Posts Tagged ‘Statists’

Our Cold Civil War

Thursday, February 21st, 2019

There’s no shooting yet, unless you ask Steve Scalise(R-LA.)  He might well see it differently, and justifiably so.  He was grievously wounded by a leftist madman with plans of wiping out Republicans. Even in the Cold War, there were occasional incidents that involved shootings, even though most people observed the peace, perhaps just barely.  Now we face something different in character.  It is a combination between our worst fears of the growing police state in the era of the War on Terror we’re still fighting, a new version with different motivations than the bloody Civil War we fought one century and one half ago, and the Cold War we didn’t fight, but ended, some thirty years ago.  This new form of war is different in some ways from what we’ve seen in the past.  Our nation is so thoroughly divided that it seems impossible to heal.  Violence threatens from just beneath the surface, only constrained by our lack of desire.  Like all people under the boot of oppression, we will go a long way before we will rise in rebellion.  We don’t want a fight.  We want to be left alone.  Just as in the war on terror, however, the enemy seems bent on denying us that option called peace, and they’re bringing war to us. For now, it’s cold, or at least cool.  As the rabid left continues to agitate for more from their neighbors’ wallets and souls, the temperature is rising fast. Now we find ourselves in a Cold Civil War in which the violence is just beneath the surface and an open war is just one election or one court ruling away.

Alexis de Tocqueville famously warned:

The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.

We are approaching the end of the American Republic.  Congress discovered in the 1930s that it could bribe the public with the public’s money, and the bribery began in earnest in the 1960s.  Now, the bribery is everywhere.  Now the guns hide just beneath the surface.  There is always the threat that they will be pointed in your face. Somewhere, even now, some statist is contriving the next approach to coerce your rights and your property from your hands.  In fact, there are more statists coming up with ways to spend you into oblivion than there is money to be expropriated and spent.  The Green New Deal is one example, but it’s only the most recent.  Understand that they are willing to use violence.  Let them hem and haw all they will, and let them attempt to conceal their malign plans, but do not let them go without demanding of them: “Where do you get the right to steal from others at gunpoint?”  Do not allow them to hide the gun.  That’s why they immediately shift to nonsense about “social contracts” and so on.  They want to pretend you’ve volunteered to be robbed.

Ladies and gentlemen, we’re in a cold civil war that is just one bad incident or one miserable election from going hot.  Some will moan that I’m far too pessimistic about it, but let’s be blunt, shall we?  Look around.  It’s so bad that we now have Americans turning to theories that may or may not have any basis in reality for belief.  The left has its collusion hoax, while Trumpsters have something I’m investigating called “Qanon.” I know the left’s Russia/Collusion story is a thoroughgoing hoax, but only recently, having encountered advocates of this Qanon business, I’m still investigating.  For all I know, Qanon is a political operation of Trump’s to keep his base in line. (Don’t email me to complain, please, as I’m still investigating this, and this is one of a number of theories floating around the Internet about Qanon.) Still, let us imagine Qanon is substantially real, whatever that means. How far have we fallen that such a character (or collection of them) would constitute the only hope of salvation for America?  How thoroughly bankrupt have we become?  How corrupted is our government and those who not only staff it, but also who choose them?  Why are we looking for a hero rather than rising to be heroes ourselves?  We’ve sat by and let them steal our country, and now we wish for some sort of superman with a bold “Q” emblazoned on his chest to save us from our own intransigence?

We let the statists steal our schools and universities.  Having monopolized these platforms, they stole our children and grandchildren away, now to be used as fodder in the war against us.  We let them control all of our media because we have refused to bankrupt their outlets by simple disuse.  That’s all it would take.  That’s all we would need.  Just stop using them.  Turn off their television channels.  We hang onto their platforms(I’m as guilty as any) like Facebook and Twitter and Youtube because… they’re convenient!   The problem is that they’ve turned it all against us.  Where are we now? How can we claim to support the constitutional republic while we join these villains in a “civil” relationship comprised of their guns and their threats, but only our submission? What sort of mixed signals do we send to our progeny? On the one hand, we talk to them about the evils of the popular culture, but on the other, we partake of it.

