Posts Tagged ‘Tyranny’

It’s “For Their Own Good”

Sunday, August 22nd, 2021

Police and Protesters clash in Melbourne Australia

Nothing is more despicable than a government abusing its people. The Australian government, like so many others, is in absolute insurrection against its people on the claim that its lockdown measures are “for their own good.” Think about this: They’re imposing violence, fines, lockdowns, and every sort of bedlam on the people of Australia in order to “save them” from an infection that has a ninety-nine (plus) percent survival rate.  Think about that: In order to “save them,” they’re willing to hammer the Hell out of them. They’re willing to impose poverty and isolation and actual physical harm on the people of their country. Such governments are increasingly the norm, and as I (and many others) predicted two decades ago when the Australian people largely surrendered their right to arms, the object was always totalitarianism.  It always is. If you give government power, or surrender your rights to government, it is only a matter of time until some dirtbag comes to power in government who will use the power or your lack of rights to subjugate the people of the nation. It’s inevitable. This is because humans are imperfect, and foul people sometimes(and all too frequently) are able to come into power.  In fact, I would argue that politicians are frequently the most dangerous people, because they possess an insidious arrogance about their ability to impose their policy preferences on their fellow man.  In Australia now, it’s off the charts. People are joining in open resistance, and they should be.  Tyrants always claim to act on behalf of the public. They always lie about it.

In Melbourne, they’re chanting “Freedom!”


In some instances, Australians are giving notice that they’ve had enough:

These sorts of abuses have begun in America too. So far, they’ve been confined to deep blue locales, like New York City under the rule of Mayor Bill DeBlasio, a.k.a. “DeCommio.” I believe the sole reason they haven’t gone wall-to-wall is because America has something Australia ceded in 1999: The right to own firearms. It is only our Second Amendment that gives the same brand of tyrants pause here in the United States, and it’s my contention that they intend to strip you of these rights before much longer. Folks, if you think they’ve become tyrannical with their lockdowns and mandates already, wait until they strip you of the right to keep and bear arms. They’ve already attacked your ability to get some foreign-made ammunition. That’s not accidental. The price of ammo had begun to slowly drift downward, and while not down to its pre-pandemic prices, it was heading slowly down as supplies increased over the last few months. This week, Biden banned the importation of ammunition from Russia, which is a direct attack on several lower-end brands of ammunition, such as Wolf. I don’t have any evidence, but I wouldn’t be surprised to find that somebody in the Biden administration is heavily invested in some domestic brands. It’s just how they roll.

As the unrest spreads, with France and the UK becoming more volatile by the week, and with Australians finally, belatedly beginning to stand up, and with the globalists pushing their vaccines and masks and lockdowns at an ever-escalating pace, and with ever more naked coercion and aggressive force supporting it, it’s likely to get much worse. Before this is all over, I expect some Western[ized] nation to have a Tiananmen Square type of massacre. As we’ve seen with the surrender of Kabul Afghanistan, history’s worst instances have been repeating themselves in too many ways, also at an accelerating pace.  It’s time for readers to prepare themselves for whatever comes next. It’s not likely to be pretty.

 

 

Advertisements

Redistribution of Rights

Sunday, August 15th, 2021

Whose Rights Are They Anyway?

It’s inevitable in a collapsing civilization that you will observe every sort of ethical and moral inversion conceivable, but there’s also a chance you’ll see something novel. In 2021 America, I think I’ve spotted something happening that ought to cause all Americans a moment of pause. When hate speech legislation began to erupt around the country in the 1990s, many of us thought it a despicable idea, in part because the sort of acts that generally accompany hate speech evince all the hate one need infer from those acts, and because speech does not cause actual harm. Essentially, critics of hate speech legislation adopted the old but true “sticks and stones” argument, and while correct, they also cautioned about the absurd directions a hate speech law could take us as a civilization.  Sadly, they were quite right, and now we’re seeing the development of the most sickening notions. Recently, it’s been proposed that government bureaucrats should be safe from hate speech. In simplest translation, and in most recent application, people wish to protect government officials from criticism, particularly criticism that attaches criminal consequences to the government official’s actions.  Suggesting, for instance, that Dr. Anthony Fauci should face a war crimes tribunal for his apparent involvement in funding the gain-of-function research in the Wuhan lab that now appears to have been the source of SARS-CoV2, a.k.a., COVID-19. This notion, that public officials must not be criticized, and especially mustn’t be accused of crimes, is anathema to free speech, but it’s a growing symptom of a broader threat. Slowly but surely, the bureaucracy is seeking to protect itself, and to empower itself, by depriving Americans of rights while redistributing those rights to itself.

