Higher Education in America: An Obot Snapshot

I’m reading the sophomoric tripe that leftists are shilling lately, and I can’t help but wonder if they have any self-awareness, any clue at all about how immature and intellectually-barren they sound.  Did you see the snort- and cringe-worthy Why Obama’s the bestest president of all bestest presidents EVAH column written by an Ed.D.?  In itself it’s a depressing commentary on the state of higher education in this country; it’s also a sad and terrifying look into the Koolaid-addled brain of a typical higher ed Obot.

Here goes my response to this intellectually-challenged, eternally-juvenile doctorate’s 12 reasons Obama is the biggest, bestest, most historicalist president in the history of history’s greatest, bestest presidents!:

1. He is for The People. Say what you will about Barack Obama, but unlike the many presidents who preceded him, he cares about what is best for the greater good. He truly does represent The People. His actions have always been motivated by a sincere desire to do what is best for the majority, even if it meant losing ground with the wealthy, influential or powerful minority.

It is intellectually, spiritually, economically, emotionally, and in every other way impossible to be both for the people and for The Greater Good.  The Greater Good always subverts the rights and liberty of the people; indeed, that’s the very premise by which it exists and by which it justifies perpetrating untold horrors on the people.  In every commie, totalitarian scheme throughout history a few million people have had to die . . . for The Greater Good.  And even so, The Greater Good is never met, these regimes always fail.

As to that last part, just look at the list of wealthy, influential, and powerful people, groups, companies, and unions exempted from the ObamaCareTax fiasco.  Rebuttal complete.

2.  He is for civil rights. He has consistently spoken on behalf of the disenfranchised, the underdog and the most controversial members of society -despite the fact that it was politically unpopular to do so at the time. His outspoken support of gay marriage is an excellent example. Gay marriage is, and has always been, a legal and civil rights issue -not a moral one as conservatives would have you believe. Obama’s open support of gay marriage speaks to his core values and his inherent belief that there truly should be justice for all.

Actually, the “underdogs” are the people most harmed by every single one of Obama’s domestic policies.  It’s not an accident that welfare, food stamp, disability, unemployment claims, and every other form of government handouts have exploded under Obama, and it’s no accident that unemployment among America’s minority population has risen to all-time highs.  It’s also no accident that the income gap between the rich and poor has risen exponentially under Obama‘s reign.

As to Obama’s “evolving” view on gay marriage, he’s not always been outspoken about it; indeed, he’s spent a lot of time supporting traditional marriage.  Obama’s idea of “justice for all” is distinctly racist, as evidenced by his DOJ‘s refusal to prosecute the New Black Panthers while going after states for requiring proof of citizenship to vote.

3. He is for one race -the human race. In just a few short years, Obama’s professional achievements and continued demonstration of equality and integrity have done wonders for race relations. America has never been more unified as a people than it has been under the direct leadership of Barack Obama. Finally, the racial lines that have divided blacks and whites for decades seem to be narrowing.

This one made me laugh out loud.  Literally.  There are, demonstrably, hundreds of examples of Obama throwing gasoline on increasingly tense race relations in this country, and it would take hours to find and link them all, so I’ll just include three instances of Obama inciting racial disharmony: “the police acted stupidly,” “If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon,” and his campaign accusing Bill Clinton of being a “racist” (this latter set the tone for the media, Hollywood, and random leftists screeching “RAAAAACIST” any time anyone disagrees with Obama’s policies.).

4.  He is for a healthcare system that brings hope and healing to the hurting. Obama’s healthcare plan has allowed uninsured Americans to reap the benefits of a universal healthcare system. A suffering child should never be turned away because his or her mother doesn’t have health insurance. To deny medical assistance to people who desperately need it is barbaric. Obama’s health care plan has placed America among the world’s greatest superpowers who demonstrate care and compassion toward its constituents with healthcare that serves all.

No. He’s not. The ObamaCareTax catastrophe has nothing to do with hope or healing.  Or “the hurting.”  It has everything to do with amassing control and power in the executive branch.  It doesn’t “serve all” (and therefore is not “universal”), and it never will (be); it was never intended to do or be so. Indeed, according to the CBO, 30 million people will not have coverage after 0Care is fully implemented.  Yes, that’s roughly the same number of people that the law–billions of dollars ago–was supposed to help.

No “suffering child” was ever “turned away” under the “old” system; emergency rooms turning away a patient because of inability to pay is illegal and was well before the 0Care nightmare.

5. He is for the middle class. Here are just a few of the comments made by President Barack Obama in recent months: “Rebuilding our economy starts with strengthening the middle class. Extending tax breaks on 98 percent of families now would give hardworking Americans the security and confidence they need.” In July 2012, during a visit to Cedar Rapids, Iowa, he said, “The vision of a strong middle class is what we’re fighting for. What we need is somebody who’s going to fight every single day to grow the middle class because that’s how our economy grows, from the middle out, from the bottom up, where everybody has got a shot. That’s how the economy grows.” Enough said.

