goes like this, but seriously. I really hate to be the one to point this out but the Indivisible Guide is literally one of the most misguided and ignorant documents I believe I have ever read to date. In fact, it is filled with so many inaccuracies that it could be used as a demonstration of fiction in any other context.

It is written by “former progressive congressional staffers” who are evidently in dire need of a dictionary and a Constitution. Their “former” titles should be a warning sign to anyone actually considering buying into their nonsense because it screams of bias on several different levels. Clearly, it was written by hate-filled Democrats, but the ignorance within it is simply over the top. Let me provide just a few examples to illustrate the point. Within the guide you will find statements such as this:

Donald Trump is the biggest popular vote loser in history to ever call himself President-Elect. In spite of the fact that he has no mandate, he will attempt to use his congressional majority to reshape America in his own racist, authoritarian, and corrupt image.

Biggest popular vote loser? Racist? Authoritarian? Corrupt? This entire statement is nothing short of speculation and lies. Never mind that John Quincy Adams and Rutherford Hayes lost by a greater margin than Trump. Never mind that some of Trump’s closest friends (for a great many years) are black and being ripped for being his friend. Never mind that he is married to an immigrant. And never mind that his minority employees have nothing but great things to say about him. Shall we also ignore the reason for the Electoral College, the difference between votes cast versus counted or the possibility of voter fraud? By the way, if you want to talk about corruption, perhaps Hillary Clinton is the right place to start.

I have asked this question to liberals before and the only part that anyone on the left seems to want to dispute is the voter fraud part. This in spite of examples such as Michigan, where some votes were counted as many as six times or recent developments where claims from former intelligence personnel suggests that there were “at least three million illegal voters in this last election” or how a report by political scientist Jesse Richman of Old Dominion University in Norfolk, Virginia, showed how 6.4 percent of the estimated 20 million adult non-citizens in the U.S. voted in November (illegally) and added 834,381 net votes for Hillary. And guess which candidate those illegal votes were cast for (hint: not Trump). Shall we also forget about the Constitution or why the Founders fought against the idea of Democracy? Shall we ignore the history of racism or voter intimidation of the Democrat party and the left in general? And more to the point, should we forget that out of the 3,141 counties in the United States, the vast majority (at least 2,626) went to Trump?

The truth is that we would have to ignore all of these facts in order for such statements to be true. And if we do choose to ignore the facts, then I guess reminding ourselves that Hillary Clinton lost more electors than anyone else in over a hundred years is just pointless. Unfortunately, it just gets worse from here. Here’s another statement:

The authors of this guide are former congressional staffers who witnessed the rise of the Tea Party. We saw these activists take on a popular president with a mandate for change and a supermajority in Congress. We saw them organize locally and convince their own members of Congress to reject President Obama’s agenda. Their ideas were wrong, cruel, and tinged with racism – and they won.

What “change”? As I recall, all we saw was further erosion of Constitutional liberty. In fact, I have written about how Obama’s legacy will not be remembered as anything positive. And the popular president? On what planet? President Barack Obama had an average approval rating of 47.9 percent during his time in office, according to Gallup. As CNSNews Reports, that puts him BEHIND Richard Nixon, who resigned, and George W. Bush, who saw his approval rating drop as low as 25 percent near the end of his term. To be clear, Obama’s 47.9 percent puts him ahead of only Gerald Ford (47.2 percent), Jimmy Carter (45.5 percent) and Harry Truman (45.4 percent). Awesome.

Let me also touch on the “Cruel and Racist” part. There is so much wrong with that statement, it’s hard to know where to start or end. So let me just provide an example of how wrong this statement is. To begin with, just because someone does not agree with a leftist agenda does not mean they are racist. Let’s also talk about Tim Scott in South Carolina’s 1st Congressional District for a moment. For those of you who might not be familiar with this particular case, Tim Scott became the first Black American GOP representative in more than 100 years in the South Carolina House thanks to the Tea Party. How terribly racist, right? He beat Paul Thurmond, son of U.S. Senator Strom Thurmond; the guy who said things like “All the bayonets of the Army cannot force the Negro into our homes, into our schools, our churches and our places of recreation and amusement,” and “We stand for the segregation of the races and the racial integrity of each race.” I find it ironic that the right has at least a couple hundred years of evidence to prove that conservatives are the ones all about equal rights and yet the Democrats continue on with their racist rhetoric, seemingly not knowing they are being extremely racist. Here’s just a brief example of many:

But let’s keep this going for a bit.

