Closer to Midnight
When I wrote A Nation on the Edge of Revolt Saturday morning, I knew that it would be taken out of context by some and well-received by others.
Perhaps the most interesting feedback I've received this far was in the comments of that blog entry, where a commenter calling himself TN_NamVolunteer wrote:What has changed my mind? What has transpired that makes me feel that patriots should gird for a possible revolution? What, as he asks, "has happened or transpired that has moved the hands of the clock of destiny closer to midnight?" These are all fair questions, and I do not have a simple answer to any of them. For example, I'm not sure that my mind has changed. We live in a nation with the longest continually-functioning government in the world. The Founders were brilliant men who set up a system of checks and balances that has kept any of our three branches of government from easily seizing power for themselves, and just as importantly, has made it difficult from them to collude with one another. It is a system that has worked better than any other for several hundred years. But just as there are no perfect people, there are no perfect governments, and all governments over time seek to grow. Governments crave power and control the way plants seek light and nutrients. The more they grow, the more they need to survive, and the more they need to take. Inexorably, this taking comes at the price of our individual liberties. Angelo M. Codevilla's recent America's Ruling Class -- And the Perils of Revolution brings us nothing revolutionary in and of itself. What Codevilla does best is bring a bit of synergy to the fractured thoughts many of us have harbored in part or in whole as we witness our nation's perilous state and the megalomania of those who have both caused so many of our problems and who simultaneously claim to be our saviors. The greatest disagreement I have with the author is that he thinks that Democrats represent the elitists and that Republicans, almost by default, represent the best hope for the rest of us. I respectfully disagree, and suspect that many who read the Codevilla article will come away with the realization that there is very little difference between Democrats and many Republicans. I also think they will agree with the author that the elitists that are entrenched in both parties have far more in common and are far more driven by the desire to further their lots in life than they are to serve their fellow citizens. As a bipartisan group, this would-be ruling class exists to increase their power, at the expense of the rest of us, the so-called "country class." But specific membership aside, the author correctly notes:
Bob/CY
I would like to ask you a question and do not need/require a personal reply, just answer here or perhaps better a reply in new post. I've read you for a number of months (years) primarily because you have been a 'level head' or a 'voice of reason' even re. other conservative blogs; and, here, once before - you said the time was not now. the question: What has changed your mind? What event or piece of information has happened or transpired that has moved the hands of the clock of destiny closer to midnight? What has changed your mind that you now "advise" us to: "prepare for war"? (for the vets here my oath was on 17JUL1968, my father's 31JAN1943)
One side or the other will prevail. The clash is as sure and momentous as its outcome is unpredictable. We have moved "closer to midnight" not because of any singular act , but because of inertia of a political class that does not respect or enforce the laws, or this nation's sovereignty. We have diametrically opposed views of how our nation can and should be run, and it appears that there is very little room left for negotiation. Propagandists for the elitists at Media Matters seem troubled by A Nation on the Edge of Revolt. They portray it as a threat when "Conservative media figures openly discuss armed revolution." I hope they do feel threatened. Attempts at peaceable protests have been met at turns by feigned ignorance, then mockery, then attacks on the character and motives of those would not sit quietly by. Perhaps it will take a serious review of our capacity for violence to get them to realize we shall not surrender our individual liberties to their lust for power. I have not yet been swayed to the point of view that an armed conflict is inevitable, TN_NamVolunteer. But we are close enough that one would be wise to prepare for a possible conflict, just as one would prepare for any coming storm. Update: Media Matters responds with the sort of "objectivity" you'd expect. 08/11/2010 Update: Brad Reid at the aptly named Crooks and Liars has joined the shrieking liberal chorus. I invite his readers, like those of Media Matters and Daily Kos, to read my response, Defending Liberty.
