Of Ted Cruz, the Obamacare fiasco, and America

Okay, I started this post after getting no sleep (having been up all night watching the Ted Cruz not-a-filibuster), but I thought I’d pick it up and run with it (the first bit from a comment I left on a Telegraph article by the ever-insightful Nile Gardner), so here goes:

Ted Cruz’s Efforts to Shine Much-Needed Light on ObamaCare

The reason that I haven’t slept is that one senator (two, actually, because Mike King matters hugely in this) stood up in Jimmy Stewart fashion and told the truth.  Americans aren’t used to hearing the truth (and haven’t been in decades, so this isn’t a swipe at anyone in particular–yet), so I watched it all (well, I was a bit late getting to the party, but only by about an hour or so). I literally stayed up all night to support Senator Cruz in my own inconsequential way: I thought if he can stand there on the Senate floor in suit and tie to speak for the American people, the very least I can do is to sit in my jammies on the couch for every minute of it (bonus: I got to take “bio” breaks, he didn’t).

Here’s the thing, I listened to all 20+ hours of that not-a-filibuster, and while I cringed a tad at some of the stuff (the Darth Vader impression was . . . weird), I can’t say that anything he said or read of substance was off-key, off-base, or in any other way off.

People forget how the Obamacare monstrosity was forged and then passed, but it really does matter because even the Dems would never have made this thing law if they could help it.  What happened was the law was written, passed through committees (with this, that, and the other tacked on . . . because they can), and then . . .

Boom.

Scott Brown got elected to the Senate.  He ran as the 41st vote against ObamaCare, and he won Ted Kennedy’s seat (as we all remember, Teddy was a progressive, single-payer fanatic).  That was supposed to send, should have sent, a message to Washington that we, the people, didn’t want ObamaCare.  Even uber-regressive Massachusetts was willing to send a (faux) conservative, running primarily on voting against ObamaCare, to the Senate.  And not just to the Senate, but in Teddy’s seat.

It mattered.

But it didn’t change a thing:  Dems saw it, understood fully that the people rejected ObamaCare, shrugged, and moved on with ramming this national disaster down our throats.

That special election meant that the haphazard, crazy, tacked-on, willy-nilly nature of that bill had to be either: a.) voted on as is (with Reid pulling a fast one and going with a”budget” vote that required only a majority vote), or b.) given the ideological divide, pretty much it being trashed and started over.  Reid, as majority leader in the Senate decided to pass a major piece of legislation, one that directly affects every American’s life–mostly for the worse–with an up-down vote on budget rules (it all passes or fails and does so by a majority rule).

Laws in the U. S. are supposed to be passed by a 2/3 majority, a thing Reid didn’t have when Massachusetts elected Scott Brown to the 41st seat. So he fudged it, used a budgetary gimmick, and slammed ObamaCare through with exactly zero input from Republicans and without a single Republican vote.

Americans don’t like, don’t trust, and generally ensure there is no one-party “rule.”  No major piece of legislation has ever been passed without votes from the loyal opposition.  This was shocking to us all, left and right.

We like our Dem presidents to have Republican houses of Congress and vice versa.  Some split is also desirable to we Americans, and generally-speaking, we avoid like the plague any one-party rule–one party’s control of the executive and both legislative branches of government.

Americans were–and, importantly, are–angry.  In America, our representatives are supposed to (oh, with the crazy!) represent us, our voice, our wishes to DC.  What happened with ObamaCare was that DC decided what was best for us and then tried to represent that to the people.

That’s completely backwards.

America is just not a nation of sovereign rule, Americans are not subjects of some ruler, and we don’t take kindly to being treated like subjects who must bend to the will of some centralized power that is far removed from us.  That’s how revolutions–all revolutions–start.

So what Ted Cruz tapped into was almost primal, it’s in an American’s DNA, soul, collective unconscious (whatever you want to deem it) that we are a free people, that liberty comes first, that our government and its elected officials represent us; they do not rule us, they are not our “boss,” and they damned sure aren’t our “masters,” and we are not their “servants.” Indeed, they are “public servants,” and if anyone is “master,” it is we, the people.

And that, ultimately, is what Cruz’s not-a-filibuster was about: America, our republic.  What it means to be an American, what it means when your American-ness is stripped away against your will, and that is what the fight for the soul of the republican party is ultimately about: do we continue to support weak-willed, self-serving GOP elites who are big government, big spending pawns of the Washington machine that sees us as servants and ATM machines for their largess, or do we enforce our will, that of the people of these United States, and reject that tried-and-failed socialist-communist-fascist rubric?