It’s awful.  The real problem may be that the left is now pushing so hard that people who are only barely anchored to reality may begin to do completely unhinged things, and some may ultimately involve actual shootings.  First, think of this fool Jussie Smollett, who created a hoax hate attack, all so he could defame Trump and his supporters, but perhaps also to help Kamala Harris(D-CA) and Cory Booker(D-NJ) push their anti-lynching bill through the Senate last week.  Then, on Wednesday, an apparently demented US Coastguard Lieutenant was arrested on terrorism charges in Maryland.  Christopher Paul Hasson, of Silver Springs, was planning to kill a number of leftist federal office-holders in particular, but apparently had a more generalized hate on for all of humanity.

If you view these things as I do, it’s becoming obvious that America is being pushed to the brink.  We are still in a “cold” phase of this second civil war, but that won’t last too much longer.  People from both sides of the divide are now openly talking about this as an eventuality. Warfare is much uglier than most can imagine, but that’s part of the reason to worry:  Too many Americans think warfare is clean and easy, because too few Americans have served in the Armed Forces.  Too few among us have borne the real burdens and costs of war.  War, civil or otherwise, must never be treated as the first or best alternative, and those who seem to place it on the table as a first or best option should be watched closely.  Sometimes, wars must be fought, but never should any person contemplate war too easily or too frivolously.

Despite what prudence tells us, there are those who claim to relish a civil war, and would prefer it become “hot.” This is a danger to be avoided at all costs but one.  We must de-escalate this situation by whatever rational means still remain to us.  If we fail, this situation may break down in a tragic way.  I haven’t been an advocate for liberty and freedom just to see it pissed-away by hot-headed numbskulls on both sides of the ideological divide.  There are too many outside provocateurs, and I worry that what Russia was unable to accomplish by colluding with Obama and Clinton, they now intend to accomplish by pitting one side against the other.  Don’t underestimate that problem.  The world is full of enemies who would be thrilled to see the US consumed and effectively neutered by a domestic civil war.  This is a time of intense danger, friends, and I fear for our republic as never before.

Editor’s Note: It came to my attention after the publication of this post that Mr. L had posted a video with a similar theme and title last summer.  First, I apologize to Mr. L, because it had not been my intention to plagiarize his work, either in title or in content.  As he says so frequently, we are like brothers from different mothers, inasmuch as we frequently agree on many things, though we may arrive at our conclusions by somewhat different paths, or express them in different ways.  Due to that, things like this can happen, but unlike some others on the Internet, I go out of my way to avoid it, even inadvertently.  Second, let me commend that most excellent video, The USA Cold Civil War, and present it here: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmlQySp40ig

The Left Doesn’t Mind Dead Children

Tuesday, February 27th, 2018

grim_reaper_ftI’ve listened to the usual suspects in politics and the media telling Americans how those who support the Second Amendment want dead children.  I know a large number of fervent Second Amendment advocates, and I’ve yet to find one among them who wants to see dead children.  This scurrilous sort of claim from the left should be familiar to you by now, because we see it in virtually every issue.  When the issue is healthcare, we’re told we don’t care about people, and want to see Americans die for lack of “affordable healthcare.” Then, as if written in the script, the left institutes a huge government healthcare boondoggle that drives up the cost of healthcare for Americans in the range of four-thousand dollars per year.  Sure, everybody has a healthcare plan, but nobody can afford to use it due to the extraordinary deductibles that have accompanied “universal healthcare.” This is the thing you learn about leftists if you watch them long enough, and see what they actually do.  Every time they accuse their opponents of some evil, you can be sure that not only is it a lie, but that in fact, it is they who seek to enact the very evils they decry.  It’s so predictable that it’s become nauseating, so now I’m going to tell you the truth about the school safety issue:  The left says the NRA and the Republicans want dead children, but I’m going to prove to you that they don’t mind dead children at all, so long as it is they who kills them.