Consider the subject of the Second Amendment. Here we see every level of government working to restrict the rights of Americans to keep and bear arms. The long train of abuses in this area is not merely horrible, but increasingly, we see the government agents employing weaponry denied to American citizens. In some jurisdictions, certain types of ammunition are prohibited to citizens, while police agencies suffer no such limits. More broadly, it is not unusual for police departments to have at its disposal full-auto select-fire weapons. They may have other destructive devices like grenade launchers, and they’re not restricted to purchasing from the shrinking pool of such weapons legally available to citizens. The Armed Forces maintain many millions of small arms to which you have no entitlement. I was in the Army. I’m no less trained or qualified to handle such weapons responsibly than I had been as a young man in uniform, and indeed, I would argue that in most ways, I’m far more qualified and much more responsible in my conduct some thirty years later than I had been in my youth. I also have a good deal more to lose by being irresponsible. The Second Amendment doesn’t specify any type of weapon. It says “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” It doesn’t say “except for short-barreled shotguns,” or “excluding machineguns.” And yes, such things did exist at the time of its writing and adoption. I don’t wish to have here an argument about the second amendment, but notice the underlying problem: My rights to have a machinegun, for instance, have been stripped from me, while government institutions well beyond the military now legally possess and employ them. My right – your right – has been redistributed to the government or its favored agents.

Consider the matter of religion. What is a religion? A religion is defined variously, but a common description is “an organized system of beliefs, ceremonies, and rules used to worship a god or a group of gods. informal : an interest, a belief, or an activity that is very important to a person or group.” This begs the question: What is a god? They have an answer for this too: “a superhuman being or spirit worshiped as having power over nature or human fortunes; a deity.” In this context, I’ve often argued that for statists, “god” is government. In other contexts, you could argue that they contend “the public interest” (whatever they may claim it it to be at a given time) fits this definition. In our public schools, your children have been prohibited from praying. Teachers are most often prohibited from displaying artifacts or symbols of their faith, such as a cross or crucifix, and in the workplace, similar restrictions apply. Yet in all cases and at all times, public officials claim to tell us what is “in the public interest,” and they do so with a zeal no less ferocious than the most militant religious actors.  Somehow, we’ve permitted the worship of the state and state power in the guise of “the public” to be adopted as a national religion, while we’ve seen our individual right to free exercise of religion diminished and slowly eroded. Bureaucrats are permitted to worship at the altar of false science, and they’ve even taken to re-writing the historical evidence that counters their religious observances. Again, rights explicitly guaranteed to the people have been redistributed to the state, its instrumentalities and agents.

The Ninth Amendment provides: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”  This is pretty explicit in terms of its reach, and yet we see precisely the opposite taking effect. In virtually all controversies between citizens and the state, judges routinely blow past this amendment to rule with inverted effect. This amendment tells us that simply because a right isn’t specifically listed and defined in the Constitution, this doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist, and it doesn’t mean the government has a right to violate it. Of course, one of the reasons the courts may have avoided giving this amendment any effect in law is that depending upon how the concept of “a right” is defined, one could imagine all sorts of rights that don’t fit that definition. Another problem is that Americans, broadly, don’t understand what is a right, nor do they understand that governments have no rights. Governments have only claims to or grants of authority. In effect, governments have powers, but not rights. What has happened is that we’ve permitted governments to steal our rights and smuggle them into the what should have been a narrow set of their powers. Now, governments and their favored grantees enjoy virtually unlimited exercise of rights that are properly held and exercised solely by the people.