My vote is for the latter.

Punishing His Enemies: It’s What Tyrannical Dictators Do

In 2010, Obama told a Latino audience:  “We’re gonna punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us.”  We, in the conservative blogosphere were horrified.  This sounded Nixonian, it sounded banana republic unethical.  Yes, the president sounded petty and self-important, but he was also proud in a bizarre way–as if, punishing enemies and rewarding friends was something that was not beneath him, as we might expect from someone in a position of such power, but was instead something that he actually relished.  It was mind-boggling, really, to think that the president’s political “enemies” (not “opponents,” not “loyal opposition,” but “enemies”!) were going to be labeled by the head of state as essentially “‘enemies’ of the state.”

Even those of us who heard it and understood the implications didn’t know how, exactly, these punishments would be doled out, what form they would take.  Perhaps, we hoped, he’d just keep calling us names, mocking and deriding us, sneering down at us from his Styrofoam pedestal.  Maybe he’d lie about us more than usual, urge his sheeple in the tabloid media and regressive groups to attack and attempt to discredit us more often.  Maybe he’d set up another version of “Flag the Fishy” and “Attack Watch” to get our fellow citizens to turn us into the state . . . for some reason, to locate all the “enemies” he has?  And to what end?  After all, this is America, you can’t “punish” Americans for political dissent or on the whim of a president.

You can’t, right?

Wrong.

This president has taken punishing his enemies (and often simultaneously rewarding his friends) and elevated it to an art form that would make history’s worst tyrants and dictators drool with envy:

His DOJ: in addition to suing Arizona for violating federal immigration laws (while ignoring violations of immigration law in “sanctuary” states and cities, of course–after all, what petty tyrant doesn’t pick and choose which laws he likes best?), also has a well-known policy of never prosecuting blacks for crimes against whites.  0’s DOJ also went after Gibson guitar on bogus “wood” crime allegations.

His TSA: in addition to gross abuses of power and zero ability to actually detect an actual terrorist, the TSA considers anyone who “opts out” of their porn scans and gate rapes to be “domestic extremists.”

His DHS: in addition to the unprecedented (and frankly bizarre) stock-piling of ammunition about which they decline to comment, issued a memo in April 2009 telling various law enforcement agencies across the country to be on the lookout for dastardly “. . .. groups that reject federal authority in favor of state or local authority [i.e. that pesky 10th Amendment which protects citizens and states from a too-powerful central government]. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single-issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration,’ the warning says.” I.e. conservatives, TEA Party groups, patriots.

His military: in addition to forcing its pastors to perform gay “marriages,” has also targeted Christians in a special effort to silence their free speech.  And the army has been told not to consider actual terrorists (Nidal Hissan, for example) as terrorists, but instead to focus on Christians, Jews, and Islamaphobes.

His press secretary: tried to exclude the “enemy” network Fox News from an interview.  Yes, it was one interview, but if they had succeeded, it would have been the end of Fox in the WH press pool.  It was a baby step to see how far they could go in ending the freedom of the press.

His NLRB: targeted Boeing in a bogus lawsuit in an attempt to bully them into opening a new plant where the administration (and its union thug friends) wanted it.

His DOE joined with his DOJ to effectively revoke the First Amendment on all college campuses receiving federal funding (the majority of them, in other words).

His IRS: the recent revelations that the IRS was intentionally and methodically targeting TEA Party, “patriot,” and those groups or individuals “educating on the Constitution and Bill of Rights,” has created deep concern on the right–leftists, not being the targets this time, are perfectly happy to see this gross abuse of power to intimidate and silence opposition.  This isn’t that surprising; after all, if we’ve learned nothing else over the past four years, we’ve learned that leftists are perfectly happy with tyranny and oppression . . .  as long as they are the tyrants and oppressors.  Too bad for them that totalitarian takeovers historically end badly (very very badly) for the regime’s early supporters and apologists.

