Fuzzy’s Faux News: President’s Obama’s Racial Parity Plan

April 11, 2014

Among the announcements that the Obama administration made today was the exciting mention of a plan to ensure racial fairness and equality in America.  Distressed that African Americans make up only 14% of the American population, the Obama administration is in talks with the designers of China’s “One Child” policy to hammer out a means of growing this important segment of our population.  The goal is to limit the number of children that whites and, to a lesser extent, Hispanics and other non-African Americans can have, so that the African American population can grow to equal the number of whites over the next three decades.  The details of this plan have not been revealed, but some that have been released include a halt to all births of whites for a decade and a restriction on the number of children whites (and others, not African American) can have in the two decades that follow.

Another detail that was revealed is the potentially-controversial banning of abortion among America’s African American population; however, this ban will not affect access to this vital healthcare treatment for whites and, to a lesser degree, Hispanics, Asians, and those races that are difficult to codify but that are definitely not African American.  “This is a matter not only of national security, the nation’s economy, the environment, childhood obesity, and gun control” Obama noted at a recent fund-raiser/golf outing, “but it is a vital step in ensuring that the black voice is heard in America.  Can you imagine any other nation on earth allowing such a disparity in numbers of its voting demographics population segments as we have here? It just doesn’t happen in the 21st century.  This racial injustice, this disenfranchisement of the black voice must be remedied!”

Some have noted that this will mean a sharp decline in abortions because African Americans make up the majority of all aborted babies in many states.  Noting the concern of abortion care providers who are worried they will lose tax payer funding and other revenue, President Obama explained that he was going to make up the loss by requiring that all white women who are carrying a white, potentially white, or suspected white baby have an abortion.  This, he assures us, will only be in place for one decade, to “give others a chance.  It’s only fair that the African American population meet the numbers of the white population.  How can anyone reject this fundamental premise that Jesus talks about in the Bible and that such stars as Pajama Boy and that guy with the hat extol in tax payer funded rap videos?”

There is also some push back from progressives who are, according to President Obama, not adjusting their eugenic vision for the new world order and are “stuck in the 19th Century.”  Upon hearing this charge, the recalcitrant progressives promptly blushed, shuffled their feet uncomfortably, voted by finger up twinkles, and began hailing the president’s wonderful new plan for racial equality.  In a subtle message to Russia’s Vladimir Putin, the president beamed at them and gave a special “shout out” to them for their proper response to his corrective taunt.

April 17, 2014

Responding to outrage from conservatives who are already saying that they will refuse government-mandated abortions and forced sterilization, President Obama remained his usual unruffled, calm, majestic self.  “Some people are calling me a fascist and are talking me about me like I’m a dog because I champion equality, because I stand firm in transforming this nation into the one I envision,” President Obama intoned at a recent pre-taped press conference at which we all watched a video of the president’s remarks.  “These people are unAmerican and are clearly brainwashed by Fox News.  Any white person who does not volunteer for the government sterilization program or agree not to have children for 10, possibly 30ish, years is clearly a racist, maybe even a traitor. All these so-called ‘black conservatives’ who are outraged should add themselves to this list; I hereby deem them no longer black.  And that’s official!”  The video is paused here, and we in the press corpse cheer enthusiastically!  After we quieted down, Jay Carney pushed the “play” button for us.  President Obama concluded, “How can anyone reject the sensible plans for racial equality that I have laid out?  They cannot! Luckily, I have my pen and my phone, and with these, I will ensure that my racial justice, equality, parity, fairest fair fairness for all plan be enforced by every agency from the DOJ to the IRS to the EPA to NASA!”

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.

A Leaderless America? Not So Much

If one more person tells me some variation of “there is no leader in the WH,” my head may explode. Of course there is.  This idea that Obama is somehow removed from, above, or not up to his scrawny neck in what his administration is doing must be dispelled. Now, do I think he’s the brains behind the operation?  No way, I don’t think he’s that bright, but I do think he’s surrounded himself with people who have plenty of brains and plenty of nefarious, traitorous plans.  I also believe that he’s well-aware of and ideologically happy with every single thing that has led to the myriad scandals that stink up our White House.  Do I think that he gets his hands dirty (beyond going out and spreading vile lies, doubts, and suspicion of the TEA Party and conservatives more generally), that some “smoking gun” will be found tying him directly to the IRS, DOJ, AP, Rosen, NSA, or any other scandal we currently know about or ones that may yet be revealed?  Nope.

But it’s his Chicago stench that permeates every single scandal, up to and including Benghazi.  The bullying, the thuggery, the blackmail, the boot on the neck, the manipulation of events for a specific end . . . all of it is straight out of Chicago, specifically, and leftist “thought” more broadly.

