Posts Tagged ‘Terrorism’

Warm and Fuzzy versus Fangs and Venom — Predators Know the Difference.

December 17, 2012
Coyote_arizonaWikipediaC1

Coyotes prefer prey WITHOUT fangs and venom, thank you, very much.

Rabbit_in_montana

Coyotes, the media and Progressive elites — pragmatic predators all — prefer THESE as prey…

Rattlesnake_Dance_01

… Over THESE, as prey, although both are edible. Do we know WHY?
Yes, we do, even if the wizards in the media-government complex do not.

Just as a hungry coyote understands the important difference between a rabbit and a rattlesnake, a would-be armed robber, or a glory-seeking spree killer, understands the difference between a victim who may be armed, and one who certainly is not.

Both the rabbit and the rattler can be eaten, but preying on rattlers involves considerably more risk than preying on rabbits. Why? Fangs and venom, that’s why. A coyote or a human predator that chooses the wrong prey is more likely to end up floating, face-down, in the gene pool.

There has been supportive chatter in the media-government complex  for decades, on the efforts of the UN and American “Progressives” to  get small arms out of the hands of individuals, and make them a government monopoly.

The media tend to chide Americans who cherish their Second Amendment right, for being afraid the UN wants to take away “their deer rifles.” Silly Second Amendment types! All the UN is concerned about, the editorials say, is “rocket launchers and machine guns.”

Of course, that’s a lie. The UN, whose membership is composed mainly of tin-horn dictatorships and bankrupt, socialist dis-utopias, and the Progressives, who cherish their own safety enough to hire armed bodyguards, want to relieve all of us of all of our firearms, down to the last pellet gun and antique flintlock. It’s for our own good, right?

Hardly.

The UN’s problem is that an armed populace is a terrible inconvenience to a would-be despot. Armed citizens may not go along with certain kinds of government excesses, such as pogroms, purges, gulags, concentration camps and slavery.

Armed citizens introduce an element of risk and expense to such ventures that discourages governments from undertaking them. Beneath their veneer of compassion and care for our collective safety, the Progressives share the UN’s concerns.

Armed citizens are also a nuisance to the dictator next door, whose stupid policies have wasted all his country’s resources. He must now prey on his neighbors to satisfy his needs, and “reallocating their resources” may be difficult, if his neighbors are armed. Charitable by nature, perhaps, they may not share the great leader’s vision for their future. Their privately-owned weapons may frustrate their acquisitive neighbors’ plans long enough for regular military forces to show up and end them altogether.

On a much smaller scale, armed citizens are also a nuisance to the individual predator, who dislikes assuming the risk of attacking a crowd of rabbits, only to find that one or more of them has hidden rattlesnake fangs and venom, and the will and skill to use them in his defense, or in defense of innocents around him.

America’s founders understood this principle of nature (and of human nature), and built the individual right to be armed into our Constitution.

Coyotes, armed robbers and dictators understand this principle.

Someone, please explain it to the nation’s media-government complex, and to our Progressive elite.

Advertisements

A Kinder, Gentler Martial Law

May 29, 2012
A kindler, gentler martial Law

GOP senators have appealed to President Obama to soften the impact of martial law imposed before the national election.

Republican Senators Offer Alternative Plan for Martial Law

(Washington, October 29th, 2012)

In the wake of President Obama’s declaration of martial law last week, just weeks before the 2012 general election, moderate Senate Republicans have proposed some alternatives to the President’s executive orders authorizing indefinite detention without trial and civil asset forfeiture.

The measures were described as “draconian” by former talk show host Rush Limbaugh, who has not been heard from in several days. Senate Republicans Olympia Snow, John  McCain and minority leader Mitch McConnell came forward today with what they call “a reasonable alternative” to the emergency measures. They say they have met with Senators Harry Reid and Dick Durbin to negotiate the release on recognizance of several Republican senators, congressmen, and state governors, all of whom had been “very critical” of the emergency measures.

Senate Majority Leader McConnell spoke for the group:

“In this time of crisis, we must reach across the aisle to our colleagues and come to some sort of compromise on these executive orders. While we appreciate the urgency and severity of the situation that faces the President, we believe it is possible to deal with our unfortunate circumstances with a more moderate, measured approach.”

“We propose to allow those thousands of Americans being held incommunicado and without legal representation or charges being filed, to be released on their own recognizance from the detention camps around the country, after signing an agreement not to participate in political activity.

“They should be allowed to return to their homes, if they have not been demolished or re-assigned to needy immigrant families. They should wear a GPS-enabled house arrest ankle bracelet and keep authorities advised of their whereabouts at all times.

“Of course, we would expect the President’s National Stability Police Force to continue to hold anyone who is a real security threat, but we expect that such detainees would be tried and convicted or released within a reasonable period.”