We see this in other areas as well. You’re supposed to be secure in your persons, houses, papers, and effects, according to the fourth amendment, but as in other matters, governments have laundered the violation of these things through nominally private actors – corporations and non-governmental organizations – such that in our modern world, your electronic data is subject to snooping by Apple or Google or any other large corporate interest, to be handed-over to government on request or even without having been asked. Meanwhile, if you approach government, demanding access to public records, every form of dishonesty and malfeasance will be employed to obstruct disclosure of any information the actors within government(or its agents and cohorts) have decided you ought not know. Your putative right to open government has been demolished, and your right to private information has been exploded, all by this same process of the redistribution of your rights from the people to public offices and agents.

This applies to more than the “free exercise” clause of the First Amendment.  Consider that while you should properly enjoy a guarantee to freedom of speech, your ability to exercise that right is being demolished, or redistributed to government and government’s favor actors. See Dr. Shiva’s detailed explanation on how government now launders censorship through its private cohorts here to understand how your First Amendment has been gutted for the interests of the state. This isn’t limited to the explicit rights guaranteed in the constitution, nor is my outline here exhaustive in detail. It is possible to evaluate many laws, acts, and orders, as well as court rulings to have been a part of this general redistribution of our liberties to entities that do not rightly possess them. It confronts us daily. Why are car manufacturers shifting to electric vehicles? Is it because the market wants them, or is it because government and its co-conspirators are imposing them? Are they the most economical or “green,” or is this simply somebody’s peculiar desire and interest? In every facet of our lives, our rights to choose and act in accordance with our natural endowment has been abridged, either by governments claiming authority it does not have, or exercising power it has seized by guile, legal gymnastics, or outright force.

All of this is despicable, given that ours was to be a constitutional, representative republic. There may be no solution within the context of our existing government, but to take the approach of the framers in the face of the failures of the Articles of Confederation.  We may need to dissolve this government in its entirety, by adopting a new constitution that supersedes our current governing document.  Do we have the wisdom to actually do so?  Can we obtain sufficient broad public support for such a thing? I suspect it will only be possible when our rights are completely redistributed into the hands of increasingly tyrannical state authorities. At that point, it may take force of arms. We are coming to a departure from civil society, because Americans are and have been accustomed to a broad palette of rights and rather tighter limits on government power in all but a few narrow applications, despite peculiar disagreements among us.  This current circumstance cannot go on indefinitely, so it won’t.  What happens next will be our greatest challenge. We have already answered Franklin’s concern: We have not kept it.  Americans are correct in worrying now that we will not get it back.

Why You Must Refuse and Resist Vaccine Passports

Thursday, April 15th, 2021

Dr. Naomi Wolf Explains the Danger…

On Wednesday, longtime Democrat strategist Dr. Naomi Wolf appeared on Steve Bannon’s War Room to explain the imminent danger of so-called vaccine passports, and how the model is going to be extended to encompass your entire existence. This is the Chinese Communist Party control grid, extended globally, and powered by Western oligarchs. Watch the video below:

Editor’s Note:  I’ve been at war with Twitter over Coronavirus and vaccine-related information. They don’t permit any contrary information, no matter the sources you provide or the credibility of those sources. This entire thing is being used as an excuse for tyranny at all levels. Be on your guard.

We Must Remove Them All

Tuesday, October 6th, 2020

Do We Deserve the Country They Built?

When one thinks about what form the post-COVID word will take, one thing nags at me above all others. All of these public officials who have been willing to strip from us our civil liberties, often without any legitimate authority to do so, will be left in place to do this to us again the next time somebody decides “necessity” demands it.  I don’t care if they’re Republican or Democrat or Independent.  I don’t care whether they’re a lowly County Commissioner, a County judge, a mayor, a school superintendent, or a Governor.  None of these people have the authority they’ve seized, and as courts continue to make that point abundantly clear, I think it’s up to us to examine our own behaviors in response to these various mandates, decrees, and executive dicta that have so thoroughly demolished American life.  We must never permit this again, and indeed, we must put a stop to its continuance now. In order to see this through is going to require an active, rebellious citizenry, unwilling to suffer any more of the indignities being heaped upon us.  We must rid ourselves of all the petty tyrants, big and small. We must leave none of them with any power to do this again.  We must punish them, and we must teach them a lesson: Our liberties are not disposable, nor are our lives, our livelihoods, our businesses, or even our leisure activities.  This is our country, and to preserve it, we must throw off all of these dictators-in-waiting.  If they made mask mandates, closed down businesses, ordered school closures, or took any other action that restricted the lives and movements of Americans, they must be removed. All of them.