How your MoC (Member of Congress) thinks, and how to use that to save democracy

The statement “save democracy” is nothing short of ignorance on public display. We are not a democracy and were never meant to be. The Constitution of the United States was actually set up to protect the people AGAINST a democracy. Our Founders, openly and repeatedly, criticized democracy for a reason. This is because democracy ends up being mob rule and tyrannical. This is generally recognized by intellectuals as a bad thing and has been known for thousands of years. I must admit that I am not shocked that liberals who went to liberal schools are somehow unfamiliar with this. Regardless, this is exactly why the Founding Fathers designed our system around a REPUBLIC instead. Need proof? Try reading Article 4 Section 4 of the Constitution. The reason why is best explained by Marvin Simkin who in 1992 wrote the following statement in the Los Angeles Times:

Democracy is not freedom. Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to eat for lunch. Freedom comes from the recognition of certain rights which may not be taken, not even by a 99% vote.”

By the way, this is part of the reason why “popular vote” does not decide our president.

You know, Plato recognized that Oligarchy degenerates into a democracy where freedom is the supreme good but freedom is also slavery. And I guess this point sort of plays into Obama’s, and perhaps even Clinton’s “popularity”. Back in 2014, a study jointly conducted by Princeton and Northwestern Universities found that the U.S. government now represents the rich and powerful, not the average citizen. Or, as the Washington Times stated, “it has taken a turn down elitist lane and become a country led by a small dominant class comprised of powerful members who exert total control over the general population — an oligarchy.”

So what’s an oligarchy? By definition, it is a form of government in which all power is vested in a few persons or in a dominant class or clique; government by the few. And the left is literally (and oftentimes, unknowingly) trying to achieve this while suggesting that they seek true freedom. Blame the liberal schools which have created this system of the blind leading the blind.

I could literally destroy numerous elements of the Indivisible Guide with nothing but definitions, but I believe I have made my point. This “guide” is filled with little jewels like the ones I have provided. The ignorance is deep, and sadly, few involved can see it. But I think in light of what I have provided herein and what I have proven in other articles and links, you will find the following part of the Indivisible Guide to be the most ironic.

The Tea Party’s ideas were wrong and their behavior was often horrible. Their members:

  • Ignored reality and made up their own facts
  • Threatened anybody they considered an enemy
  • Physically assaulted and spat on staff
  • Shouted obscenities and burned people in effigy
  • Targeted their hate not just at Congress, but also fellow citizens (especially people of color)

We are better than this. We are the majority, and we don’t need petty scare tactics to show that our cause is just.

I don’t know about anyone else, but for me, if this isn’t a case of the pot calling the kettle black, I don’t know what is. In fact, it really does not take much of a brain (or an extensive Google search) to discover that if ANYONE is responsible for threats, lying, physical assault, burning things, being hateful and being obscene, it is the left. Sure, I could list out hundreds of examples but a simple question will suffice. Exactly when was the last time anyone saw conservatives riot, beat voters in opposition, destroy a Starbucks, attack cops, block traffic or harass and throw eggs at innocent people? Sorry, those appear to be actions engaged in exclusively by the left. As for the claims that the Tea Party was wrong; well, that’s just an opinion now isn’t it? Do you want to know what they say opinions are like?

And let me make something VERY clear; the Left is simply NOT the majority. Understand that conservatives in the U.S. are the largest ideological group and have been for a very long time. According to numerous polls, Americans’ political ideology has remained essentially stable for many years. As of late (and according to Gallup) conservatives are the majority at 37%, moderates are second with 35% and the lying liberals held firm at 24%. To further that point, the Washington Post just reported that since 2008, nearly every state moved right in both presidential and state politics and Rasmussen Reports just reported that forty-five percent of likely U.S. voters think the country is heading in the right direction now. That means that liberalism and their crazy ideas are the minority.