Not only are we, justly, concerned that political dissent will make us a target of IRS (or FBI, CIA, FDA, DOJ, or any other executive branch agency–keep in mind that the videographer 0 falsely blamed for Benghazi is still in prison.  Sure, he did something unrelated to the video wrong, but odd how he was only picked up after the attack in Benghazi when the president and secretary of state needed a scapegoat.  And believe me, every single person out there is guilty of some crime or violation of some regulation–there are so many that we don’t even know about. You could be harassed for collecting rain water, for growing vegetables or herbs on your porch, for who knows what else. So we are not only concerned about the IRS targeting us as taxpayers), but we also are concerned about what this means with the new role that the IRS has as the 0Care enforcers.  They now have, granted by the 0Care monstrosity, access to our personal bank accounts (actual access, not the power to freeze them–they’ve had that for ages), free reign to monitor our purchases and income, access to our personal medical files, and a list of other means by which to “enforce” the 0Care mandate.  These things could all be used to intimidate, bully, silence, even imprison any person “guilty” of political dissent.

And now we know, for a fact, that 0 is not only willing but actually relishes wielding the power of the presidency to “punish” his “enemies” (no, I won’t rant about his insistence that he can use drones to kill American citizens on American soil because he thinks them an “enemy,” but . . . well, not so tinfoil hatty now, huh?).  We, that is anyone who opposes this administration, are 0’s “enemies,” and no abuse of power, no strong-arm tactics, no bullying thuggery is beneath him.

These are the times that try men’s (and women’s) souls.  Luckily, we are Americans, and this tyrant wannabe will not intimidate, cow, or silence us.  We are not Germans defeated in spirit and nation, we are not Russian or Chinese peasants–isolated and disarmed, we are not, in other words, easy pickings.  And for that, I am forever grateful.

Mourning For America and the End of (Political) Fuzzy–Updated

I’ve been writing for years about America, about the American Spirit and the American Dream.  It was all for nothing, all about something that simply no longer exists.  I was delusional, in denial, stooopid.  America is no longer the America of my youth, of my dreams, of my spirit.  The American people have re-elected 0, and that tells me all I need to know about the country I’ve always loved and been proud of, about my fellow countrymen and women who rejected all that is good and decent and admirable about our great country and embrace all that is bad and failed and shameful about her and her century-long flirtation with communism.

The American people have spoken, and it’s a sad sad day for our endangered Republic.

As for me and this blog . . . I’m done.  This blog is done, at least as a political blog.  Because I love to write, I may come back at some time to write about whatever interests me, but it won’t be politics.  I’ll stay a constitutional conservative (it’s who I am), and I’ll still vote, of course, still resist in the culture war and stay informed, but I see no point at all in torturing myself for four more years, of agonizing over 0 and his shameful anti- and unAmerican policies when, apparently, he’s just what the American people want.  Well, they have him.  We have him.

I’m heartsick.

And done.

–Update–

Okay, maybe “And done” isn’t quite correct.  Both my conservative blogger friends here and a very special one over at Hack’s place (*waves at Sol, the great mind behind Wisdom of Soloman*) have reminded me that . . . well, they’ve reminded me of who I am and what I care about.  I will continue to blog, perhaps not as focused on politics (I need to keep some semblance of sanity, and four more years of 0 are guaranteed to deprive me of that if I let them), but I will be here, and yes, I’ll definitely engage in the political arena when it seems useful and wise (or, hey, when I feel like it! Heh).

Pledging Allegiance To The Republic, Not Servitude To The President

Oh dear, I feel a rant coming on.  Yes, again. I just read this headline “Actress Jessica Alba asks voters to pledge allegiance to Obama” and my head almost exploded.  Before I even clicked the link, I was transported back to the truly creepy, truly awful Demi Moore and Ashton Kutcher Stepford “pledge” to be “a servant to our president” (meaning, of course, 0):

And I remembered this bicep-kissing guy (no idea who he is, but I guess he’s someone famous to people who like that sort of thing) pledging to be “of service to Barack [weird bicep-kiss] Obama [weirdly kisses other bicep].  At the 0:51ish mark:

This put me in mind–again, before I even clicked the Alba link above–of a conversation I had with a 0-supporter on Twitter.  It was some leftist who originally seemed sane, so I followed him back. Briefly. (As most of you know, I don’t follow leftists as a rule: I gave up any fantasy that they were open to any ideas but their own ages ago, and as I’m certainly and proudly not open to their commie-crazy ideas, well . . . what’s the point?  Oh, I did try, for ages, to engage with leftists, but it really was just an exercise in futility, so now I don’t follow them on Twitter or even read their comments when they wander onto my blog.  I just block, ignore, delete forever.  Yes, I know, many conservatives still engage with them in the spirit of the great Andrew Breitbart, but I just can’t be bothered. Anyway, back to the point. . . ) This leftist guy on Twitter wrote to me in a lengthy-ish pm exchange that I should support 0 and his agenda because (get this!) the president is our “boss” (his word), and just as we wouldn’t “disobey” (his word again) our boss in the workplace, we shouldn’t (and you can’t make this stuff up) “disobey” 0.