Early on Tuesday, I had been watching the most recent video on YouTube by the creator Amazing Polly, entitled It’s Your Funeral.  She’s Canadian, but she has a strong affinity for America, and I think she recognizes that if Americans won’t fight, her country will easily be subsumed into whatever global catastrophes to which America falls.  In particular, in this video, one of the things she addresses that caught my attention was her discussion of the psychology of isolation, and of tyranny. You can view the section of the video I’m referencing below. The portion on which I’d like to focus runs from approximately the 9:02 to the 27:02 timestamps. You may wish to skip ahead to the 9:00 mark:

Polly’s point is an important one. In fact, I’d like to expand on it, because I’ve observed a phenomenon since the onset of the various lock-downs and mask-mandates that troubles me greatly.  She mentions the Milgrim Electric Shock experiment, and she gives a decent explanation of the basic premises that inquiry investigated.  Basic human psychology doesn’t really change much, because we’re wired the same as people who lived one-hundred or one-thousand years ago, despite the artifices all our modern technology provides.  What’s most interesting about the experiment is how rapidly people become desensitized to the infliction of pain on others, how accepting of isolation they become, and just how readily people, all people, can be persuaded by authorities to do the most egregious things to one another.

This is even more remarkably distinct among people who already live and work in a martial or quasi-martial environment, like military or police.  It’s quite plausible, based on my experiences and observations that people in those environments, already inculcated and indoctrinated to take orders and execute them more or less unquestioningly to pick up on this behavior even more readily than their civilian counterparts. Of course, it’s not just police and military, but also any hierarchical structure, like education or medicine, where this becomes a problem.  Accustomed to following orders handed-down from on high, people in those fields are potentially just as dangerous when under such demands.  Obedience and compliance become the keys to survival within such institutions, and it is this that, more than any other thing, should concern us when regarding all of these would-be dictators at the state and local levels.  People who can uncritically accept specious “science” which on one day tells you masks are pointless but on the next tells you they are indispensable in stopping the spread of a virus are just the sort of persons who should never be entrusted with or granted any power over their fellow man.

It’s been asked in innumerable forms how it was possible for the German people to permit the holocaust.  While I am not here directly comparing mask orders to the holocaust, what I seek to examine is the basic human psychology that permits either.  You see, we have had countless incidents of otherwise innocent and peaceable people being accosted by authorities in one form or another for refusing to wear masks, or maintain strict “social distance.” See below for one recent example:

I’m quite afraid of what might have happened had I been present for this. I don’t believe I’d have been able to sit by and watch this assault go on. I’m as big a supporter of law enforcement as any, but this behavior by this school resource officer was completely unjustified.  I don’t care what else is said about this incident, but the fact that an armed man was willing to use [less] lethal force(NOT non-lethal) against an unarmed woman for the “crime” of not wearing a mask when she’s clearly well beyond six feet from anybody not related to her is ridiculous.  Frankly, none of the powers of arrest or force should ever have come into play here.  The officer should be fired.  His credentials should be stripped. Every person in the chain of command between him and the Governor of Ohio should be removed from their offices, forcibly if need be, and they should all be charged for varying degrees of criminality. What was done in this case was a complete demolition of this woman’s civil liberties, and the institution directly responsible should be made to pay compensation.  If she is not able to obtain satisfaction by legal means, she would be morally justified in almost any action she would thereafter take in response.  She is entitled to her pound of flesh.

Will you suggest to me otherwise? Stop! Please leave my website. You don’t belong here. You don’t need to read anything I’ve heretofore written. You’re not fully human, and your willingness to submit to this idiocy is all the evidence I need of your inhumanity.  Law is important, critical in fact, but it is not everything and cannot substitute for morality, but for those of you who would happily go along with this woman’s abuse at the hands of the authorities, you are morally no different from the dirt-bags in Germany who went along with their atrocities. Yes, I agree that the degree is different, but the underlying psychology, the premise underlying and justifying this action is really no different.  You are every bit as dangerous to your fellow man as the SS officer who shot Jews on command and dumped them into a mass grave. I mean that. All of it.