I could stop right there and walk away, task complete, but some would not be convinced by the mere assertion.  They will need some evidence of my accusation, and I am obliged to offer it here.  For decades, all my life really, I have heard the statist left accuse Republicans and Libertarians alike of wanting dead children because those groups will not support gun control.  In the first place, Republicans support all sorts of gun control, and sadly always have. It was Ronald Reagan who signed the 1986 act of Congress that banned the further sale of automatic weapons to civilians.  From that point forward, only those automatic already in civilian hands were to be permitted to exist, and they would be heavily taxed and regulated, and due to the incredibly small number, their prices are so absurdly high that most people could not begin to afford one.  That was enacted by a Republican.  Ronald Reagan?  Remember him?  It was one of the three things he did in the entirety of his presidency about which I still have real heartburn.  (Amnesty, and pulling the troops from Beirut after the barracks bombing and the death of 241 US Marines, for the record.)  Surely, that is gun control, and surely, President Reagan was a Republican. Is he off the hook for his alleged desire to “see children dead?”  No, of course not.

Of course, if we’re interested in the question of dead children, as my friend Mr. L has pointed out recently, they had no problem with more than fifty-million dead children killed in utero by Planned Parenthood. They never miss an opportunity to see as many abortions performed as is possible.  It’s not, as they argue, about the availability of “safe” abortions, but instead, about seeing to it that as many are performed as necessary.  They claim to care about the women too, and accuse opponents of abortion as condemning women to unsafe, back-alley, coat-hanger abortions, but the truth as we have seen is that these clinics are dirty, their doctors don’t have hospital privileges, and women die due to the unsafe, unsanitary conditions, as well as the utter incompetence of the sort of hacks who tend to perform abortions in these human slaughterhouses.

The leftists who run the American Federation of Teachers and the National Education Association profess to us the undying love and devotion for the children of the teachers they represent, and while I have no doubt about the love many teachers have for their students, I doubt very seriously that either the AFT or the NEA have the first thing to do with it.  I have no doubt but that Coach Feis, who placed himself in the line of fire between the gunman and children, had a deep sense of devotion to the students, but I point out that while the AFT and the NEA are opposed to teachers being armed, Coach Feis was reportedly a concealed carry permit holder, but did not carry at school because it would have violated the law.  I believe the AFT and the NEA prefer dead students and teachers to the alternative of armed teachers.  So much for the AFT’s or NEA’s alleged love of their members, never mind the children.

Then there’s this: These people tell us that they don’t wish to take away our guns, but only make us safer, more like Australia!  Well, in fact, in Australia, they took away guns.  The evidence has shown that crime has increased since.  Imagine what happens to we Texans down here on or near the border when the drug cartels needn’t even worry about being repelled by ranchers with rifles?  It’s astonishing.  In Chicago, daily, they have nearly as man people shot as in the incident in Parkland, Florida, but Chicago has the strictest gun control in the country. In a month, the body county in Chicago rivals or exceeds the casualty count in the notorious Mandalay Bay shooting in Las Vegas, Nevada, and many of the dead are children, most of them young black and hispanic males.  They tell us what love they have for people of color, but what the truth reveals is that they have no problem stacking up their bodies like kindling for their socialist funeral pyre.

Even in less lethal circumstances, they always falsely accuse others of what they’ve already done.  Consider Trump. They tell you “he colluded with the Russians to swing the election,” but what we now know is that they worked with Russians and other foreign agents to concoct a story about Trump so they could justify their spying on the Trump campaign throughout the 2016 election season.  They’re even willing to undertake treason, which is the very crime of which they’ve frequently and vociferously accused others.

Now I’m going to let you in on the deadliest of their secret. As they tell you they don’t want full communism, and that that Trump and other Republicans or conservatives are “dictators” or “tyrants,” to date the only evidence of that is when they were inclined to go along with the statist left on issues like gun control. Remembering, as we must, that they accuse others of what they actually intend, consider this: They accuse Republicans of wanting to enslave others, or to kill them outright, so what then must we conclude about the left’s actual intentions?  They say they are not tyrannical, and don’t wish to take our guns, but all the evidence is contrary to that postulate, and all of recent history shows they’re actually inclined to commit the crimes of which they accuse others.  This means, taken to its logical conclusion, that the statist left intends to turn us into North Korea, or some ghastly approximation of it.