50-foot statue of Dear Leader anyone?

Well, you can imagine my response.  I pointed out that the American president is not “our boss,” that his job is not to “rule,” and that the American people pledge allegiance to no man , to no office–not even to the office of the presidency.  We pledge allegiance to our flag, and to the republic for which it stands.  Period.  I also noted that our military and elected officials pledge to protect and defend the United States Constitution, not the president, not the office of the president.

So it turns out that Alba wasn’t actually saying, as that bicep-kissing moron and Demi Moore most certainly did, that we should pledge allegiance to 0, to a mere man, to a relative nothing in the great scheme of our beloved republic.  Instead she likened pledging allegiance to our flag to pledging allegiance to communism, or at least to a version of it as expressed in the old Soviet constitution and in FDR’s commie Second Bill of Rights.

“Growing up, my classmates and I started every day with a ritual: We’d stand up, put our right hand over our hearts, and say the Pledge of Allegiance,” explains Alba. “To me, that gesture was a promise. A promise to be involved and engaged in this country’s future. A promise to work for liberty and justice — and for affordable education, health care, and equality — for all.”

Maybe that’s the same thing as pledging allegiance to 0?  And we all know that to 0, as to all leftists, “equality” is exclusive, not inclusive.  Leftists have a long list of “justices”: social justice, green justice, racial justice, and on and on.  But nowhere in their list is “equal justice.”  Conservatives, in this construct, aren’t “equal” and aren’t deserving, to their totalitarian beliefs, of free speech, freedom of religion, nor of any other liberty they claim for themselves.  This is the danger of government-granted rights and is exactly why our Founders specified that our rights are unalienable, granted by our Creator, not by government.  Totalitarian states–the regressive leftists’ ideal–do not permit true liberty, and they certainly are not built on equal justice for all.  Every instance of “social” or “green” or “racial” justice is built, inherently, on injustice to others.

We know this.  And as I recently posted, they know this even if their useful idiots do not.  And there can be no clearer evidence of useful idiocy than of their pledging allegiance, actual servitude, to the president of these United States.  Americans are not servants, obedient or otherwise, to any elected official, to any man (or woman).  We are a free people, and we will, despite their best efforts, remain so.

Make no mistake about that.

 

Hollow Points, “Any Means Necessary,” and Alinsky’s Rule 14

Some things that we’ve all been thinking for ages are finally seeing the light of day; by “light of day” I mean that they are no longer relegated to the tinfoil hat brigade.  Major General Jerry Curry’s post, “Who Does the Government Intend to Shoot?,” at The Daily Caller has spurred a couple of thoughtful and thought-provoking posts over at American Thinker.  MG Curry writes:

What would be the target of these 174, 000 rounds of hollow point bullets? It can’t simply be to control demonstrators or rioters. Hollow point bullets are so lethal that the Geneva Convention does not allow their use on the battle field in time of war. Hollow point bullets don’t just stop or hurt people, they penetrate the body, spread out, fragment and cause maximum damage to the body’s organs. Death often follows.

Potentially each hollow nose bullet represents a dead American. If so, why would the U.S. government want the SSA to kill 174,000 of our citizens, even during a time of civil unrest? Or is the purpose to kill 174,000 of the nation’s military and replace them with Department of Homeland Security (DHS) special security forces, forces loyal to the Administration, not to the Constitution?

Forces like the SS, loyal only to Hitler, not to Germany or the German people?  Possibly. After all, as MG Curry notes:

We have enough military forces to maintain law and order in the U.S. even during times of civil unrest.

We have local police, backed up by each state’s National Guard, backed up by the Department of Defense. So in addition to all these forces why does DHS need its own private army? Why do the SSA, NOAA and other government agencies need to create their own civilian security forces armed with hollow nose bullets?

Why indeed.  Needless to say, this news coupled with the gravitas provided by such an upstanding, respected military officer (retired. And certainly not of the tinfoil hat brigade) has caused quite a stir in the conservative blogosphere (even I posted a “Short” on it).