It’s no mistake that his czars and other appointments are a rag-tag assortment of dirty dealers, traitors, commies, anti-Semites, radicals, and fascist zealots.  Those people didn’t just materialize around him; remember, he sought out this type of person all the way back in college.  That never ended, as we can see all too clearly.

What kind of a person appoints the freaks and fringe fanatics that Obama has?  Remember his TSA nominee who stated that white supremacists and “Christian identity groups” were America’s “biggest threat”?  That’s what Obama believes with all his tiny, shriveled evil little heart. Hell, his DHS said as much in their memo to all of America’s law enforcement in 2009.

Last week, Obama announced the war on terror over; for him, it is.  Indeed, it was never really about Islamic terror for him; he happily supports both in word and deed (and with our money) all sorts of Islamic terrorism and terrorist groups.  Hell, he calls various Islamofascist groups his “peace partners.”  That he’s droned a bunch of them doesn’t change that fact.  And it’s right in line with Obama, anyway, he’s famous for sacrificing friends, family, leftists, whomever for “the cause.”   But Islamic terror isn’t his focus, what he does has been a means to an end–his support for the Arab Spring wasn’t an accident, nor was he unaware that Islamofascist states would emerge (everyone was saying so from Glenn Beck to John Bolton).  Neither were any of Obama’s moves an accident from basically encouraging Iran to nuke up to removing the missile defenses in Poland.

We may not be able to connect the dots yet, but it’s becoming pretty clear that it’s all of one piece, including what he’s been doing right here in America.  To Obama, the nation’s real enemies, his real enemies, are people who “want to make America a better place to live,” people who support the 10th Amendment, people who are pro-life, Christian, Jewish, white, patriots.  He’s made this crystal clear since practically Day One with every appointment, every czar, every policy, every word.

Back in September of ’09, I wrote:

[Van] Jones is a racist, a self-proclaimed communist, a “truther,” and a proponent of destroying the American system and replacing it with a . . . well, with another one that favors people of color and subjugates whites.  I’m not making this up.  Van Jones has said it.  All of it.  He talks of white people purposely poisoning minorities with pesticides, he signed a document demanding investigation into our government’s role in either allowing or actually perpetrating the 9/11 attacks on this country, he’s spoken of using the green movement to install minorities in key positions of power and remaking the system to favor them, and he’s called republicans assholes.  Well, okay, that last one doesn’t matter; we’ve all said worse about our political adversaries at one time or another.  But the other points, they matter.  Each of them alone should exclude him from the president’s inner circle, and together, they paint a picture of a dangerous, racist, anti-American communist who should not be allowed to enter the White House gift shop let alone sit in the Oval Office and snuggle with the president.

. . . . .

You have to wonder, if you’ve got a brain in your head, what is going on with the other BO czars.  Who are they and what are they hiding?  What is BO’s agenda in having such radical and controversial figures surrounding him, advising him, making policy for all of us and doing so well outside the checks and balances set up by the Constitution?

Well, there’s John Holdren, BO’s Science Czar, who has a neato idea to control population.  Apparently, he’s a big fan of China’s forced abortion policy and even advocated putting sterilization drugs in America’s food and water supply.  He’s also said that forced abortions “could be sustained under the current Constitution.”  Um, okay, but don’t you think that’s a bit much?  And this man is in key policy position, unchecked by Congress or anyone else, advising the president of the United States.  He’s not in some think tank or university espousing crazy theories and philosophizing, he is actually helping shape American policy.  This is the problem, not his wacked out ideas.

Holdren apologists point out, correctly, that Holdren preferred “milder methods” of population control.  Um, okay, so what happens if the people don’t line up for population control abortions of their own free will?  Do you honestly think that if the government controls the healthcare system and Holdren or BO decide that “population growth” is a threat to either the environment or the economy/healthcare system that they won’t start limiting the number of children people can have, forcing abortion on those who’ve maxed their “quota”?  This sounds crazy, but what the hell is someone with crazy ideas like this doing in the White House if not to put those ideas in motion?  Again, the apologists say that these ideas were expressed in the 1970′s and as such are “dated” and not relevant today.  Another apologist angle is that the book presents a “theory” and does not recommend a “practice.”  Well, so did The Communist Manifesto.  Remember that nifty little book?