The ruling class's appetite for deference, power, and perks grows. The country class disrespects its rulers, wants to curtail their power and reduce their perks. The ruling class wears on its sleeve the view that the rest of Americans are racist, greedy, and above all stupid. The country class is ever more convinced that our rulers are corrupt, malevolent, and inept. The rulers want the ruled to shut up and obey. The ruled want self-governance. The clash between the two is about which side's vision of itself and of the other is right and which is wrong. Because each side -- especially the ruling class -- embodies its views on the issues, concessions by one side to another on any issue tend to discredit that side's view of itself. One side or the other will prevail. The clash is as sure and momentous as its outcome is unpredictable.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 12:10 PM
Comments
1
The issue, as I see it, is not so much the government but the bureaucracy that has sprung up to support all this feel-good, "we really, really care for you" legislation. The bureaucratic overload is enormous. Not too long ago, it required $2 of administration to deliver a dollar in benefits; It's heading for 3 to 1 with no indication the increased administration is having any effect but stifling the economy as the administrative burden increases.
Private businesses typically run an administrative burden of about 5 to 10%. They have to watch their expenses or the company goes out of business. The erroneous assumption of this era is that governments, especially the United States, cannot go 'out of business', they can default; become unable to provide services promised. California and other states are teetering on the edge of default.
The federal government has been growing itself for decades. Default is not an impossibility. We need to shut down the stuff that no longer works. I propose to fight bureaucracy with bureaucracy.
I propose to establish a Bureau of Government Efficiency whose sole task is to identify government programs that have completed their task, become outdated, are corrupt, ineffective or outright criminal. Once identified, BuGE pulls their funding. Just to be sure they do their job, BuGE has no budget; Their only budget comes from programs and agencies they have shut down. This is not unlike the Base Closing Commission which was instituted to take the politics out keeping or closing military bases. BuGE would report to the President. Congress and the courts would have some ability to countermand BuGE's decisions. The point is that the bureaucracy, Congress and the President will be scrambling like mad to protect their sacred cows while BuGE grows to devour them and then dies off to a more manageable level.
What politician could stand and publicly vote against government efficiency? What media outlet is going to sing the praises of waste, fraud & corruption? Once in place, it would become a behemoth devouring sinecures by the thousands. For that matter, as our President has so amply demonstrated; who needs the approval of Congress? He can start BuGE then stand aside as the carnage begins while devoting his attention to more pressing issues.
Private businesses typically run an administrative burden of about 5 to 10%. They have to watch their expenses or the company goes out of business. The erroneous assumption of this era is that governments, especially the United States, cannot go 'out of business', they can default; become unable to provide services promised. California and other states are teetering on the edge of default.
The federal government has been growing itself for decades. Default is not an impossibility. We need to shut down the stuff that no longer works. I propose to fight bureaucracy with bureaucracy.
I propose to establish a Bureau of Government Efficiency whose sole task is to identify government programs that have completed their task, become outdated, are corrupt, ineffective or outright criminal. Once identified, BuGE pulls their funding. Just to be sure they do their job, BuGE has no budget; Their only budget comes from programs and agencies they have shut down. This is not unlike the Base Closing Commission which was instituted to take the politics out keeping or closing military bases. BuGE would report to the President. Congress and the courts would have some ability to countermand BuGE's decisions. The point is that the bureaucracy, Congress and the President will be scrambling like mad to protect their sacred cows while BuGE grows to devour them and then dies off to a more manageable level.
What politician could stand and publicly vote against government efficiency? What media outlet is going to sing the praises of waste, fraud & corruption? Once in place, it would become a behemoth devouring sinecures by the thousands. For that matter, as our President has so amply demonstrated; who needs the approval of Congress? He can start BuGE then stand aside as the carnage begins while devoting his attention to more pressing issues.
Posted by: Jerry in Detroit at August 03, 2010 03:05 PM (WMmcr)
2
I like to characterize the current climate as the "Early John Adams" period.
Posted by: flavius at August 03, 2010 04:13 PM (eHO33)
3
Since you brought up the idea of revolution, I gotta ask. How much thought have you given to the idea of killing your fellow Americans? Could you line someone up in rifle sights and pull the trigger? Just something to consider before you revolt.