American Thinker has published, in the past few days, two pointed posts that address the issues raised by MG Curry:  Stella Paul’s “Will Obama Keep Power ‘by Any Means Necessary’?” and Cameron Reddy’s “Wargaming Termination of Tea Party Extremists.”  While these two articles may well have been in the works for a while (who doesn’t have several drafts of possible posts waiting to be molded into something worth hitting “publish” on?), they do follow the MG’s post and are taken, by me at least, in that context.

We have this puzzling mass purchase of hollow points, then we have a list of things that 0 and his traitorous horde have done in preparation for . . . what?, and finally, we have a cool-headed response to the (very real) threat under which we find ourselves and our great country.

Go read each of these articles (if you haven’t already).  As our dear, wonderful Adrienne says, go ahead, I’ll wait.

Each of these articles prompted a great deal of comments, and I’ve tried to read them all (but gave up, there are just too many).  One thing that is established, too clearly, in them is that some Americans are ready to take the fight to 0, to be, in Reddy’s spot-on analysis, “goad[ed] ” into doing exactly what they want.

Do I need to point out that doing exactly what they want us to do, are itching and hoping and NEED us to do, is a mistake of catastrophic proportions?

Things have changed since 2009, when I was certain that 0 would never give up power willingly.  I tried to capture that in my (ugh, so lengthy!) comment in response to Adrienne’s asking our thoughts on Paul’s essay, “Will Obama Keep Power By ‘Any Means Necessary’?” (note: I’m not setting this off as a quote, too, it creates too many icky layers):

I said back in ’09 that I believed that Obama would never give up power willingly. I understood fully who and what he is and what he’s doing, and I feared the worst for America. Since then, however, Americans are starting to get it. So many people, not just obscure bloggers such as myself or tinfoil hat loons tapping away in dark basements, are now willing and able to call Obama not only the radical that he is but also the communist fascist that he is. This is incredibly good news for America. Incredibly good news. So few people knew or understood what Stalin and Hitler were up to (to name but two similar totalitarian dictator types) that they got away with it. With so many people not only aware of what Obama’s up to but actively, vocally pushing back, I have every expectation that he and his traitorous horde will be stopped.

They didn’t count on so many things. They bought their own press (in both senses of the word, I guess), and they really believed that Americans were not only ready but eager to embrace the communist nightmare vision Obama and his treasonous scum fellows have in store for America. They thought they would have four years of a completely free hand to set up their structures, to put in place their means, to erect a devastating distortion of America. But they didn’t have that. Almost immediately, and by their own mistake, the American people got together and said not just no, but Hell NO! The TEA Party caught them completely off-guard. They thought they had us cowed, that screeching RAAAACIST would be enough, that Obama would be teflon in ways that the left only dreamed up and coveted when Reagan was the “teflon president.” They thought they had him covered with both the Messiah nonsense and the race card. They thought their union goons and scuzzy occudreg types would be sufficient. That strong-arming Boeing, Gibson, the TEA Parties would make everyone shut up. Heck, it worked so well, you see, for so many others who attempted and accomplished the same thing. They didn’t count on the new media, the Andrew Breitbart, the Jim Hoft, the Dana Loesch, the William Jacobson, and they certainly didn’t count on every day conservatives, American patriots quickly and fearlessly jumping onto social media and pushing back. Hard.

Do I think they’ve given up? Oh no. Not even close. Do I think things will get worse before they get better? Oh yes. Do I think they are fully and completely capable of concocting anything and everything, up to and including mass civil unrest and violence? Oh yes. But here’s the thing. We know it, and we are committed to resisting, as are vast numbers of current and former military, elected officials from local and state up to the federal government, police forces and other agencies at the state and federal level (or at least enough of them). There are plenty of “bluedog” democrats who are also in positions to help if and when this admin makes a move. All of this makes this moment in history totally different in every conceivable way from previous fascist takeovers. Add to that our Americanness, that special something that sets us apart from the people of other nations–certainly from the defeated, humiliated, desperate Germans and the impoverished, helpless Russians of the 1930’s and 1940’s, and they don’t stand a chance.