When one examines the results of the “Promise” program exposed in Parkland, Florida, whereby the criminal activities of students were concealed and obscured in order to get more federal dollars for the school district, one cannot help but notice the result: A future killer was left to roam the streets, when in fact, Nikolas Cruz should have been jailed and/or institutionalized long before.  The problem is that this wouldn’t have served their purposes at the time, so that now you know that this kid was a known danger all along, and that they left him free to eventually wreak havoc, like they knew he would.  They’re fine with havoc, so long as it advances their agenda.  They’re always willing to break a few eggs.  In for a penny, in for a pound.  The statist left doesn’t mind deaths that serve their purposes.  The money these greedy leftist school administrators took from the feds is simple blood-money to get the local stooges to happily, perhaps unwittingly play their assigned parts. The longer-term result of suppressing freedoms they hope to abolish is the primary goal of the monsters who provided the federal cash.

Ladies and gentlemen, don’t take my word for it.  Trust your own eyes and ears, and the history you know, and the facts you have discerned. If any political organization in the United States wants the death of children, it is the anti-American, statist left.  They profit from dead children, but the profit they seek is not mere money, but total dominion over your lives.  They want you and your children dead, but only on their schedule, once you’ve served whatever use they have in mind for the remainder of the miserable existence they will permit you to endure.  If Donald Trump gives them an inch, there will be even more dead children because they will have learned where is his weakness, and how to get to him.  President Trump had better catch on fast, or he will have played right into their hands.

 

 

Note to Big Government Statists: Leave Me Be!

Friday, February 17th, 2012

New Boss, Same as the Old Boss

Dear Miserable Big-Government Jack-booted Statists:

I don’t know you well enough to give you even the most vaguely intimate details of my life.  Why do you want them?  I don’t love you, and you don’t love me, so why can’t you let me be?  Why is my contract in employment any of your business?  If my employer is happy, and I’m happy, apart from the fact that you’re already taxing both to death, why do you need to know how much I earn per hour, or anything of the sort?  Why are you involved in the question of my health insurance?  Not only do you wish to decide whether I will buy health insurance, but also what it will cover.  Note to jack-boots:  I’m a forty-something man married to a forty-something woman and we’re not interested in contraceptive coverage.

Why will my health-insurer be forced to cover it?  Florescent lighting gives me a headache.  CFL’s particularly are the bane of my existence.  Why may I not choose what kind of light-bulb I will purchase? I don’t mind paying extra for the slight difference in efficiency. Why must I be condemned to a life of headaches triggered by these lights, just to suit you?

Of course, you’re not satisfied with this, are you?  Hardly.  You don’t want me to buy weapons, but to the degree you permit it, you don’t want me to buy too many at once, and you want gun stores to report me if I buy more than one at a time.  Why?  Are you afraid I’ll arm a gang of Narco-terrorists with them?  Like you did?  Of course, since we’re speaking of terrorism, let’s cover your general ineptitude.  You want to scan Granny’s wheelchair, but you refuse to “profile.”  Why?  Profiling has been a crime-fighting technique for generations because it works.  Why is it that you’re willing to subject women to body-scanning abuse by some of your pervert agents?  Will you treat my wife that way?  My adult daughter?  What makes you think we’re chattel for your amusement?

Speaking of our children, you now seem to believe it’s your business what we pack in our kids’ school lunches.  Why is it that elected officials believe that their busy-body spouses should have any say-so in what we eat or drink, or don’t?  We didn’t elect them, but even if we had, why do you believe it’s any of your business?  You don’t buy my food.  You don’t prepare it.  You don’t feed my children, so when you explain to me how you’re seizing my kid’s lunch to be replaced by such meals as you deem suitable, are you confused as to why I might be upset?