Perhaps the most deluded point here (if not the most hilarious).  The middle class has been eroding for a couple or three decades in all fairness to Obama, but that’s been ratcheted up under his “rule”, with more and more people out of work, forced into part-time work (largely by 0Care but also by a stagnant economy that Obama’s done nothing substantive or meaningful to turn around), and heavily taxed in new and exciting areas (despite Obama’s pledge not to increase taxes on anyone making more than $250k per year).

6. He is for women’s rights. Obama’s very first executive action as President was to sign the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, a bill specifically designed to annihilate wage discrimination barriers for women. He also fully funded the Violence Against Women Act, which addresses the criminality of sexual assault and domestic violence and provides women with the services needed to overcome such atrocities. President Obama nominated two women to the Supreme Court, including the first Latina justice in American history. Furthermore, Obama has taken exceptional measures to secure grant money for women business owners and get them a fair shake from the Small Business Association.

Another completely deluded argument . . . unless you believe that women are nothing more than reproductive and sexual vessels.  If that’s your argument, you win!  Obama does indeed stand for women having early and often abortions (as birth control, no less) and access to “free” birth control pills and “morning after” abortion drugs.  He’s also a big proponent of late term abortions and the denial of medical care to a baby who survives the “abortion” process.  So yeah, if infanticide is your thing, Obama’s your guy.

And if paying 13% less to women is your idea of gender equality . . . chalk up another win!

Oh, and woohoo! The Obama regime will hand out money to Julias who are dependent not on a man but on her Big Brother-, father-, or husband-government.  What a win for women!

7.  He is for doing away with pomp and circumstance. Let’s be real -Obama is one cool cat. As the 44th president of the United States, he has changed the face of the Oval Office forever. Many suggest Obama’s casual demeanor and informal interaction with the American people is inappropriate, and even downright offensive. Millions of people, however -me included -perceive his relaxed deportment, humorous candor and outright honesty as a breath of fresh air. In spite of the fact that he is a politician, and the president, there is something about him that makes him real and relatable. Even though he is the most powerful man in the world, he is, at heart, just a man. In almost four years under perhaps the most intense public scrutiny ever placed upon an American president, he has never lost sight of the fact that he bleeds red, just like everyone else.

Ignoring, as we really must, the “cool cat” weirdness here; how can anyone claim that Obama does away with “pomp and circumstance”?  When he and his wife (and dog) aren’t taking separate planes to the same destination (within hours of each other, no less) or hosting lavish parties on our dime, they are reveling in excesses that defy logic during this time when Americans are hurting economically.

I, for one, am not at all impressed with Obama’s fake accents and bizarre-sounding attempts to pretend he’s . . . whomever his current audience wants to meet (to be fair, I also hate this when Hillary Clinton does it.).

As to his “deportment,” he’s an absolute embarrassment.  I will say that his rare moments of candor (“you didn’t build that,” and “it’s good for everybody when you spread the wealth around“) are noteworthy, but absolutely not so because they make him more “relatable” (I can’t even begin to express my deep loathing for that “word”).

“Outright honesty”? Really? About what?  That we can keep our plan and our doctor?  That our health care costs will decrease by $2,500 per year?  That 0Care won’t add “one dime” to the deficit?  That 0Care wouldn’t cover elective abortions?  That the Benghazi attack that resulted in the rape and torture of an American ambassador and the deaths of three other Americans was due to a video?  That he doesn’t know anything about anything until he sees it on the news or reads about it in the paper?

8. He is for the environment. President Barack Obama has taken a forward thinking approach to creating a red, white, blue and green America. His policies and initiatives for a clean energy economy have had an incredible impact on the future of the nation. For instance, the U.S. reduced oil imports by more than 10 percent from 2010 – 2011. That’s more than 1 million barrels a day. The Administration continues to seek ways to reduce America’s dependence on oil, promote efficient energy and invest in clean energy practices. Read more about Obama’s environmental strategies here.

Obama could give a rat’s patootie about the environment (note above on his and Mooch taking separate planes within hours of one another); he cares about control.  He cares about bankrupting the coal industry and sending electricity and gas prices “skyrocketing.”  And he cares about this not because he believes in the AGW hoax but because he’s a Marxist ideologue who truly believes that America is evil, that it oppresses other countries just by being, and that we should spread our wealth around (not only in-country, but around the world).

As to the bizarre and erroneous claims that Obama has done anything at all to lessen our reliance on foreign oil . . . that has happened not because of his policies (which seek only to limit oil, coal, and natural gas production in America) but despite them.