Saying they were trying to reach missing Congressional colleagues to get a consensus in support of the compromise, McConnell expects to be allowed to meet with the President’s chief of staff to present the proposal “within the next few weeks.”

WHERE ARE THE LEADERS?

June 3, 2011

Where are the leaders?

Where are the leaders – the people who can and will lead the United States of America out of the open grave we have been thrown into by the “leaders” of the last fifty years?

Where are the passionate, honest and humble men and women who know that government running every aspect of our lives is a recipe for misery and slavery?

Where are the men and women who will place themselves under the media spotlight without a crippling need for acceptance, because they understand that the media do not share, and will never share, their values?

Where are the men and women who will laugh in the faces of liberal hacks and counterfeit intellectuals with their cries of “racist” and other cheap, cowardly epithets, and call them out as the frauds and liars they are?

What follows is the speech I want to hear from a candidate who believes himself to be one of the real leaders – one who will help us to climb out of that open grave, rather than throwing in smaller shovelfuls of dirt, and telling us everything will be fine, if we just relax and embrace the darkness.

My fellow citizens:

I want to save this country. I can save this country. I need to save this country.

We are sinking into serfdom. Our government has broken the bonds the Founders wisely put on in our Constitution, and it is becoming our master, rather than our servant.

In the unending effort to buy permanent power, our government has plunged us into debt and inserted itself into every aspect of our lives.

While it pursues permanent power, our government neglects its most urgent and legitimate responsibilities. It fails at protecting the weak against the strong, and at protecting our nation against foreign and domestic enemies. It fails at protecting our rights and property against unlawful seizure and against unlawful restrictions on what we may do in and with our own property.

In fact, government has aggressively pursued the destruction of our right to own property, and to do with that property what we wish, thus rendering the right to own property nearly meaningless.

I must tell you, my fellow Americans, that once government has rendered meaningless the right to own property, we all become the property of government. The most important difference between a slave and a free person is the right to own property and to do with it, while protecting the rights of one’s neighbors, as one wishes.

I will reverse this endless expansion of government power.

I will nominate judges to the federal bench and to the supreme court, who will treat their oaths to uphold the Constitution literally. I will ask Congress to impeach judges who violate this oath.

I will pare down drastically the bloated regulatory bureaucracy that is choking off our freedom and our ability to prosper.

On my first day in office, I will fire “czars” that are unaccountable to the people and who are openly hostile to freedom, and who have no basis for authority in the Constitution.

I will ask Congress to abolish entire executive branch agencies and departments that have no basis in the Constitution, and no goal but their own self-perpetuation and expansion of influence.

The unborn, the sick and the elderly – the weakest and most innocent among us — are fortunate, these days, if we allow them to live. The fortunate survivors are those who were not killed because they were inconvenient, embarrassing, expensive, or evidence of a crime.

Our government has, instead, made these innocents legitimate prey for the predators who will make themselves rich and advance their lethal, utopian ideals by killing them.

I will sign legislation that makes abortion and euthanasia illegal under federal law, and I will speak unflinchingly to the States, from the bully pulpit that is the presidency, urging them to do the same. I will ask Congress to send me a bill that removes taxpayer dollars from any program, foreign or domestic, that funds abortion or euthanasia. I will sign that bill into law immediately, before American taxpayers can be forced to pay for one more innocent’s death.

A citizen’s life is a citizen’s property, and the right to own that property is basic, without which no other right matters. The right to life subsumes the right to choose one’s own medical care, and to pay for it as one wishes. The current level of government interference in this right is intolerable, and illegal.

I will revoke any executive orders intended to advance Obamacare, and I will consider the federal court ruling that Obamacare is unconstitutional as binding. I will immediately revoke the authority of any executive branch agency, board or other bureaucratic structure put in place by preceding administrations to support or enforce this law.

I will instruct Congress to send me legislation repealing Obamacare completely, and I will then ask Congress to begin structuring legislation that will unleash the private sector to revolutionize health care while dramatically reducing costs and increasing the range of options available to consumers.

I would expect this legislation to include a gradual transition over several years from government-funded — and government-restricted – health care for the aged and for those who are incapable for providing for themselves. Medicare must be replaced incrementally with private medical care that patients who are capable of it can pay for themselves, as medical care was dispensed for hundreds of years before this bloated, self-destructive program came into existence. The indigent and disabled must be protected, and they will be. Those who can pay all or a share of their health care costs, though, should do so.

Contrary to the lies you are being told by the Left, this does not mean my administration would throw the sick, the elderly or the indigent out in the street to die uncared for. That is a lie, and the liars know it. What the liars are not telling you, is that Medicare and Social Security are both utopian schemes that bought a lot of votes in their day, but their day is over. We simply can’t pay for them any longer.

Let me say that again: Medicare and Social Security are both about to run out of money. If we shut our eyes to this stubborn fact, Medicare and Social Security will still be out of money very soon, and our nation’s sorry financial state will soon prevent us from borrowing any more from Communist China to keep them afloat.