Posted by: Rafterman at August 03, 2010 04:22 PM (gAVTo)
4
Attempts at peaceable protests have been met at turns by feigned ignorance, then mockery, then attacks on the character and motives of those would not sit quietly by.
Don't omit the threats and acts of outright violence by the thugs of the ruling class(es) against those who protest. The violence committed by the Left will only increase; it is, after all, their response to challenge. I predict that protests and tea party assemblies will encounter greater violence in the next few months in order to intimidate and discourage.
Don't omit the threats and acts of outright violence by the thugs of the ruling class(es) against those who protest. The violence committed by the Left will only increase; it is, after all, their response to challenge. I predict that protests and tea party assemblies will encounter greater violence in the next few months in order to intimidate and discourage.
Posted by: iconoclast at August 03, 2010 04:36 PM (MZd0C)
5
"Attempts at peaceable protests have been met at turns by feigned ignorance, then mockery, then attacks on the character and motives of those would not sit quietly by."
Maybe you're starting to get some idea of how we felt back in 2003.
My point being, we have more in common than we generally care to admit. What do you think of the possibility of the beaten-down left and the beaten-down right getting together for some small-d democratic action? (In the abstract, of course)
Maybe you're starting to get some idea of how we felt back in 2003.
My point being, we have more in common than we generally care to admit. What do you think of the possibility of the beaten-down left and the beaten-down right getting together for some small-d democratic action? (In the abstract, of course)
Posted by: Evan at August 03, 2010 04:53 PM (LPjQW)
6
We need to require a budgetary process that requires more effort to eliminate government spending instead of finding additional ways to spend in order to get reelected. I propose a congressional veto where each congressman would be required to recommend a line item of the budget that would then have to receive a majority vote to remain in the budget. This would have a political chance of getting through because it does give the congressman some additional power and might actually limit some of the abusive spending.
Posted by: Steven L. Hanson at August 03, 2010 06:29 PM (vQ4Az)
7
I am not optimistic about the nation avoiding violence. Our rulers are getting increasingly desperate to find more ways to increase government's take, in order to avoid curtailment of obscenely bloated salaries, leave, and pension benefits, and will show up in increasing numbers at tea party events in their purple shirts. Thugs will increase their intimidation of peaceable protesters (there have already been numerous incident, invariably precipitated by union thugs and ignored by the media) until one day, several will pummel a protester only to eat bullets. Cops will massively step in on the side of the union thugs (they're on the same side, and frequently in the same union), and the war will be on. I hope and pray that I'm wrong, but there seems to be some inevitability to the way things are progressing.
The violence will of course originate with the leftist thugs, but that is not the way it will be portrayed in the media, and the media themselves will risk becoming targets of the tea partfiers, who see them --- correctly --- as aligned with the ruling class and the union thugs. It won't be pretty.
The violence will of course originate with the leftist thugs, but that is not the way it will be portrayed in the media, and the media themselves will risk becoming targets of the tea partfiers, who see them --- correctly --- as aligned with the ruling class and the union thugs. It won't be pretty.
Posted by: Spartan79 at August 03, 2010 06:35 PM (SK5U6)
8
I abhor voilence, yet I increasingly feel it is inevitable. When it comes, the first targets should be the MSM. Let's copy previous revolutionary tactics - sieze the control of information from the grasp of the communists/socialists. We might hav e to destroy that village in order to secire a free and indepemdent press. The 1st Amendment should also apply to the Internet.
Posted by: SicSemperTyrannus at August 03, 2010 08:13 PM (EAESv)
9
Oath of office aside (including my Dad and Son's): being prepared is not any type of fault. I'm certain that many conservative, USA-loving, constitutionally aware citizens and veterans alike are just as prepared to vote, attend town hall meetings, and pray, as they are to oil a weapon and check the sights. I'm just as prepared for peace as conflict. Vigilance is not evil.