If, on the other hand, you find, as do I, that this had been an unconscionable abuse of authority and power, I must ask: “What are you doing about it?” What are any of us doing about it?  You see, this is the real problem. I’m more than one-thousand miles remote from this taser incident, but I’m aware of it.  The people of South Central Ohio are aware of it. What are they doing about it?  Herein lies the problem: We all find excuses to remain uninvolved.  People, this is happening in America! This is happening in YOUR COUNTRY! This isn’t happening in some third-world S-hole, although given their preferences, the left will surely turn it into one.

My larger point here is that as Polly argues, we must not let our humanity be stolen from us, and we must be willing to make a stink. Beyond that, we must be willing to fight against this entire monstrosity. Our liberties don’t evaporate because there’s a virus, whether it’s extremely virulent, or spread only through intimate contact.  Our rights don’t get suspended because some tin-pot dictator-wannabe says so. The problem is that when all this finally ends, if we leave these people in place, they’ll be emboldened to do this to us again in the next emergency.  Some of them have grown to like this power they’ve managed to seize, and from our perspective, the problem is that in our willingness to comply for our safety and those of our loved-ones, we’ve too easily ceded too much ground, and too willingly watched as abuses of citizens goes on unabated.  I don’t understand how the school resource officer in the video above didn’t find himself surrounded by a bunch of citizens explaining to him that he’d better back off, or else.  I don’t understand it.  Where are the men, by the way?

Our society is collapsing in part because men have become neutered and indifferent; emasculated and impotent, morally much more than physically. I fear for our nation because now we live in a society in which tin-pot punks with official titles hand down orders and edicts, while ostensibly free men and women simply comply. What sort of people have we become?  What else will we accept when pressed?  Is there no limit to the indignities we will suffer on the say-so of some dimwit who mustered a majority of voters in some small county in an off-year election?  It’s time to reject all of this.  President Trump was right to say that we mustn’t let COVID19 dominate our lives.  He was right to lead from the front, rather than shout orders up from the Presidential bunker, like so many others. None of us get a second lifetime, and watching it bleed away in isolation offers no consolation. I’m done with the lock-down now. One way or the other, it’s over. Come what may. I will not be reduced to the sort of cringing loser who will surrender the right to console my aged mother, nor the sort of hapless mealy-mouth who helplessly watches a mother be assaulted by a power-hungry bureaucrat with a badge and a taser. It’s not happening. I hope my fellow Americans will join me in rejecting this “new normal” before it morphs into something more insidious. Those public officials who have handed down and enforced such orders must go, and the purge must begin today. What they’ve demonstrated is that they are too willing to abuse citizens on the basis of orders in pursuit of public policies that violate our constitutional rights, and that is a sin we cannot tolerate, and a treason against us we must not permit.

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.

 

 

The Dissolution of the Social Compact

Wednesday, February 29th, 2012

Is America Breaking Down?

On Tuesday evening, Mark Levin posed a question on his radio show that bears serious consideration by we conservatives, and I think it’s time we discuss it.  It’s not a matter of winning any longer, but whether we can stave off disaster.  What Levin wondered aloud was whether our nation might be saved at all. He asked if it is too late, because there are too few people remaining who will oppose the advance of statism.  Are we too few?  Is it too late?  Is the America we had known doomed?  If so, what will we have instead?  Our Republic stands on the brink of collapse, and the question we now face is what we can do about it.  The signs are all around us: If we don’t turn things around in 2012, it may be that we never will.

Identifying the problem we face is simple, and it’s really what Alexis de Tocqueville proposed when he wrote Democracy In America.  Among all of the other important and prescient things he warned, these may have been the two we should have etched in stone on the steps of Congress, and on every class-room door in the country:

“The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.” ― Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America

That helps to describe our predicament, and this punctuates it:

“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 years.” ― Alexis de Tocqueville

Our nation is now just more than 200 years on from the adoption of our current constitution, and it seems that the cause of Tocqueville’s warning is being realized before our eyes.  Barack Obama is effectively a dictator, overturning laws by failing to enforce them, and by promulgating regulations that have no legal basis in authority under our Constitution.  Our people, a majority of them, live substantially by taking from others, and those who produce their living have been indoctrinated to supine servitude.  This isn’t the nation of our founding, and our current president’s enmity to the constitution to which he has sworn an oath demonstrates our dire situation.  Many judges no longer see any reason to restrain themselves to the content or context of the laws on the basis of which they’re allegedly ruling, and they reach out to international case law for precedents that conflict with our own constitution.  Under these conditions, our Republic cannot survive, much less flourish, and we are headed for darkness.