Tell me, my fellow Americans, what will happen to the sick when our government-driven health care system no longer has money to care for them? Rationing. It is happening now, in every country that foolishly believed it could nationalize its health care and not face the same, inevitable consequences.

Care is being withheld, and patients are being allowed to die from neglect and by the withdrawal of basic life support. They are starving and dying of thirst in their unchanged, soiled beds. If their families do not bring them food and change their linens, they lie in their own wastes and die, slowly and in great discomfort. This is the fate of those the Left is supposedly defending against their allegedly greedy, heartless critics.

Those who are so often vocal in their expressions of compassion and concern for the sick, are the liars who cannot face the consequences of their own lies. The helpless victims, however, face those consequences daily. This is what happens when government takes away the property right of citizens to care for their own lives. They become slaves.

What government gives, government can take away – including life, itself.

This nation has a history of decades of government encroachment into our lives, decades of spending money we do not have, decades of gradually surrendering our sovereignty to creditors and to those who think we should not have borders, decades of growing generations of government dependents, decades of failing to educate our citizens in basic skills, history and analytical thinking.

We cannot reverse this disastrous course overnight. But, we must begin immediately, shouldering the burden and working against the pain that will result, because if we do not change course, we will die as a nation, just as surely as the sick will die under national health care.

We must change course. And we will.

I want to save this country. I can save this country. I need to save this country.

But, I cannot do it alone. I must have your help and support. Now, and after the election, I must have your support and your trust. With your help, and with the Lord’s guidance, we will save this country. We must save this country. We owe it to ourselves and to our posterity.

Thank you, ladies and gentlemen, for your attention. Now, let’s get to work.

May God Bless you, and may God Bless the United States of America.

The Bin Laden Raid — the Real, Final, Official Version

May 4, 2011

He's dead. Really. Probably. Or not.

The mainstream media have been frustrated in their efforts to report the most Obama-friendly version of events in the raid that resulted in the death (or not) of U/Osama bin Laden in Pocky-Stawn.

The media frustration results from the inability of the Obama administration to report a version of the story that remains uncontradicted for more than four hours.

I am offering this account in an effort to relieve the media from that frustration. I’m here to help.

Okay, here goes:

The Special Operations Group SEAL Team Six attacked the compound from helicopters, and encountered or did not encounter small arms fire in resistance. The Pocky-Stawni government did or did not know about the six years of bin Laden’s presence in the compound, and was or was not consulted before and/or after the raid as to the reason and extent thereof.

Bin Laden did or did not resist, with or without the firearms he did or did not have, and used or did not use one of his wives, or perhaps a daughter, as a human shield.

His body was or was not removed from the scene, along with computer hard drives and thumb drives, which had a treasure trove, or not, of intelligence value.

Intelligence gleaned or not gleaned from “enhanced interrogation techniques” in secret prisons over the last several years, was essential or was not used at all, or was just part of a wondrous mosaic of information, used to set up the raid and execute it over the span of less than an hour.

Bin Laden’s body was disposed of at sea twelve hours later, in a ceremony that either was or was not in conformity with Islamic laws regarding the disposal of dead muslims, because bin Laden was, or was not, a muslim.

Photos of the dead terrorist icon’s body will or will not be released to the public, because the release of said photos would either foment or prevent violence in the muslim world against muslims, or non-muslims, or someone.

Bin Laden, who was either dead years ago from kidney failure, was killed a short time ago in a missile attack, was killed in a firefight or unarmed, on sight, or wasn’t there at all, or has never existed, is expected to serve as a rallying symbol for terrorists everywhere, or as an example of what happens to terrorists if they don’t mend their ways.

PLEASE NOTE: Members of the media are cautioned to pay close attention to Obama administration press conferences, photo opportunities and talk show appearances over the next several weeks while material facts and details of these events evolve, revolve, appear and disappear.

There I hope this helps.

WHERE’S WIKILEAKS (AS OF THIS MOMENT)?

December 3, 2010

WHERE’S WIKILEAKS?

Whose couch is WikiLeaks sleeping on, today? The “.org” domain is no more, thanks to Fox News Radio on WLAC for that info! It’s now (or most recently, anyway) “.ch” in Sweden.