Posted by: Robert17 at August 03, 2010 09:13 PM (LaaRT)
10
Why might revolution be necessary? Actually, it's relatively simple and the Founders spelled it out in detail. Remember too Hubert Humphrey, certainly no republican reactionary, who observed that tyranny seems very unlikely to Americans, but is always possible.
May I offer one simply metric by which we can judge? When our elected officials have an idea for a law or policy and proceed this way, democracy is safe:
"...OK, so we're all agreed this might be a good thing. But is it constitutional? Does the Constitution give us the specific power to do that? It's not? It's doesn't? Too bad. We can't do it then. What's next on the agenda?"
If, however, when those we elect (or who were elected by the votes of the dead, convicted felons, or folks who voted early and often--interesting how such people tend to vote Democrat) proceed this way, we're in trouble:
...OK, so we're going to do this. How can we shape the narrative and messaging to push it through before it can be stopped? What's that? The republicans are going to say it's unconstitutional? Yeah, right. OK, so we call the SEIU and..."
When we stop measuring our actions by the limits of the Constitution, when we no longer accept the concept of constitutional limits, the possibility of revolution becomes very real indeed. It becomes real because substantial numbers of Americans do understand and revere the Constitution and all of those who established it, and who have, for more than two centuries, maintained it with their blood and toil. They understand that we do indeed have domestic enemies, and that they are, in many ways, more dangerous than foreign enemies.
No rational person wants this to happen, but thank God there remain sufficient Americans to recoil in horror at the fact that the current administration is so anti-American and so immoral that such might become necessary. And thank God too that should it become necessary, they will defend the Constitution. If that becomes necessary, like our Founders, these new patriots will indeed be risking their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor. For those who understand no principal except their own pleasure and comfort as provided by an all encompassing, omniscient government, this is surely an alien concept.
May I offer one simply metric by which we can judge? When our elected officials have an idea for a law or policy and proceed this way, democracy is safe:
"...OK, so we're all agreed this might be a good thing. But is it constitutional? Does the Constitution give us the specific power to do that? It's not? It's doesn't? Too bad. We can't do it then. What's next on the agenda?"
If, however, when those we elect (or who were elected by the votes of the dead, convicted felons, or folks who voted early and often--interesting how such people tend to vote Democrat) proceed this way, we're in trouble:
...OK, so we're going to do this. How can we shape the narrative and messaging to push it through before it can be stopped? What's that? The republicans are going to say it's unconstitutional? Yeah, right. OK, so we call the SEIU and..."
When we stop measuring our actions by the limits of the Constitution, when we no longer accept the concept of constitutional limits, the possibility of revolution becomes very real indeed. It becomes real because substantial numbers of Americans do understand and revere the Constitution and all of those who established it, and who have, for more than two centuries, maintained it with their blood and toil. They understand that we do indeed have domestic enemies, and that they are, in many ways, more dangerous than foreign enemies.
No rational person wants this to happen, but thank God there remain sufficient Americans to recoil in horror at the fact that the current administration is so anti-American and so immoral that such might become necessary. And thank God too that should it become necessary, they will defend the Constitution. If that becomes necessary, like our Founders, these new patriots will indeed be risking their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor. For those who understand no principal except their own pleasure and comfort as provided by an all encompassing, omniscient government, this is surely an alien concept.
Posted by: mikemcdaniel at August 03, 2010 10:30 PM (AL1KP)
11
Love the MediaMatters piece on you. Its not like the whole objective of that post was to put pressure on the newspaper for hiring you or anything. Nawwww.....
Typical.
Typical.
Posted by: Phil at August 04, 2010 12:13 AM (5IXVT)
12
Bob/CY
Thanks for the "personal" reply. Also, 'tis excellent advice to "prepare for any coming storm".
best regards,
Tom Shipley
Thanks for the "personal" reply. Also, 'tis excellent advice to "prepare for any coming storm".
best regards,
Tom Shipley
Posted by: TN_NamVolunteer at August 04, 2010 12:18 AM (diBNC)
13
Bob, as an old Marine vet I share your assesment of our future. Something occurred in my life that reminded me of the many books I have read on the American revolution. It was the Tea Parties I have attended. They have ALL been made up of people from a Norman Rockwell magazine cover. This is the broadist group of voluntary people with the same purpose I have ever been a part of. But what I did sense from these groups was a feeling that there was nothing much more that we could do about the mess in DC if our effort to vote in change fails. There were patriotic people whispering that things may have gone too far this time with our government. The groups were solid people and were not the type to use loud hyperboyle. But these groups are a dertermined bunch and will not stand by and watch our country fail.