As all of this grows and grows, I have begun to wonder if you’re even aware of how sick of you I have become.  If you were a person, I would charge you with theft, stalking, harassment, and torture.  Since you do all of this under color of your official authority, you also do it at the point of a gun.  I wanted you to know this, and to know that I no longer consent. You are in violation of the constitution that acts as the social contract between and among us. You have taken on the role of dictator, and frankly, I’m not interested in being your servant since our compact declares that you will be mine.  I don’t want anything from you.  I don’t want a single commodity.  My state and local governments are going to receive the same talking-to, but since I know you are arrogant and no longer believe you need listen, I’m going to make this explicit:  Leave me alone. I don’t want your hand-outs. I don’t want your iron fist. I don’t want anything but those limited purposes for which you were created: Defend the country against foreign enemies and domestic criminals, and act as an objective arbiters in our own domestic squabbles.  You have no other legitimate purpose.

 

Leave me alone.

 

Impositions of Morality: Arguing With Lefties

Sunday, February 5th, 2012

A Different Approach

Over the course of your political life, if you’re a conservative, you have probably run into an issue or ten where the focus is a matter of  morality in some way.  Abortion is one of the issues, and if you happen to favor a prohibition, you will be attacked as some sort of Neanderthal who wants to impose his or her morality on others.  I’m sure you’ve all heard this, and in some contexts, I suppose a few of you may have said this, and it is the standard answer leftists use when you touch on an issue where they are fearful of being undone.  One of the problems for conservatives is that too often, we cede this ground without a fight, not challenging their claim, and not contradicting its basic premise either.  This is the kind of bumper-sticker argument that frequently appeals to the young, and if we’re going to beat the liberals, this is one instance where me must learn to fight fire with fire.

You can almost write a script of the order of remarks in such a debate, wherein you have a liberal on one side, and a conservative on the other.  My approach to these sorts of debates is now much different than it was two decades before.  When I see that such an argument is imminent, I now take the step of a preemptive strike:

“Don’t you agree that as individuals, it is wrong to impose our individual moral standards upon others?”

Upon hearing this issue forth from your mouth, the liberal inevitably thinks victory is already achieved, and they smile (either inwardly or outwardly) as they wait to close in for the kill:

“Yes, absolutely, I believe that.”

It’s now your turn to smile. Show all of your teeth.  Whatever the subject, be it abortion or welfare, or anything in between, this is your moment to pounce upon them with vigor:

“Why do you then impose your morality by virtue of the tax code?”

They may look at you in confusion, as the formula is somehow “off.” They don’t have a scripted recipe for this ready, and it’s not in their 1-2-3 Half-Bake Liberal Cookbook. They almost immediately and reflexively turn to the next best thing:

“No I don’t! What are you talking about?”

Take your time, as you already have them on the ropes, and do to them what they ordinarily try to do to you: Badger and mock them.

“You think rich people should pay a higher percentage, right?

“uh, yeah…”

“You believe people should be able to deduct child-care expenses, right?”

“sure, I uh…”

“Mortgage interest? College tuition?  Their children?  Their government-approved home improvements?”

“well, I, uh, look, that’s not what I…”

“That’s the truth of it, isn’t it, and you’re imposing your morality at every turn! Why?”

“It’s the right thing to do…”

“According to whom?”

“Well, everybody…”

“You don’t speak for everybody! Who are you to speak for everybody and place your own view above all of theirs? What sort of moral superiority do you practice?  What sort of person are you anyway?”

If they’re not crying by now, it’s because they’re frozen.  If you’ve done this sort of thing to one of them in front of a crowd of their friends, all the better.  By now, if they’re not looking for their blankets while sucking their thumbs, they soon will be.

Now you might say that this may work with the tax code, or with welfare programs, but you might ask me how it could ever work with abortion.  That’s easy too, but remember what their game is and how you must defeat it, and the answer is that you must always take the initiative from them without having seemed to have done so:

“Don’t you agree that as individuals, it is wrong to impose our individual moral standards upon others? I mean, you wouldn’t want somebody imposing their will on your right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, right?”