I find their “guide” to be an ignorant mess; even their name could use some more thought. Let us recall the Pledge of Allegiance for a moment. Between 1892 and 1923 the pledge read: “I pledge allegiance to my Flag and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, Indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.” For clarity, between 1923 and 1954 it read “I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, Indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Can we agree that it doesn’t mention a democracy anywhere in it? It speaks of the Republic – where things like redistribution would be illegal. Let us also note that it speaks of liberty and justice for all; not just the Democrats and not to those we disagree with. Regardless, the definition of Indivisible is unable to be divided or separated. This is a powerful word, which why it was used in the pledge listed above. Yet, this same word is in the same pledge that had to be put on a teleprompter at the DNC (just FYI). Evidently, some in the crowd might have had an issue reciting it. This is telling.

Isn’t it ironic then that this guide is entirely about division? Think about it. It is about disruption and opposition to the right. In fact, in the guide, they state clearly that it is a “defensive strategy”. Defense against their fellow American’s? Defense against the right, the Republic, the Constitution, conservatives, and the GOP?

Let me be clear. I am well aware that what they are referring to in regard to Indivisible, is the left in opposition to the right. However, you should understand that this literally defines division which kind of makes their name an oxymoron. That may seem evident enough, but I just wanted to make it abundantly clear that this leftist group is evoking foundational talk about a united and cooperative nation while actively seeking to push their agenda of division onto everyone else because THEY do not agree with (or understand) someone who defied the oligarchy. It’s just really odd to me.

For those who would consider following such ignorance, let me provide you with a simple warning. Think twice… or at all. If your leaders are putting you or your group in danger, disregarding opinions or concerns, ignoring truth, lying to you, misleading you with lies, pushing aside or ignoring fundamental rules or regulations, or leading you to someplace you know you should not go or simply do not support, your group needs to be able to identify this and act accordingly. This warning goes out to both the left and the right. You are in the presence of a pseudo-transformational leader and, I will say it again, “Pseudo-transformational leadership is very dangerous.

All that being said, we must ask whether anything in this guide is true. Admittedly, yes. While the reasoning behind the guide is completely irrational, illogical, ignorant and false, the tactics work quite well. I think everyone can learn something from examining the document. If nothing else, it is worth reading to gain some insight into how you could form your own group to counter their efforts. I can envision counter-groups employing the exact same tactics at the exact same town-hall meetings. It would be very effective and bring some balance to their horribly ignorant agenda.

I want to provide a link so that you can review the guide yourself. Be mindful of the propaganda and blatant lies. As I have demonstrated, much of it is simply that. Still, review the tactics and learn from them. Then, if you are emboldened, play the game.


Something else to consider.

For years, the left has blasted the Tea Party and its members; calling them “legislative arsonists”, “anarchists” and even “terrorists”. Now, this Indivisible group, by their own admission, is looking to “replicate the Tea Party’s success” using a similar model and similar tactics. Let’s just say that what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Let them have their group, let anyone join, but let no one in Indivisible be surprised when involvement with the group comes with a label of “domestic terrorist” as well.

Now, who do we have to thank for this wonderful work of fiction and this new domestic terrorist organization? Well, according to The Washington Post and The Daily Signal, there is Ezra Levin, one of their leaders and former deputy policy director for Democratic US Rep. Lloyd Doggett of Texas. Leah Greenberg is also a leader; she is the wife of Levin and one of the co-authors of the guide. She used to work with Humanity United which was funded by Soros’ Open Society Institute. Then there is Angel Padilla; a board member and co-author of the guide. Angel currently works for the National Immigration Law Center, which is funded by Soros through his Open Society Foundations. Board member Melissa Bradley is a Soros Justice Fellow through the Open Society Foundations. Board member Sarah Dohl is the former communications director for Democratic US Rep. Lloyd Doggett of Texas. Finally, board Member Matt Traldi is the research team director for the Service Employees International Union. That’s quite a line-up and it’s growing by the day.

Concerned about Soros’ name coming up so much? Don’t be, the group has made assurances that they are not funded by Soros. Of course, they have also demonstrated a willingness to spread lies while demonstrating that they don’t know what they are talking about or don’t care to do a little research, not to mention that they have admitted to using the Tea Party’s “terrorist tactics”. I guess you should just take their assurances for what they are worth.