Posted by: inspectorudy at August 04, 2010 01:11 AM (KOOZL)
14
Rafterman:
On being interviewed by CNN, a Marine Sniper was asked: "What do you feel, when you know that you've just taken a human life? That by pulling the trigger you killed someones father, son or brother?"
He thought about it for a second, gazed into the long distances and replied:
"Recoil."
On being interviewed by CNN, a Marine Sniper was asked: "What do you feel, when you know that you've just taken a human life? That by pulling the trigger you killed someones father, son or brother?"
He thought about it for a second, gazed into the long distances and replied:
"Recoil."
Posted by: Big Country at August 04, 2010 04:08 AM (Z8fIq)
15
I have been saying for a while now that if the Republicans win the house this November, which they should, they will have the ability to stop this in its tracks. All I am looking for is for them to act, even if it is futile. Pass the bill to repeal ObamaCare, it will never pass the Senate or be signed by this President, but pass it anyway. Pass bills that drastically reduce spending, again it will never pass the Senate or the President but give us the indication that you get it.
If the Republicans botch it, the only way will be armed rebellion.
If the Republicans botch it, the only way will be armed rebellion.
Posted by: Sinner at August 04, 2010 08:28 AM (U/yZ+)
16
"Since you brought up the idea of revolution, I gotta ask. How much thought have you given to the idea of killing your fellow Americans?"
That question presumes that I view those people as "fellow Americans." That's a very big presumption that might not be true. It's increasingly obvious that those people look at me not as a "fellow American," but as a serf who's expected to bow and scrape in the presence of his betters.
"Could you line someone up in rifle sights and pull the trigger?"
Been there, done that, wore the t-shirt.
Any more silly questions?
That question presumes that I view those people as "fellow Americans." That's a very big presumption that might not be true. It's increasingly obvious that those people look at me not as a "fellow American," but as a serf who's expected to bow and scrape in the presence of his betters.
"Could you line someone up in rifle sights and pull the trigger?"
Been there, done that, wore the t-shirt.
Any more silly questions?
Posted by: Ken Prescott at August 04, 2010 08:34 AM (KCVUU)
17
Ah yes, the usual response of the dunce who can't frame an argument. You can't win on the merits of your views, so you resort to physically threatening the rest of us. Your entire argument consists of, "Shut up or we'll hurt you."
Please explain why I should regard you or anyone else who fantasizes about killing me, my husband, my family and friends for our beliefs, with any less contempt than I regard Islamic fanatics, Stalinists, or Nazis who want to kill us for our beliefs.
Please explain why I should regard you or anyone else who fantasizes about killing me, my husband, my family and friends for our beliefs, with any less contempt than I regard Islamic fanatics, Stalinists, or Nazis who want to kill us for our beliefs.
Posted by: Pamela Troy at August 04, 2010 10:46 AM (bW7+7)
18
Killing, no matter whom, should never be taken lightly. I suspect that regardless of the tone of the comments here, veterans who have killed the enemy did (or do) have residual, if minor, regrets.
Having said that....
Ron Johnson, running for US Senate against Russ Feingold in Wisconsin, is running an ad denouncing Federal debt run-up as "immoral." First time I've heard that term applied to what IS 'immoral' in my memory.
The question, assuming that Johnson is correct, is therefore "What Government immorality deserves lethal retribution?"
The decision cannot be based on perceived or real arrogance, greed, or 'class distinctions'. It must be based on a rational analysis which ultimately shows that the intergenerational theft is sufficient cause for armed revolt.