C:\Documents and Settings\Tom Cox>tracert wikileaks.ch

Tracing route to wikileaks.ch [88.80.13.160] over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.0.1
[local ISP hops] –
9 83 ms 86 ms 85 ms TenGigE0-0-0-0.GW4.ATL5.ALTER.NET [63.122.230.125]
10 116 ms 93 ms 91 ms 0.ge-1-1-0.XT1.ATL5.ALTER.NET [152.63.82.253]
11 82 ms 93 ms 93 ms 0.so-5-1-0.XT1.ATL4.ALTER.NET [152.63.0.85]
12 82 ms 91 ms 96 ms TenGigE0-6-1-0.GW7.ATL4.ALTER.NET [152.63.80.133]
13 94 ms 91 ms 94 ms teliasonera-gw.customer.alter.net [157.130.90.238]
14 100 ms 109 ms 109 ms ash-bb1-link.telia.net [80.91.247.172]
15 110 ms 110 ms 104 ms 80.91.248.201
16 200 ms 226 ms 201 ms kbn-bb1-link.telia.net [80.91.247.114]
17 204 ms 208 ms 230 ms s-bb2-link.telia.net [80.91.248.50]
18 210 ms 224 ms 216 ms s-b3-link.telia.net [80.91.249.220]
19 210 ms 214 ms 319 ms tsic-206.kn1.sth.portlane.net [213.248.66.206]
20 215 ms 238 ms 228 ms i2b-154.kn1.sth.portlane.net [80.67.0.154]
21 227 ms 225 ms 213 ms sth-sod1-crdn-1-ge-1-2-801.i2b.se [178.16.212.10]
22 247 ms 227 ms 221 ms sth-sln1-crdn-1-ge-2-3-800.i2b.se [178.16.212.5]
23 216 ms 207 ms 213 ms cust-prq-nt.i2b.se [178.16.212.2]
24 210 ms 247 ms 203 ms mail.wikileaks.org [88.80.13.160]

Trace complete.

WHOIS search:

[Querying whois.ripe.net]
[whois.ripe.net]
% This is the RIPE Database query service.
% The objects are in RPSL format.
%
% The RIPE Database is subject to Terms and Conditions.
% See http://www.ripe.net/db/support/db-terms-conditions.pdf

% Note: This output has been filtered.
% To receive output for a database update, use the “-B” flag.

% Information related to ‘88.80.12.0 – 88.80.13.255’

inetnum: 88.80.12.0 – 88.80.13.255
netname: PRQ-NET-INT
descr: prq Inet – Access
descr: Customer / link addresses
country: SE
admin-c: pIN7-RIPE
tech-c: pIN7-RIPE
status: ASSIGNED PA
mnt-by: MNT-PRQ
source: RIPE # Filtered

role: prq Inet NOC
address: PRQ AB
address: Box 1206
address: SE 11479 Stockholm
address: Sweden
remarks: !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
remarks: !! Abuse reports should ONLY be sent to abuse@prq.se !!
remarks: !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
abuse-mailbox: abuse@prq.se
admin-c: PW1115-RIPE
tech-c: PW1115-RIPE
nic-hdl: PIN7-RIPE
mnt-by: MNT-PRQ
source: RIPE # Filtered

% Information related to ‘88.80.0.0/19AS33837’

route: 88.80.0.0/19
descr: Periquito aggregated route
origin: AS33837
mnt-by: MNT-PRQ
source: RIPE # Filtered

Hamas-linked CAIR to Muslims: Pat yourselves down in airport security checks

November 25, 2010

Burqa_afghanistan_01.

Just let them pat themselves down. It'll be fine. (Courtesy Wikipedia)

Hamas-linked CAIR to Muslims: Pat yourselves down in airport security checks

CAIR wants muslim women in veils to offer to “pat themselves down” to satisfy the TSA at the airport.

If the TSA goes for this exception — and who will be surprised if they do — it will validate my suspicion that the “enhanced” security measures have less to do with security than with conditioning the traveling public to being treated like presumptive criminals, stripped of dignity, privacy and any sense of their bodies as their own property.

This will make them fit better into the brave new world Dear Leader has in mind for us.

Muslims, like socialists and communists, are already collectivists with a diminished sense of personal sovereignty, and thus, already are a better fit in the new order. Thus, they will get a pass, although it is temporary.

Eventually, Marx and Lenin have to step into the ring with Allah and Mohammed, and decide once and for all which religion will run the world… until then, muslims get a pass.

Happy “EVERYBODY DRAW MOHAMMED” Day! Long Live Free Speech!

May 20, 2010

Happy EVERYBODY DRAW MOHAMMED DAY! Long live FREE SPEECH!

Tennessee’s Eighth, and Conservative Ideals versus the Republican Establishment

February 14, 2010

More on Tennessee’s Eighth

I got some reactions from Donn Janes on my earlier essay on history and current events in the Tennessee Eighth Congressional District. His comments add great value to the discussion, so I thought I’d produce an addendum trying to take them into account.

The most important item is that I need to correct a crucial factual error. I described Donn Janes as one of “two Republicans [who] have stepped up…” to fill the seat to be left vacant by Tanner’s retirement.

Oops. Fundamental error… Janes is running as an independent, having explicitly divorced himself from the Republican Party and its many betrayals of Conservative standards and ideals. I registered as an Independent in Dickson County when we moved here, after decades as a Republican in Indiana, for the same reason. I should have been a lot more aware of the difference.