9.  He is for veterans. Obama has consistently promoted the allocation of funds, increased benefits, job opportunities and extended resources for our nation’s veterans. Although Obama never served in the U.S. Armed Forces, he has always been a responsible and thoughtful commander-in-chief. Unlike his predecessor -G.W. Bush -he has always been conscious of the fact that troops serving in combat zones are sons, daughters, mothers and fathers. He has never lost sight of the commitment, dedication and sacrifice made by the brave men and women who volunteer for military service and he has been adamant about rewarding them accordingly.

Where to start on this one?  His treatment of the Fort Hood terror attack survivors?  His shutting down open-air war memorials out of spite? His first response to any government cuts is to target the military?  His requiring a Marine to violate regulations in order to hold an umbrella for Dictator Won?  His crotch-salute of the American flag?  His requiring that all military personnel be disarmed in his presence?  His repeated insistence that the United States military is “his” and that they “fights on [his] behalf“? His regime’s attacks on Christians and conservatives in the military?  His dismissal of hundreds of generals and other high-ranking military officers whom he deems too patriotic?

10.  He is for peace. Let us never forget that Barack Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009 -one of the greatest accomplishments any man or woman could hope to achieve in a lifetime. The award reads, “The Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 is to be awarded to President Barack Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The Committee has attached special importance to Obama’s vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.” During his presidency, Obama successfully ended the war in Iraq and is close to finally putting an end to the conflict in Afghanistan and bring our troops home for good. Speaking of Afghanistan, remember public enemy number one, the King of Terror? It was under Obama’s order that Osama Bin Laden was annihilated and put out of the warmongering business for good.

Obama’s “for peace”? Really?  That must explain why he unilaterally and unConstitutionally took us to war in Libya and why he was chomping at the bit to march us off to war in Syria (on the side of al Qaeda, nonetheless!).  That would also explain his alienation of our allies and his rush to destroy our own nuclear arsenal as he encourages Iran to build one of their own and ignores Russia’s lack of stupidity in refusing to destroy their own nukes.

Yeah, a weakened America, a strengthened Iran, Russia, and China, and roiling unrest throughout the Middle East . . . a sure recipe for peace.

11.  He is for education. Obama has always been an advocate for education, making it a top priority during his administration. Believing education is what brings about the strength of a nation, Obama has set a goal for the U.S. to have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world by 2020. He has increased federal funding and doubled the amount of grant money allocated to students seeking a higher education to cover rising tuition costs. During his presidency, Obama also passed the White House Initiative on Educational Excellence for African-Americans and the White House Initiative on Educational Excellence for Hispanics to ensure equal education for people of color.

He’s “for education” if by that one means indoctrinating our nation’s youth in his cult of personality and refusing to allow the teaching of American history and civics, then sure, he’s all for educating America’s children in the finer points of anal and oral sexual intercourse, leftist protesting, and that Obama is an actual messiah.

As to the goal of producing the highest number of college graduates in the world, that’s going to be easy because colleges are giving out A’s like candy, being bullied and shamed into lowering standards, and basically making a college degree a joke (the author of this “12 reasons” article is a prime example of the type of student who would not have made it past the first semester of freshman year even three decades ago . . but now not only holds a doctorate in education but actually serves as chair of his department!).  This all breaks my heart because I believe in higher education, or at least in the long-lost theory of it.

12.  He is for entertaining the masses. If we have to listen to a president yakitty-yak about this or that for another four years, we might as well pick one with charisma and charm. If you can’t find anything else appealing about Obama, you can’t deny the fact that the guy is an amazing speaker with wit, fantastic comedic timing and an incredible intellect. In fact, I will go so far as to say that when the man does finally retire from politics, he has a rewarding and lucrative job as a stand up comic awaiting him if he so chooses. When’s the last time you heard a president joke about drinking beer, belt out Al Green with poise and precision at a moment’s notice and admit to watching the Kardashians?

Holy crap!  Can’t you just see this written out, painstakingly, in crayons?  We want a president who can “entertain the masses”?  Whose most promising post-presidential career is that of opening act for Carrot Top?  Really?

I have no words.

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.

We’re All Extremists Now

So this is making the conservative internet rounds:

extreme

h/t Todd Starnes, FOX News

Apparently, the Army is being trained to spot terrorists, especially those dastardly evangelicals, Catholics, Jews, Mormons, and anyone with a “Christian identity” (whatever that means).  Oh, and let’s not forget those people who worship in the church of “Islamophobia,” a well-known and oft-practiced religion.  (Good grief)

Troubling on many levels, of course, but my question is why is the Army being warned about ANY terror or extremist group operating in the U. S.?  The United States military should only be fighting on American soil in the event of an invasion by enemy forces, and they should only be doing so to fight the invading enemy, right?  Don’t we have law enforcement, the FBI, and a string of other domestic law enforcement agencies?  So why is the military being trained in this at all?  Or are we in the U.S. (count how many of those extremist groups are tagged “U. S.”) now under the “all enemies foreign and domestic” clause . . . because the Commander in Chief said so?