Part of what my professional life entails is the process of evaluating threats and vulnerabilities, and projecting organization capabilities for confronting them.  Applying that technique to our current situation, for individuals who consider themselves conservative, never mind libertarian, I think we’re going to see a revolution of radical statists, and I believe this has been the aim of George Soros and his pack of radical cohorts.  Our options are going to be just three, and you had better begin to consider them:

  • Submit – Accept the country is going to become a radical socialist state complete with a police-state front
  • Flee – Leave the country in search of friendly shores that will accept you
  • Fight – Take up arms against it, risking life, limb, and property

These aren’t pleasant options, no matter which we consider, but let’s look at them.  To submit would mean to maintain immediate physical safety, but it also means giving up virtually all personal sovereignty.  I’m not cut out for this option, because I’m not one who respects claims of arbitrary authority over my life, or the way in which I choose to live it.  I’m not one who abides by theft, whether carried out by a hoodlum in a darkened alleyway, or in the open by a federal bureaucrat.  I don’t accept the idea that my life, liberty, and property are rightly subject to the aggression of other men, whether alone, or as a mob.  This means that for me, I’m not inclined to submit, but every person will be forced to make their own choices.  I fear too many will lie down in order to avoid harm, because in point of fact, the last century has been a progression of this sort of incremental surrender.

I don’t wish to surrender my country.  I’m not the sort to flee from tyranny, although I must admit that I’ve done so before.  I live out in the country precisely because I could not abide the growing tyranny in a municipality that orders its residents to have so many shrubs, so many trees, and what sort of decorations they can place on their own properties.  I could not abide it, so I moved a short way out of the city, and in a matter of a decade, that city annexed properties quickly advancing upon me.  At that point, I moved my family and my horses to an even more remote locale, and set up the farm where I expect that I will find some peace for the remainder of my days.  This won’t be the case, however, if the federal government becomes the sort of coercive police state that leftists desire.  There will be no escape to the country, and the only choice will be to flee the country altogether.

As I’ve reported, there have been some people, including filmmaker James Cameron who have fled to New Zealand, but the problem for most of us is that few can afford that move, and countries like New Zealand are smart enough to refuse easy immigration.  Where then shall we go?  The geographical isolation that has served America as a protection promises to serve now as a prison.  Canada?  Mexico?  These are our choices, and neither looks very promising to most Americans.  I can’t imagine that Mexico will offer much promise, and Canada won’t absorb us all.  In my view, this sort of flight isn’t feasible for me, or for most Americans, which then brings us along to the option nobody wants to consider.

Fighting a counter-revolution is a deadly affair, particularly when the power of government is in the hands of the revolutionaries.  From the outset, they will have command of the entire military, the police, and indeed, the entire array of government institutions, and since the media serves the revolution in most important ways, they’ve already created a willing propaganda arm.  They control the horizontal and the vertical, so communications will become an impossibility.  How do you wage a war against such a force?  How is it possible to win?  There is a very good reason that peoples the world over flee from or submit to large scale national social tyrannies:  These are easier than fighting.  These pose less danger.

What sort of country have ours become that we must even consider the revolutionary tyranny that is now creeping toward us, gathering inertia?  I do not wish to seem as though I’m a doomsayer, but the truth is that we’re in very real national distress.  Across the vast expanses of this country, there are probably fewer than one in six who I would consider committed patriots who believe we should maintain this republic as framed by our constitution, but still fewer who are willing to fight to preserve it.  I doubt we could must five million patriots who would step forward and take up arms in defense of the republic, and make war against the people who have slowly usurped our system of government.