As if to scold me immediately for neglecting the best arguments for the parting of ways between Establishment Republicans and constitutional conservatives that has taken root in the last few years, I found a column by Alan Keyes posted Friday, February 12, in World Net Daily that distills the grounds for divorce. Some excerpts are reproduced here, but I strongly recommend the original article for the patient, scholarly and thorough dissertation that Alan Keyes, as usual, produces.

“In the days when my awareness of the U.S. political scene was just budding there were politicians in the Republican Party who openly identified themselves as liberals. For this sort of fact Wikipedia is as reliable a witness as any other:

“‘In the 1930s ‘Me-too-Republicans’ described those who ran on a platform of agreeing with the Democratic Party, or proclaiming only minor or moderating differences. A prime example is presidential candidate Thomas E. Dewey, who did not oppose New Deal programs altogether, but merely campaigned on the promise that Republicans would run them more efficiently and less corruptly. …’

“’From 1936 to 1976 the more centrist of the Republican Party frequently won the national nomination with candidates such as Alf Landon, Wendell Willkie, Thomas E. Dewey, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford. Indeed, other terms for liberal Republicans include Nixonian and Rockefeller Republican.’

“If this take on the GOP presidential candidates of the 20th century is accurate (and I think it is) it confirms the notion that, for all their posturing in opposition to the Democrats on particular issues, the controlling powers of the Republican Party have no quarrel in principle with the New Deal worldview. On grounds that are at once aesthetic, practical and self-interested, they decry the excessive Democratic tendency toward openly populist egalitarianism. Yet, impelled by a self-adulating sense of noblesse oblige, they tacitly concede that the Democrats’ “liberal” agenda represents the higher ground of moral sophistication. What the liberal GOP elites reject is their frequent lack of sophistication in carrying out that agenda.

“In this respect, I suspect that the preferred candidate of the GOP elites in the 2008 election was … Barack Obama. He had all the outward appearances of cool sophistication, purposefully controlled moral passion and seeming respect for the ironically unselfish elite ambition benevolently to secure a position of unchallenged control over every aspect of human life. He seemed so moderate.”

Ouch. A better rebuke for my neglectful lumping of a conservative independent and a nominal Republican together was never delivered. Thank you, Doctor Keyes.

Stephen Fincher certainly impressed me in our telephone conversation as a conservative at heart, using the Republican establishment framework to get to power. That was a subjective impression, however, with no corroborating evidence.

As I said, Mike Pence’s interest in Fincher made me interested in him. However – always, the however – as I mentioned before, Mike and I are not in lockstep on several issues of importance.

I have not forgotten Mike’s embrace of a very McCain-like form of “immigration reform.” It was a rotten idea when McCain championed it, and it was no better with Mike Pence out in front of it.

I also do not agree with Mike’s tendency to go along with “anti-terror” legislation that has the effect of making America less of a fortress than a prison. If we want a safer country, let’s put the bars on the outside, not on the inside.

I have always harbored the irrational hope that  Mike was immune to the effect of cumulative exposure to the insidious, Inside-the-Beltway atmosphere he has been subjected to since January, 2001. Rationally, I have to admit that no one is completely immune to those effects – even Mike Pence.

I doubt that he has succumbed to the wiles of special interest like the United Autoworkers Union or the Sierra Club, but I can’t rule out that he may have been co-opted by an equally-powerful influence in his environment – the Republican establishment.

I described before, my phone conversation with Stephen Fincher. It would be reassuring to see the conservative, constitutionalist views I heard from him then, explicitly laid out on his Website. I would be especially impressed to see him step away from the farm policies that are the oldest vestige of socialism in American government, and that have done as much damage to the free market in agriculture as government involvement in health care has done, and will continue to do, to the free market for that industry.

My favorite civics text is by Libertarian P. J. O’Rourke: PARLIAMENT OF WHORES — a Lone Humorist Attempts to Explain the Entire U.S. Government. The author of this caustic, penetrating and hysterically funny appraisal of our “system” of government yields up the following observation concerning American “farm policy:”

“Farm policy, although it’s complex, can be explained. What it can’t be is believed. No cheating spouse, no teen with a wrecked family car, no mayor of Washington, D.C., videotaped in flagrant has ever come up with anything as farfetched as U.S. farm policy.”

If Stephen Fincher can convincingly break free of the web of obligation and obfuscation of current farm policy, emblematic as it is of what is wrong with the U.S. government, I, self-appointed mayor of Lower Danley Road, northeastern suburb of the unincorporated area of Bellsburg, Tennessee, will give him a serious, second look. As a farmer in a farming community, Stephen Fincher would be showing his allegiance to principle over economic and political self-interest by disavowing government farm policy, and the integrity required to take that step would be very impressive. As cordial and genuine a gentleman as Stephen Fincher is, I’ll have to wait to believe that when I see it in print.