Perhaps it isn’t as sinister as tin-foil hat Fuzzy imagines, perhaps it’s “simply” that the military is “ready to purge Catholics and Evangelicals.”  Whatever it is, it’s not good for any American of any religion because apparently believing in any God, having any religion, is now enough to get you investigated for possible terror ties . . . not that anyone mentions investigation anymore.

Nothing quite so regressive as a “progressive,” right?  Religious persecution here we come!  Let’s just hope that burning at the stake or gas ovens aren’t on the tiny tyrant’s 21st-century list of genocidal techniques.

Pre-SOTU Ponderings

Tonight the big 0 will be delivering yet another State of the Union address.  Sigh.  When at all possible, I avoid listening to this man.  He’s a despicable, horrible, tiny little person in whom I vest no admiration and for whom I have even less respect.  Despite this, I do have a morbid curiosity about what he’ll say this year.  This curiosity is rooted in the strange and troubling transformation he’s undergone since his reelection; the real him is becoming more and more clear to everyone but his most die-hard salivating Obots.  And it’s not pretty.

Besides, I’ve posted on each of his previous SOTU’s (he didn’t deliver one in ’09):

2010: POS BO’s SOTU: WTH?

2011: The SOTU In A Nutshell

2012: BO’s Subterfuge of the Union Address

What do I expect from tonight?  I’m not entirely sure because I’m not sure how much of his hand he’s confident enough to reveal, but based on his inauguration speech, I do expect it to be even more transparently leftist than any previous such speech.  And I expect it to be loaded with buzz words that are designed to unruffle the feathers of center-right Americans.

He loves to toss out things that sound like he “gets” America but that actually have nothing to do with true American sentiment or our foundational beliefs.  So he’ll talk about guns as if they are only for sport hunting or shooting skeet in mom jeans, saying things like hunting is an American tradition or some such nonsense.  And he’ll talk about rugged individualism . . . in the context of the “federal family” he seeks to impose (it’s very like Hilary’s “village,” by the way, as you’d expect from a collectivist loon).  He’ll talk about “who we are as a people,” and most of us won’t have any idea what he’s talking about because he not only has no idea who we, the people, are, but he doesn’t even understand that he doesn’t understand.

His speech will cover a laundry list of things that are anathema to the majority of American people:

Amnesty, gay marriage, forcing religious institutions and individuals to act against their conscience, global warming (or climate change, whatever the newest catch phrase is for this hoax), raising taxes, fair shares, infrastructure, teachers, guns, and our individual responsibility . . . to the government (i.e. 0 himself) and to a lesser degree to the collective.

Things he won’t mention:

His kill list, his drone attacks on American citizens, Benghazi and our raped and murdered ambassador, the fact that there has not been a federal budget during his entire presidency, the fact that war deaths have sharply increased under his “leadership,” the amassing of ammo by his administration, the numerous unConstitutional executive orders he’s signed and intends to sign, drone activity in the U. S., the fraud that it took to “win” the election, the fact that death panels are indeed a prominent feature of “cost-savings” in the 0CareTax, or the fact that Gitmo is still open and that he not only extended President Bush’s warrantless wiretaps but added to their scope and intrusiveness.

Things he may mention but shouldn’t:  his new healthy housing initiative whereby the federal government imposes requirements on homeowners to meet as yet unclear “healthy” standards (this is in compliance with, added to, and/or justified by the 0CareTax monstrosity), his nuclear disarmament plans (whereby the only country who currently has nukes and won’t in the near future is the United States; all other countries, of course, will keep theirs), the fiscal benefits of the 0CareTax (there are none, so far it’s a complete failure in every way–“not one dime” was a lie; “illegal immigrants won’t be covered” was a lie; “if you like your health insurance, you can keep it” was a lie; “abortion won’t be covered” was a lie; and on and on) except that it does seem it will fulfill its goal of shutting down private health insurers), and his “cyber-security” plans (i.e. a kill switch).

But who knows, maybe he’ll surprise us all and actually tell us the real state of the union:  we’re broke, divided, pissed off (on both sides of the aisle), and teetering on the brink of at least two (more) wars.  Three if you count the civil war he seems intent on creating.  Naw, he’s not got an honest bone in his body.  Add that to the fact that he’s a coward, and we can expect more happy BS that sounds right but isn’t.

 

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.