I am not asking or urging anybody to do anything, except think.  I’d like you to consider the meaning of all of these things, and what you are willing to do to preserve what we all claim to love so dearly.  Is our liberty to be abandoned without a fight?  Is our freedom really to be eclipsed in this generation?  Why are we going on quietly about our lives?  The Tea Party was launched with the intention of creating a push-back, but the Tea Party has been largely silent in the last year.   The problem is that without some rallying cry, we’re sliding more quickly toward the national catastrophe that now awaits in the gaping maw of the social welfare police-state.  The other problem faced by those who would be inclined to fight if it comes to it is that we don’t have a single bright line for the trigger for a fight.  What is that trigger?  What is the thing that if the government undertakes, we would immediately respond with war?

This reminds me of the story of Wyatt Earp standing down a mob:  “Sure, you’ll get me in a rush, but who wants to be first?”  This is a question nobody likes to consider, because nobody wants to be first.  Perhaps that will change, and perhaps it’s not yet as bad as that implies, but at some point, we’ll reach that climax at the pace in which we’re now rushing toward tyranny.  All I’m suggesting to my fellow Americans is that now is the time to think these things through.  What will we do in defense of our constitution when those sworn to uphold it decide instead to set it aside?  What will be that condition under which we will no longer abide the transgressions?  It’s easy to make brave oaths, today in the shrinking protection our liberties provide, but if our social compact is to be dissolved, it will no longer be a matter of oaths but instead a course of actions that we must consider.

 

How to Stop Barack Obama

Friday, February 17th, 2012

"Resist We Much"

We are under constant attack by Barack Obama’s administration.  He is rapidly converting the United States into a vulnerable, weak nation that cannot defend itself against external threats, but polices its own people with an iron fist.  Evidence of this thesis comes from all quarters, and conservatives are placing all their hopes in the coming presidential election.  The thinking is that if only we can get the right candidate, and if only we can nominate and elect that candidate, once in office, that person will change everything.  Ladies and gentlemen, if you believe it will be so simple, you’re sadly mistaken.  This isn’t going to be easy, and it’s not going to happen without pain, but if you want to defeat Barack Obama, you will need to learn one word, and make it stick for all times, irrespective of the cost.  You must learn to say “no.”

The Obama radicals intend to overturn 230 years of liberty.  They now inspect brown-bag lunches brought to school by small children, making sure the meal complies with the Department of Health and Human Services(or Michelle Obama.)  There is only one way to defeat such a thing, and parents in the country need to find some ‘intestinal fortitude’ and take ownership over the lives of their children, as should have been the case all along.  Say “No.” Don’t send your kids to these schools.  Organize sick-outs.  Organize whatever is needed.  All you need to do to stop this is to refuse to comply with it.  Refuse.

Obamacare can be defeated in exactly the same way.  Refuse.  Refuse to buy insurance.  Refuse to pay their fines.  Refuse. The only word you need is “no,” but saying it, and sticking to it is the harder part of the chore.  Everything the leftists do requires your participation and consent.  Don’t give it.  Don’t participate.  Then their only option is to round you all up, jail you, or kill you if you decline.  Let me ask you bluntly:  Do you favor life as a slave?  That is the only option remaining if you accept their assault on your life.  I’m not suggesting you do this all tomorrow, but you should begin to prepare to do it when the government finally, inevitably arrives at that line in the sand across which you will not step.

It’s time you begin to turn this around on the leftists.  Call them what they are:  Torturers and rapists and murderers.  All they have is naked force, and they’re not as frightened of using it as you are of refusing to comply.  When people of faith are told that they must fund contraception that violates their conscience, it’s time to admit that you have nothing but a shell to lose, but with Obamacare, even that will be theoretical.  Your wallet is not yours. Your home is not yours.  Your life is not yours.  One by one, bit by bit, the radical left is taking over.  They are preparing to sweep away all constitutional constraints upon their actions.  What are you doing to prepare?  How will you resist?  These are questions that you must confront.