Another fun BO czar is Mark Lloyd, BO’s Diversity Czar.  He’s a fun guy who thinks that Chavez’s coup in Venezuela was beautifully accomplished and that his control of use of the media should be emulated here in the U. S.  God forbid the people have access to anything that might be anti-BO.  I wonder how much he had to do with the “flag the fishy” campaign?  Anyway, he finds free speech rather pesky especially from the conservatives, having the unfortunate effect of allowing people to express their dissent.  The best place to stop free speech, according to this lovely man, is by forcing right wing radio off the air with 100% taxes on their operating costs; once that pushes them off the airwaves, their license will be handed over to a (liberal or progressive) minority group (this is where the “diversity” thing comes into play, I guess, you know making sure that all talk radio leans left.  Lots of diversity there.).  I never listen to talk radio, but apparently, there are far right discussions taking place on those stations.  So what?  If you don’t like it, don’t listen.  The people who are listening are obviously of the same mind, so shutting them down won’t do anything about changing ideology, it’ll simply drive people to the internet (if BO doesn’t declare an “emergency” and shut it down, anyway) or to Fox News (which I do watch).  At least until they figure out a way to push Fox off the air.  Again, though, not being able to see or hear views with which you agree does not change your own views, so I find this rather silly.  And frightening.

And let’s not forget Michael Copps at the FCC and “net neutrality”:

And there it is, the admission.  There is a narrow window of time, while BO is still prancing around the WH playing grown up, to force through his radical agenda, an agenda that apparently includes regulating (or whatever you call “filtering and funneling” the right information to the American public) the internet, ensuring that information (the correct information, Herr Copps) reaches the masses in the correct manner and correct measure.  Can’t rely on “flag the fishy“campaigns forever, now can we?  And note, too, that like all good progessives, Copps understands that they may need to settle for a “down payment” (aka “a starter home“) on the publicly-funded, government-run propaganda machine of the (not so distant) future.

Part of what we’ve seen develop over the past few weeks is the Obama camp’s purposeful promotion of the image of a detached, disinterested, ditzy dimwit so that we will all blame someone, anyone other than Obama himself.  I’ve bought into it myself, so I understand where people are coming from, but if nothing else has become clear over the course of the past several months, it’s that Obama is central to what is going on in terms of discriminating against conservatives, Christians, veterans, and pretty much everyone who disagrees with him on any point.  Might he be a puppet?  Sure.  That’s even likely, but it does not exculpate him.  He is not an innocent victim here.

The innocent victims are we, the people and our Constitutional Republic.  People keep thinking that he’s incompetent, a failed leader, but that’s true only if his goal is to support America, keep her and her people safe, to protect and defend her Constitution.  Because, yes, a thousand times, yes, he’s totally incompetent at that.

But here’s the secret: he’s not applying himself to those goals.  He never has and he never will.

Listen again to the great and fearless Andrew Breitbart:

Why the #MarchAgainstMonsanto Matters to Conservatives

Until I read this post at the ever-delightful Adrienne’s place, I had never heard of Monsanto.  Never.  I can’t think now how that’s possible, but there you have it.  Anyway, she wrote in part:

This is the company that won’t allow farmers to save seeds.  If a farmer buys  GMO (genetically modified organism) seeds from Monsanto, they must sign an agreement not to save seeds.  I guess that means the farmer is only renting the plants they grow.  By Monsanto’s reasoning, they developed the seed, the farmer buys the seed, grows the plant on his land, but doesn’t really “own” the plant because he can’t use any seed produced.

If you dare to break the agreement, they will squash you like the little bug (no pun intended) they think you are.  Over the years, they have brought lawsuits against many farmers and have generally won.  My guess, and it’s only a guess because I have not read the court cases, is Monsanto won on contract law.  If the farmer signed the contract, then he is bound to uphold the terms.

These GMO seeds are already crossing with non-GMO plants.  I predict, due to my knowledge of hybridization and my life-long gardening, that this will prove to be a disaster in the future.

Imagine, if you will, a world where nothing you grow will produce seed that is usable.  Most hybrid plants will not reproduce true to form.  If you save the seeds from the hybrid tomatoes you purchased at a store and try and grow the seeds the following year, don’t count on eating any tomatoes.

Huh?! A company “owns,” essentially, the rights to food seeds?  How is that even possible?  If anyone else had written this, I would probably have dismissed it as hysteria and hyperbole, but as it was written by someone whom I know not to be given to either hysteria or hyperbole, I thought I better look into it further.

Monsanto is a vast, multi-national corporation that has genetically modified its canola, soy, wheat, and other crop seeds to be resistant to its own RoundUp sprays.  The crops will not die when RoundUp is sprayed to control pests and weeds, and these GMO seeds have been patented by Monsanto.  Pause, digest this: the SEEDS are patented.

Monsanto has also genetically-modified seeds so that even though a plant will produce seeds, they will not germinate (grow); they are modified to self-destruct, in other words.  Seeds, then, must be bought year after year . . . from Monsanto.  Indeed, even if you are a farmer using GMOs that are not “programmed” to self-destruct, you must sign a contract stating that you will not only buy new seeds each year from Monsanto but that you will also pay a “fee” per harvest for the privilege.