The problem right now in Tennessee’s Eighth is the same problem we have had all over America as a result of going along with the Republican Establishment. The elephantine elite are distinguishable from Democrats/Progressives/Socialists/Economic Fascists only in style; not in substance. We who have followed this herd have swept up enough elephant dung to keep the compost heap going indefinitely. We don’t need any more.

Or, as Alan Keyes summarizes, in the piece cited above:

“People are now rising in opposition to the all-too-conclusive evidence of the Obama faction’s repugnant extremism. But they urgently need to ponder the fact that the phony moderation of the GOP leadership elites did more than anything else to put Obama where he is. Unless we look beyond the false alternatives they offer, we will only enable equally false election victories that will not put an end to the destruction of American liberty Obama represents.”

With apologies to Stephen Fincher, if I had to vote in the Tennessee primary today, I’d vote for Donn Janes.

Begging for Money, and Pretending to Care What Conservatives Think — The Latest RNC “Republican Party Census Document”

July 30, 2009

I’d like to thank the Republican National Committee for inspiring this post.

Yes, I got another of their “surveys,” today. They must not pay much attention to the ones people send back unless they also contain a donation, which mine have not for about a decade.

Just so the RNC knows I’m not just spouting off on somebody else’s “census,” here’s my survey’s special, secret registration number:

051680-790130

509576472

I’d give you my individually-issued “Voter District Code,” but I’d have to kill you.

I can only stand to plod through a few representative questions, because so many of them are focused on the trivial, while ignoring the monstrous. My replies, all of which go well beyond the largely meaningless “yes” or “no” options, follow each question.

Now, on to the “census document”!

ECONOMIC ISSUES

1) Should we unite as a party to oppose President Obama’s huge tax increase on the American people, particularly the new tax on dividends, capital gains and small businesses?

As much as I would like to help out those who receive dividends, et al, I am really more concerned about the free-fall path to a socialist dictatorship the Republican “leadership” has offered to Obama, by lying down and letting him and the Democrats walk over them like a cheap doormat.

This passive acceptance of socialism and wholesale violation of the Constitution (heard of it, Republicans?) got a real boost under “your” President, George W. Bush, and would have continued under McCain.

Remember the Bush prescription drug welfare program – up to then, the biggest single expansion of government spending since LBJ? Remember “No Child Left Behind,” taking an already-invalid public education system and saddling it with a huge backpack full of federal mandates and no way to pay for them? Gross negligence on securing our national borders? Micromanaging (and largely handcuffing) the military in Iraq and elsewhere? And, as a last hurrah, how about that financial sector bailout, courtesy of George W. Bush, the “compassionate conservative?”

With that for recent history, who could be surprised that Republicans in Congress have rolled over and let Obama put the wholesale government violations of the Constitution into overdrive? Has it escaped your notice, RNC,  that Obama has nationalized two auto manufacturers, and appointed 30-some “czars” – unconstitutional, unaccountable, un-vetted and unqualified in any respect other than as cronies of The One — to run nearly every aspect, of our economy and personal lives?  Why haven’t you Republicans walked out of Congress in protest, and gathered en masse on the Capitol steps to declare you would be no part of such an outrage? If you did, I missed it. The last time you showed that much backbone was during the “Drill here, drill now” campaign, which was encouraging, but oh, so brief.

DOMESTIC ISSUES

Is the Republican National Committee so morally bankrupt, cowardly, so self-serving and/or so terminally stupid that it needs to be TOLD to oppose illegal immigration, “card check,” trial lawyer welfare, a taxpayer-funded, Obama-worshiping  corps of  brainwashed, brownshirt thugs, and the “fairness doctrine” censorship program for all media, including the Internet?

Okay, that isn’t an actual question, but it should have been. Unfortunately, the short answer is, “Yes.” Over the last hundred years, it has become obvious that Republicans include a large contingent of progressives who share Woodrow Wilson’s and Barack Obama’s and Hillary Clinton’s goal of weakening the United States and its fundamental principles to the point of irrelevance, so that it can be absorbed into a transnational government.

From Theodore Roosevelt right through John McCain, Republican “leaders” have been leading us over a cliff into subservience to the UN or its equivalent, by promoting a politically-driven court system, an irrelevant, emasculated legislative branch, and real power concentrated in an enormous, unelected bureaucracy.

At least, Obama was honest when he told a campaign audience in Missouri, days before the election, that he was going to “transform this country.” That is just what he is doing. He is making more of what the progressives call “progress” toward transforming the United States of America into a post-Constitution, socialist pseudo-democracy in months, on its way to becoming a communist dictatorship, than his most ambitious predecessors made in nearly a century.

The Republicans, meanwhile, grouse and pout about his methods, and wonder what will be left of the multinational corporations to which they have traded their souls for cushy lobbying jobs after they earn their cushy Congressional retirements. Will the big bucks still be there by the time they resign, or Congress is dissolved by executive order, or they are voted out of office by a contingent of ACORN thugs and illegal aliens, or…

FAMILY AND SOCIAL ISSUES

[Let me paraphrase and condense, for brevity]: Should Republicans allow Obama, Reid and Pelosi to pack the supreme court with liberal sock puppets, force taxpayers to finance abortions overseas, and allow partial birth abortion at home?