Again, they will be a bit disarmed at this point, because you seem to be saying something not so controversial, and they will generally agree pleasantly.

“So given that, if somebody were to impose their estimation on the moral value of your life, that would be horrible, wouldn’t it?  Nobody should have that right, should they?  Nobody should be able to say to you what your life is worth, or whether you have a right to it, right?”

“Of course not. It’s preposterous! You can’t do that to people!”

They may even throw in a little indignant  grand-standing to prove their commitment to this argument.  Then it’s your turn:

“So then why do you do it?”

“Huh?”

“Why do you impose your estimate of another human’s worth on those persons and call them disposable?”

“I don’t!”

“You’re in favor of abortion, aren’t you?”

“That’s different! That isn’t even a person!!!!”

“According to whom?”

“Well, everybody, science, law, ROE V. WADE you know, EVERYBODY!”

“You now speak for everybody?”  (Rinse and repeat.)

Now you may on occasion run into the slightly more sophisticated liberal, who has thought these things through a little more than the average, and when you do, they’ll try to switch the context back, but don’t let them. Stick to your premise, and your context, and even chide them for so doing.  Mockery is permissible, and in fact, preferred.  If you have a really smart one on the line, an admitted rarity to be sure, since most liberals I know add an automatic one-hundred points to their actual IQs, just remind them of a few things worth noting:  Screaming  “everybody” and “society” or “government” and “science” does not constitute an escape clause from this moral proposition.

This is because a moral system or standard that references third parties for their alleged validity cannot be valid.  For instance, saying “the law says…” is of no value, since you can write a law that says anything at all.  Saying “science” is meaningless because for every possible position there exists at least one scientist somewhere who disagrees, and his name just might be Galileo.  To say “society” is to argue a falsehood since none can claim to speak for “society” or “everybody” and in most cases not even “all those present”(unless you’re in a room full of liberals.)

You might say, “but Mark, but Mark, God is a third party! Are you ruling God out?”  Yes, in this context, I am afraid I am, for at least one very good reason:  Who can claim to know God’s mind?  If you use this argument, they will throw that back in your face mercilessly, and in logic, they have a valid point.  You might then wonder, if you haven’t already, “but Mark, how can you claim rights that come from God?”  I don’t, and if you read my arguments in this blog carefully, you will have noted I make no such arguments.  This is because lefties will naturally throw at me: “How do you know? Can you prove it?”  Of course, at that point, I would be stymied if that were the basis of my argument.

Instead, I rely upon something the founders described as “self-evident.”  They described it as “Nature, and Nature’s God.”  You see, whether there is a respect in your heart or not for the existence of God, you must admit of the existence of Nature, being part of it, and in it at all times.  It is the context and the environment in which you exist, and in which any such argument takes place.  There is no avoiding it.  If you believe in God, you naturally believe He created all in Nature, and Nature itself, but even if you do not believe in a God, you cannot deny the existence of, well, all existence.

Now you still may ask how I argue that with a liberal who insists that rights are not a natural construction of our universe but instead a figment easily removed by the government or a mob.  They extend their view most particularly to property in all its forms, since it is their peculiarly disclaimed objective.  Waive at them your billfold, or your purse, and ask them if they’d like its contents, all else being equal.  If they stubbornly answer “No,” you can ask them why they insist government take it for them.  If they answer “yes,” you need only say: “Come and take it if you can.”

That’s all the proof of your right that you need, but it’s also the proof of their depravity.  For all their baseless argumentation, what they really condense into is a tribe of primitives with clubs, willing to bash in your skull, in order to get their way, just the same way as their ancestors, and every other miserable statist who has ever lived.  Over the years, we’ve yielded far too much ground to them by permitting them to pretend morality only has one side, and only a few applications.   Like your own ancestors, who civilized this world and wrested it from their kind, perhaps only temporarily, your answer must remain the same: “No.”

Occupy Wall Street: Prologue to Mayhem in 2012?