On the one hand, this makes a certain amount of business sense if you’re Monsanto, but the problem is that these genetically-modified seeds are contaminating non-GMO seeds that are planted within X number of miles of the patented seeds.  When the GMO seeds travel by wind, insect, bird, or beast to pure, natural-seeded crops, they cross-pollinate, making the produced seeds GMO hybrid monsters that are, courts have ruled over and over, the property of Monsanto.

So. Let’s say you are growing heirloom corn in your field, and the guy or gal next door or down the road is growing Monsanto GMO monsters.  The wind blows, a bird or bee flutters from field to field, a mouse or raccoon skitters between the two, and your corn is contaminated.  Guess who owns your corn and its seeds.  Monsanto.  Not you.  Not only that but your Monsanto’s seeds are now forever monsterfied by genetic modification.  They may be RoundUp resistant, they may not produce viable seed, or they may be both.  But they’re not yours whatever they may be.  They belong, on your land and in your fields, to Monsanto.

This could be problematic on the small scale, but as Adrienne points out, there is no way that eventually all crops will not be infected.  Eventually, by the process of nature, no crops will be free of GMO’s; eventually all seed will be good for only one season because the resultant crop seeds cannot be resown (not only will Monsanto sue you if you try, but why bother? They won’t germinate, they won’t grow).

Learning all this I was horrified (especially as I’ve begun my own feeble attempts to grow tomatoes and such in pots on my porch), and felt the need to learn still more, so I watched David vs. Monsanto on my fabulous Roku.  Through the entire film, I just kept thinking, why don’t we know about this?

A brief overview of this excellent documentary and its focus, Mr. Percy Schmeiser of Canada:  Mr. Schmeiser is a Canadian canola farmer whose fields were contaminated by a neighbor’s Monsanto crops–the seeds from the neighbors crop pollinated Schmeiser’s crops by wind (or insects or whatever, certainly not by Schmeiser’s hand).  This was not, obviously, Schmeiser’s desire, but it was beyond his–and importantly, beyond Monsanto’s–control.

Shmeiser harvested his crops and separated the seeds for next year’s crops as farmers have been doing since forever, but Monsanto stepped in and sued him for stealing their patented GMO seeds.  Schmeiser was almost ruined by this suit and was terrorized and harassed by Monsanto thugs; his wife, at one point, was afraid to leave their home.

At the end of years of harassment, hundreds of thousands dollars spent, the Canadian Supreme Court ruled that Monsanto does indeed “own” the canola seeds and that they cannot be reused, even if they were not planted in the first place!.  They also ruled that Schmeiser, because he was not actively stealing the patented seeds, was not liable for damages.  Small victory, but at least he didn’t have to pay the ridiculous amount Monsanto was demanding on top of having insisted Schmeiser’s entire crop and seeds be destroyed (you can read more about it here).

Schmeiser is just one in a long, long line of small farmers who are being threatened, harassed, sued, and shut down by Monsanto; there are more than we even know small American farmers who’ve suffered the same treatment (some were discussed in this documentary).  Governments in Canada and the U. S. are complicit in this, of course, with laws dictating what can and cannot be grown, how it can be used, etc.  Farmers are faced with the choice of either planting these government-approved GMO crops or going bankrupt.

Why isn’t the entire freaking nation not only alarmed and afraid but speaking out about this travesty?  Turns out that they are, en masse, across the globe today in the #MarchAgainstMonsanto.

Now I know it’s easy (perhaps a bit too easy) to reject such protests simply because regressives and assorted anarchists, commies, et al. are also involved.  But here’s the thing, so the frack what?  If this is wrong, then it’s wrong.  Period.  No matter who else thinks it’s wrong.  One of the things that angers me most about leftists (everyone from regressive loons to more centrist Obots) is the incredible lack of any principle at all.  They hate when Bush does something, but when Obama does the same thing or worse, they defend and support it.  They claim to hate government oppression and champion freedom of speech and the press, but the minute Obama shows his true tyrant colors, they tune out, defend it (oh, well, as long as it’s only conservatives being targeted, who cares? The TEA Party deserves to be silenced, they say!), and minimize every Constitutional and legal violation.

I refuse to do that, I refuse to consider issues and important encroachments on life and liberty only in light of whether or not leftists support or condemn them.  Too many conservatives are of the mind that if leftists hate drone strikes on civilians or on American soil, then we should automatically support them (ditto Obama’s illegal war in Libya and a myriad of other issues).  That’s mindless, knee-jerk nonsense, and we conservatives are better than that. Heaps better, actually.  So if you see anything wrong with the whole Monsanto thing–and our government, BOTH sides of the aisle, is not only complicit in but profiting from it–then learn more and stand up and be heard.  If not today, then in the near future before we are all dependent on “public-private partnerships” (aka fascism) for our food.

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.