The Founders perceived that lethal means were necessary after a series of immoral acts by the King and his agents. It was not merely taxes. It included violations of damn near every tenet enshrined in the Bill of Rights--quartering, show-trials, imprisonment without trial, and summary executions by English troops.
I submit that the King's actions were much worse than mere intergenerational theft, although THAT is extremely serious.
So: is it time? Not yet. I'd go so far as to say that it's not 'time' until The Regime's troops and agents begin doing what George III's boyzzzzz did.
That may be very soon, but it hasn't happened yet.
Having said that....
Ron Johnson, running for US Senate against Russ Feingold in Wisconsin, is running an ad denouncing Federal debt run-up as "immoral." First time I've heard that term applied to what IS 'immoral' in my memory.
The question, assuming that Johnson is correct, is therefore "What Government immorality deserves lethal retribution?"
The decision cannot be based on perceived or real arrogance, greed, or 'class distinctions'. It must be based on a rational analysis which ultimately shows that the intergenerational theft is sufficient cause for armed revolt.
The Founders perceived that lethal means were necessary after a series of immoral acts by the King and his agents. It was not merely taxes. It included violations of damn near every tenet enshrined in the Bill of Rights--quartering, show-trials, imprisonment without trial, and summary executions by English troops.
I submit that the King's actions were much worse than mere intergenerational theft, although THAT is extremely serious.
So: is it time? Not yet. I'd go so far as to say that it's not 'time' until The Regime's troops and agents begin doing what George III's boyzzzzz did.
That may be very soon, but it hasn't happened yet.
Posted by: dad29 at August 04, 2010 10:49 AM (3PS1w)
19
Pamela Troy fantasizes about murdering you, Bob. If you don't like it, then you are a Nazi, apparently. And if Pam doesn't like that I pointed that out... she's a racist and a Nazi.
They haven't heard of Godwin's Law over at DU?
Nazis, I hate those guys.
They haven't heard of Godwin's Law over at DU?
Nazis, I hate those guys.
Posted by: brando at August 04, 2010 04:52 PM (IPGju)
20
brando: Pamela Troy fantasizes about murdering you, Bob.
I've done nothing of the kind, and you know it.
I've done nothing of the kind, and you know it.
Posted by: Pamela Troy at August 04, 2010 05:33 PM (pnlG4)
21
pamela you misunderstand the argument here and mistate it. in fact your producing a diversonary straw man. no offense.
the fact is no one has expressed a desire to hunt down people and thier families for thier beliefs.
what is being talked about is where the line of tyranny is and when have the power elites crossed it.
then from the supposition of when and how the line has been crossed and we are under tyranny are we morally allowed or required to fight it, and at that point fight it by force meeting force
so do you understand? no one in this thread advocated or fantasized about a political pogram. rounding people up and wholesale executions of whole families is the tactic of the left such as communists and nazis just as you said and no one here is a nazi or a commie from the left side of the political spectrum
the fact is no one has expressed a desire to hunt down people and thier families for thier beliefs.
what is being talked about is where the line of tyranny is and when have the power elites crossed it.
then from the supposition of when and how the line has been crossed and we are under tyranny are we morally allowed or required to fight it, and at that point fight it by force meeting force
so do you understand? no one in this thread advocated or fantasized about a political pogram. rounding people up and wholesale executions of whole families is the tactic of the left such as communists and nazis just as you said and no one here is a nazi or a commie from the left side of the political spectrum
Posted by: rumcrook¾ at August 04, 2010 09:48 PM (60WiD)
22
Many great comments. I especially like "Vigilance is not evil"; nor is dedication. Pamela, if you're looking for Nazis look no farther than the SEIU thugs or the Black Panthers which were both intimidating peaceful people. We're not advocating the same behavior but rather the prevention of same.