Here’s the dirty secret none of them wish you to know, and it’s important to your frame of mind with respect to their attack on your values, your rights, and your lives.  What the left hides from you is that in order for them to have power, you must submit.  This is not the same submission to the laws you know and respect, that merely require you not do a wrong to others.  This is a submission to aggressive laws that demand performance of some sort by you.  This is the secret.  Their attacks on you via the law require you to act.  The laws you honor merely require that you not act in ways that cause harm to others.  You do not steal, nor do you defraud others, and you certainly don’t murder.  Their laws require you to take specific measures, to act on behalf of their policy agendas, either via your wallet, or via your compliance with their demands.

Therefore, this must be your standard in measuring which laws you must continue to obey, and which have only the power over you that you give them.  I am not advocating anarchy, but instead a careful examination of laws on the basis that they either do or do not comply with the context the framers of our constitution laid down as the basis for all our laws.  Again, I am asking you to think this through because the time will come when you will need to know, and you won’t necessarily have time to think it through later, or deliberate it much.  This is your time to prepare, but the preparations mustn’t be nearly those necessary to survive off the grid, but to survive resisting the tyranny that is now unfolding.

Just as in your personal life, where you must draw clear boundaries lest others run over you, in this sense you must also know what it is you will refuse to do when the law makes demands.  A number of Catholics and others of faith are now preparing to make such a stand.  They have decided on drawing a line, and I want to warn you that some will abandon the line they have drawn, but others will refuse to walk back the boundaries they have laid down.  This is the distinction, and it comes down to the principles you hold dear.

The left lives in fear of you discovering your own power.  The left lives in dread of waking up in a world where you have learned to say “no” and mean it.  That’s it.  That’s your power.  It is born of knowing what lines you will not cross no matter their threats and their coercion.  Once you know this, there is nothing they can do to you that you cannot resist.  I do not promise you painless resistance to tyranny, but I am telling you that it can be defeated.  Start small to learn how well it works.  Learn to make a fuss.  Learn to call attention to their aggression.  Learn to scream at the top of your lungs without shame “No means NO!”  Place them in their proper frame, as murders, as rapists, and as thieves.

What Obama Did to the Catholics? Romney Did It Too!

Tuesday, February 7th, 2012

Telling You How It's Going To Be

As it now turns out, back in 2005 when Mitt Romney was governor of Massachusetts, he forced religious institutions including Catholic hospitals to dispense the so-called “morning after pill.”  This is another bit of evidence as to how Mitt really isn’t a conservative, and how he really doesn’t care about religious liberties.  I am exhausted with his posturing as a saintly man who abides his faith, but to put his stamp of approval on a law that deprives others of their recourse to conscience is a disgusting breach of the the Constitution.  I don’t care to hear his pathetic states’ rights arguments, as they don’t apply in this situation, irrespective of his nonsense to the contrary.  There’s something fundamentally wrong with a politician who thinks it’s his role to shove such provisions down our throats, irrespective of our wishes, and irrespective of the matters of conscience that collide in these issues.  He’s only too happy to command you.

This bit of information merely confirms the worst of my fears about Romney: He’s not merely Obama-Lite.  He’s Obama with an “R” next to his name instead of a “D.”  This sort of state interference with the rights of religious practice and conscience is precisely the sort of monstrosity people of faith have suffered endlessly under the  Obama regime.  We shouldn’t be in the business of nominating a candidate who is substantially more like Obama than unlike him. I hope my fellow conservatives and Tea Party folk will understand that this isn’t merely about abortion, or morning-after pills, or anything else of the sort.  This is entirely about the ability of people of faith and the organizations they create around their shared faith to determine for themselves in which activities they will participate.

This is precisely the same thing Obama is now doing with respect to the coercion of religious organizations, including the Catholic church, to provide insurance to employees that includes contraception.  Once again, government is interfering in the relationship between employers and employees, and their insurers.  This is a scandalously tyrannical abuse of authority, and the fact that Mitt Romney participated in much the same thing disqualify him in my view. Whatever your views on the divisive issues, there can be no ignoring that even if it is not your faith under attack in this case, your turn will come eventually.

I cannot now and will not ever vote for Mitt Romney under any circumstances I can now imagine, and I can imagine plenty.  Feel free to make of that what you will.  In fact, make the most of it, but I will not be bullied on the matter.  That he actually imposed such a thing on the people of Massachusetts is simply unforgivable in my book.  I will have no part in merely replacing Barack Obama with another who shares his despotic reflexes.