Sure, why not? Isn’t that what Republicans would have done if John McCain had accidentally won the election? And the loyal Republican base would be looking around, befuddled, wondering how this happened, and who is to blame.

HOMELAND SECURITY ISSUES

Are you (the former Republican voter, in my case) in favor of gutting the Patriot Act, and other […] laws that promote the safety and security of all Americans, blah, blah, blah?

Does it matter? We conservatives and Constitutionalists were in favor of a border fence, and it hasn’t been built. We still have the most porous border of any supposedly sovereign nation on earth, with thousands of illegals every week, including criminals and terrorists, pouring across like a continuous tidal wave.

Our Border Patrol agents are afraid to pick a place to go to lunch without the advice of an attorney, for fear of being blindsided by their administrators, or an Obama political operative. Bush gave them the back of his hand, as well. Ask former agents Ramos and Compean. Where was the RNC during that outrage?

We were adamantly and vocally opposed to laws that would allow illegal immigrants to stay and flourish on the taxpayers’ dime, and the titular leader of the Republicans was and is still promoting such laws.

Our troops are similarly hamstrung by stupid and self-defeating Defense Department policies, but the Obama administration is considering bringing the troops home to keep us in line, in the event of an emergency. What do you want to bet the civil rights hacks and community activists will be nowhere to be found when the troops get orders to bang on our doors and confiscate privately-owned firearms in some real, or ginned-up, national emergency?

Or, will that be left to Obama’s brownshirts, trained in “summer camps” at taxpayers’ expense to go out and throw their weight around, while the Republican Congressional leadership makes Elmer Fudd noises about being “vewy, vewy careful” with the civil rights of unfavored classes?

Are you in favor of air strikes against nations that harbor terrorists, and space-based missile defense?

Will any defense system ever get out of Congress without political and international law restraints so tight as to render it useless? Will Republicans care enough to do anything beyond casting safe, timid votes, and shrugging their shoulders in resignation when the Democrats bury them under procedural maneuvers? Will the Obama administration ever sign off on any air strike that doesn’t take out Israel or Taiwan? Not before consulting with Iran, Venezuela and Cuba, certainly. In other words, all questions about defense policy are moot.

FINALLY, THE INEVITABLE APPEAL FOR MONEY

I would go on, but I can’t stand it anymore. Besides, about all that’s left is the appeal for money, which was the point of the mailing in the first place. If I can’t give them $500, how about giving them $250? Hah.

Their last stand is, “However, I have enclosed $12 to cover the cost of tabulating my survey.” Shoot, if they can’t tabulate a stinking survey for a lot less than $12, they’re no better qualified to govern than the Democrats. But, we already knew that, didn’t we?

Besides, they’ll ignore the results and go with the path of least resistance anyway, so, what’s the point? I’d rather set a pile of money on fire, or spend it on a much more worthwhile cause, like buying somebody a copy of The 5000 Year Leap.

I’d buy the RNC a clue, but, talk about a waste of time and money….

Hey, Glenn Beck: Is There a “Reichstag Fire” in Our Future?

July 23, 2009

I’m a reasonably faithful Glenn Beck Program listener, or, as you call us, a “sick, twisted freak.” There are many reasons why I became a member of your audience. In addition to being informative and thought provoking, you are often funny – LMAO, ROTFL funny. When you and your crew get a bit silly, the humor flows freely, and I love it.

I really appreciate you recommendation of The 5000 Year Leap as reading material, and I am about finished with my first pass through your modernized adaptation of Thomas Paine’s Common Sense.

I am currently preoccupied with one of the recurring themes of your program (at least the radio show, which I listen to on XM radio) that isn’t laughable. It is obvious that it is very important to you to discourage your listeners from any impulse to gather up the “pitchforks and torches” and descend upon the castle, demanding that the authorities hand over the monster. I understand it’s your way of admonishing us not to follow the example of Timothy McVeigh.

I take your point. One of many things I am not is a trained soldier. Another thing I am not is a cold-blooded murderer. McVeigh was both, and I do not regret his execution. I do regret that we did not have more time to interrogate him as to his accomplices, other than Terry Nichols. Did he have ties to Iraqi intelligence, as alleged by Jayna Davis in The Third Terrorist? Was his hatred of the US government his only motivation, or were there others? We may find out some day, but not from McVeigh. I agree with the quote from you I found on her Website, that we need a 9/11-style Commission on the Oklahoma City bombing.

Anyway, Glenn, I repeat: I take your point. I have not been recruited into revolutionary violence by Glenn Beck, or anyone else. I do not feel on the verge of becoming a serial killer, a guerrilla, a bandito, or a freedom fighter toting RPGs and EIDs.