No scenario makes sense. Canceling the elections? Not going to happen; elections are state matters, state-controlled, not federal. They can’t be cancelled by the president. At least not in red states, and how stupid would Obama have to be to have only red states voting in a presidential election? And no hostile takeover of the United States, from within or without, makes any logistical sense at all. People talk about the UN coming in, and that is one thing that will set off not only patriotic constitutional conservatives but almost every American, including normal Democrats who love America (they still exist out in America, believe it or not). That would spark something that would not be pretty, create a far worse backlash than our own agencies doing it. So people talk about the ATF showing up at people’s homes and taking them and their guns into “custody”; the logistics of that make it impossible. Here’s what I wrote in response to this scenario on this post over at AT:

[Insert: here is the original comment to which I was responding:

November 23, 2012. Romney has won, but you hear a knock at your door at 11:30 p.m. You open the door and five armed ATF agents demand you turn over your registered firearms and ammo in compliance with an executive order from the White House. You also see a local school bus filled with your half dressed neighbors in idling front of your house and you are told that unless you turn over your guns you will be taken away to a holding area as a domestic terrorist.

How many of us have REALLY thought through the consequences of giving up our guns and the consequences of not doing so?

The tougher questions quickly becomes as a thinking connservative what am I willing to sacrifice -my life, my family, my security – in upholding the Constitution? Very tough questions without easy answers.

I carefully ask my Jewish friends if a Second Holocaust could happen today in America, as in Nazi Germany. Almost all say no, and they almost all support Obama. They often get upset at being asked such a question, yet it is one of the most crucial question an American Jew should think about. “Never Again” has morphed into, “You Must Be Crazy.”

As a thinking connservative do I beleive that Obama is capable and willing to pour lighter fluid on the remaining shreds of the Constitution and toss a match onto the parchment? Yes.

Do enough Americans -including myself — have the courage to follow THAT thread to it’s logical conclusion IF such a series events occurs? Again – very tough questions without easy answers.

Stella and American Thinker — excellent work….because only the naive and foolish think IT COULD NOT happen here in America.]

“There aren’t enough ATF agents, first of all, to pull this off. It would have to be simultaneously-executed at every gun-owner’s home nationwide. I don’t know about your neighborhood, but I can just imagine what would happen at the first house that bus pulled up to while armed agents demanded that first neighbor’s guns and attempted to force
his family onto a bus. They’d have to lock down every house and every person in every house for miles around to get away with that. This isn’t the 1930’s and ’40’s; we have the internet, phones . . . all manner of instant and near-instant communication. Further, if one worries about the Obama “kill switch” on communications, what on earth do you think Americans would do if they woke up one day and had no power, no access to the internet, no phone use? We’re also not dispirited Germans or impoverished Soviets, we’re freaking Americans!  The very idea of us shuffling off in our night robes to be taken on our special vacation trip to the gulag . . . nope, not going to happen.

There’s no way that an actual, overt takeover can happen; certainly not in a way that would make the risk outweigh the objective. America is enormous, our population dispersed, and our people well and truly ticked off. Ticked off and well-armed and more organized than many seem
to think. This sort of thing is out of the question; no agency, even the wild and wacky ATF, would agree to go through with it even if some “genius” in the WH thought it would be a good idea.”

I say all this with one caveat: we HAVE to win in November. Obama has to be routed, the GOP has to have a mandate. Ideally, we’ll also keep the House and take the Senate, making everything that needs to be done easier to do. Alas, our chances of the latter got much worse yesterday [insert: this was a reference to Akin not dropping out by the Tuesday, 5 p.m. CST deadline].

End oh-so-lengthy comment over at Adrienne’s.

Things have changed, and I’m rather alarmed by the chorus of conservative patriot voices who seem to be calling for violence.  Violence is not the answer.  That, to iterate Reddy’s point (one I’ve made frequently over the last four years), is exactly what they need in order to accomplish everything that we most fear.  Reddy directs us to Alinsky’s Rule 14:

RULE 14: “Push the enemy so hard with outrageous situations and allegations that he is forced to push back.”  Whenever possible, cause the enemy to respond, and when he does, hold him up for ridicule; then push harder.  (By threatening his security and way of life, you will always elicit a reaction that can be turned against him.)

They can’t accomplish their goals without us becoming violent, being plastered all over the television and newspapers acting like . . . well, like crazed lefties.  Remember, the people who opposed segregation were counting on, NEEDED, the black and white marchers to become violent.  It was their nonviolence, insisted upon by Martin Luther King, Jr., and the resultant images of nonviolent people being summarily beaten, whipped, dragged through the streets that shifted American sympathies, that made the Civil Rights Act possible.

We must commit, equally strongly and with equal determination and faith, to nonviolence.  As I said in a comment on Reddy’s article: Nonviolent adherence to our constitutional principles is the only way to defeat Obama and his traitorous horde. It’s what they fear most.  The second, and I mean the second, that conservatives respond with violence, we lose.  We lose it all.