Thursday, October 20th, 2011

Coming Soon to a Flea Party Near You

Wednesday evening, hat-tip to Drudge linking to a CBS report that the organizers of the Occu-Pest fiasco in New York and around the country are planning a bigger event for next summer in Philadelphia from July to October.  It’s being called a “National Assembly” and the aim is clear:  They intend to intimidate Americans and US institutions.  Mayor Nutter said: “I understand national Occupy would want to be in Philadelphia — this is birthplace of freedom, liberty, and democracy for the United States of America — so I look forward to a conversation.”  One would think Mayor Nutter was talking about responsible people.  The people of Philadelphia should already be speaking out against bringing these goons to their city.

It’s worse than that, however, as they consider themselves akin to the Committees of Correspondence.  That’s right, these nut-jobs actually see themselves as the founding fathers, but the bastard they intend to sire will be birthed not in liberty, but instead born of terror and tyranny.  This is a warning, and one you had better heed:  These people intend to destroy your constitution and the Republic it had created.  They are plotting to supplant your form of government with a full-on Marxist regime, and these people are the useful idiots.

You need to prepare yourselves and your families.  It’s time to tell folks you know about the serious nature of this threat.  It’s time to begin considering how you will react, and it’s also time to understand that there are going to be a number of conspirators in all of this, and you had better understand that none of them are your friends.  These people intend to do for the US what Hugo Chavez has done for Venezuala.  If your tendency is to read this sort of article, and subsequently avert your eyes for fear of becoming a tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy theorist, just this once, stick around.  I promise: No tin-foil hats are required.  This is the time for your thinking caps, and for collaboration with your fellow patriots. You may remember the recent discussion of suspended elections.  What do  you suppose their “National Assembly” is intended to do?

We have a serious problem.  At least 70 members of the US Congress are members of the DSA.  Obama has many long-term close ties to the group, and the Occupy Wall Street crowd is largely managed by them or their cohorts.  These people want to wipe out your form of government and your way of life, and they make no apologies for it.  They have infiltrated all levels of government, and they are largely responsible for the transformation the Democrat party has undergone since my childhood.  Many of them are closely tied, or are in some cases the same people who constituted the SDS back in the 1960’s and 70’s.  Many have been tenured professors since then, and what they all share is a hatred for your freedom to choose.

The useful idiots huddling in tents in Zuccotti park and more like them will become the foot soldiers in the war against you.  They have been aligning themselves with Islamists as part of the entire “Arab Spring” fraud, and you can bet that they will use Islamo-terrorists against Americans domestically too.  If you didn’t catch the story about the emails, I’d strongly suggest you download the file, import it into Outlook, and see what these nuts have been working on all these months.  The simple truth is that for all the wishing in the world, the left sees this as their golden opportunity to finally crack the United States.  We’re weakened economically to a greater extent than in generations, our armed forces are more spread-out than at any time since World War II, and the radical left finally has nearly all the pieces in place.  Our culture has been shredded by three generations of a growing welfare state that by its nature encourages the worst possible outcomes for families, and actually creates poverty under the guise of curing it.

You’re all well aware of the state of our country.  I intend to cover the actions of these people as closely as possible.  At one point, I made the mistake of wondering if they weren’t impotent, but now I understand their game.  The politicians who are using them as foot soldiers are going to use these fools as the excuse for whatever it is they wish to inflict upon us.  It’s really coming down to the time in which you’re going to be confronted by some serious choices about your future actions and plans.  It’s clear that they have been rigging this operation for a long, long while, perhaps decades, and yes, it is as bad as all of that.  I know there are those whose “kook-alarms” are now going off.  It’s hard to believe any of this, except for the fact that all the evidence is right in front of you.

It’s time to become more vigilant at the very least.  It’s time to become more prepared both as individuals and as families, but alsos in your congregations and communities.  Those who wish to inflict their tyrannical vision of government upon you are now working almost entirely in the open.  We have a Federal establishment that is largely under their control.  The establishment Republican fools still think they can cut deals with these people to save their own necks.  Even if they can, for now, you won’t be able to get that kind of deal.  They represent Marxist revolution, and they intend to bring it to our shores in full force.  I have no intention of going quietly.  What about you?