Morality apart, you explain your practical opposition to “taking up arms”: it will give the Obama administration, sinking in the polls and facing disenchantment among the gullible, and new skepticism from unexpected directions, including among former friends – a pretext to leap right over the intermediate stage of socialism/corporate fascism, right into a dictatorship that has much more in common with the last century’s grand utopian experiments than with anything good that “hope and change” could bring about.

It is not just a very great leap from a “mandatory voluntary” Obama Youth Corps, the nationalization of health care and the giants of the auto and financial industries (except for a few close friends and generous campaign contributors), to the wholesale and explicit, rather than piecemeal and implicit, suspension of the Constitution – and to martial law.

The magnificent socialist utopian experiments of the 1900s killed more people and wasted more wealth and resources in a single century than all the socio-political systems tried in all the rest of recorded history (with the possible exception of the first thousand years of political Islam – accurate stats on that are hard to come by). There is no reason to believe that this latest bunch of unaccountable, self-righteous, arrogant ideologues would do any less damage than their failed predecessors.

That would not keep them from trying, of course.

But, Glenn, what makes you think an armed uprising among some serious believers on the right would be necessary to provide the pretext for dictatorship? Have you not read about the Reichstag Fire? One man could do it.

A lone Dutchman, Marinus van der Lubbe, was caught at the scene of the Reichstag fire, confessed, and described in detail his procedure for spreading fire in the old structure. British intelligence agent Denis Sefton Delmer, who wrote that he was on the scene at that fire in 1933, reports his conclusion that van der Lubbe was plausibly the lone arsonist responsible for the destruction of the historic German parliament building. Delmer says senior fire investigators reenacted the attack following van der Lubber’s detailed account, and found that one man could have quite easily done the deed. Other evidence gathered after the fire tended to support the “lone arsonist” theory.

The truth became less and less important, even before the smoke cleared. The Nazis pounced on the event to accuse the Communists of committing the attack as the signal to begin a concerted, premeditated terror campaign, including “dynamiting, incendiarism and mass murder” all over the country.

The Soviet Communists fabricated and spread legends to convince the public that in the immediate aftermath of the fire, the building had been found to be crawling with Nazi Stormtroopers, who were supposed to have spread the fire so quickly, and, implausibly, hung around to watch it burn. Delmer, under his cover as a reporter in that period before open conflict between Britain and Germany, asserts that he entered the building in the wake of Hitler and his entourage as soon as the fire was under control, and that there were no Stormtroopers in evidence.

None of the Communists’ efforts to capitalize on  the event  mattered, either, because Hitler and Goering, his adroit propaganda minister, successfully used the event to persuade the Germans to give the Nazis extraordinary authority over them — only for the duration of the emergency, of course – which his party used to round up the Communists and any other opposing political leadership, and to curtail free speech and opposition political activity nation-wide.

Hitler only had to invoke the Germans’ historic animosity toward Russia to justify his “conclusion” that the Soviet Communist political apparatus was on the verge of attempting a coup d’état. That van der Lubbe was a different brand of Communist – one with lasting hostility toward the Soviets – mattered not at all. The Germans reacted by allowing Hitler to stage his own coup d’état, without firing a shot. The Third Reich, and the War of Revenge, The Great Patriotic War, or World War II — depending on the version of history by which you choose to describe it – followed shortly.

History, as is often repeated, has a way of repeating itself. If the history presented by Mr. Delmer is accurate, one man, a small cadre, a group of government agents or, say, some “community organizers” could light the American Reichstag Fire, if the benefits seem to outweigh the risks, or – just for a bit of evil fun. The key factor in the succession of events isn’t the exact nature of the initial act, but the reaction to it by authority, and the willingness of the media to question or swallow the “official” explanation that best fits the political agenda.

With people such as Rahm Emanuel in positions of influence in the Obama White House, it’s unlikely that Emanuel’s maxim that, “[y]ou never want a serious crisis to go to waste” would be ignored for long.

All it takes is a crisis – real, imagined or staged. Is our Reichstag Fire smoldering at this moment?

Does it even have to be a “manmade disaster? Nope. How about a natural one that affects most of the country, like a New Madrid earthquake that crumbles every bridge over the Mississippi, or a huge solar flare that wipes out the national electrical infrastructure? Neither event would be unprecedented. Nature has served this continent both dishes before.

And, if nature won’t step up and provide a “serious crisis,” how about the Iranians, with their “peaceful” nuclear power, that, for some reason, requires the parallel development of Intermediate Range Ballistic Missiles (IRBMs)? Those wacky, nuclear North Koreans can’t be counted out, either.

If so, Glenn, then what? You, Rush and Sean will disappear from the airwaves, and we sick, twisted freaks will be on our own. It forces one to think the unthinkable, doesn’t it?