Posted by: A Nobody at August 05, 2010 12:02 PM (fEnA4)
23
Before you call each other Nazis, remember who the Nazis were:
Nazis wanted to kill or destroy:
"the liberal media" (Hitler may have actually coined that phrase)
"Democrats"
"Social Democrats"
"Unions"
"Marxists"
"Blacks, Jews, Immigrants"
"Civil rights"
"Pacifists"
"Secularists"
"College professors"
"Religious tolerance"
"Social Justice"
"Empathy"
Bilingualism, multiculturalism
Pornography
Birth control
Jazz
Modern art
Homosexuals
People who don't support troops
Nazis wanted to kill or destroy:
"the liberal media" (Hitler may have actually coined that phrase)
"Democrats"
"Social Democrats"
"Unions"
"Marxists"
"Blacks, Jews, Immigrants"
"Civil rights"
"Pacifists"
"Secularists"
"College professors"
"Religious tolerance"
"Social Justice"
"Empathy"
Bilingualism, multiculturalism
Pornography
Birth control
Jazz
Modern art
Homosexuals
People who don't support troops
Posted by: BurfordHolly at August 05, 2010 10:01 PM (TO9vv)
24
"tactic of the left such as communists and nazis"
Well, you got one right. Naziism, regardless of that silly book to the contrary, is, was, and looks to be returning as, a rightward ideology. Just compare a list of things the average conservative hates to a list of things Nazis wanted destroyed (one conveniently posted above, looks like a CPAC issues list).
"The violence will of course originate with the leftist thugs" Certainly not from the right!!
Well, except for the cop killer in Philly, or the cop killer in California, or the Bernie Goldberg fanboy who shot up a church and its members (cuz he couldn't get to the liberals he REALLY wanted to kill), or the anti-choice freak who shot a doctor in church.
And all the violent rhetoric will probably come from the left too!!! Well, except for Glenn Beck, Sharrrron Angle, and a host of righty bloggers who think the only way to discuss policy with a liberal is a tree and a rope, and the only remedy to losing an election is a "2nd Amendment" one.
The right hates liberals, and liberalism with an unhealthy passion bordering on obsession. Regardless of their hate, we ARE still AMERICANS, and our political goals, and policy ideas have as much right as anyone else's to be heard, and debated. If you think otherwise, you are not a real American.
Well, you got one right. Naziism, regardless of that silly book to the contrary, is, was, and looks to be returning as, a rightward ideology. Just compare a list of things the average conservative hates to a list of things Nazis wanted destroyed (one conveniently posted above, looks like a CPAC issues list).
"The violence will of course originate with the leftist thugs" Certainly not from the right!!
Well, except for the cop killer in Philly, or the cop killer in California, or the Bernie Goldberg fanboy who shot up a church and its members (cuz he couldn't get to the liberals he REALLY wanted to kill), or the anti-choice freak who shot a doctor in church.
And all the violent rhetoric will probably come from the left too!!! Well, except for Glenn Beck, Sharrrron Angle, and a host of righty bloggers who think the only way to discuss policy with a liberal is a tree and a rope, and the only remedy to losing an election is a "2nd Amendment" one.
The right hates liberals, and liberalism with an unhealthy passion bordering on obsession. Regardless of their hate, we ARE still AMERICANS, and our political goals, and policy ideas have as much right as anyone else's to be heard, and debated. If you think otherwise, you are not a real American.
Posted by: William Reich at August 06, 2010 09:32 AM (HZXgS)
25
And it's worth remembering what the Nazis were FOR:
Constant war
Worship of the military
Underming people's faith in elections
Reducing history education to broad populist themes of white victimhood
A "spiritual" movement
Values education in the schools
Censorship
Reduced science education
College students ratting out professors for lack of loyalty
Torture
Abstinence
Early marriage
High birth rate
State control of the media, arts, and science
Making nationalism part of the school curriculum
Worship of an idealized version of the past
Rebellion against "weak" authority
Blaming minorities and immigrants for everything
Invoking destiny and being judged by history
Claiming to do "God's will"
Constant war
Worship of the military
Underming people's faith in elections
Reducing history education to broad populist themes of white victimhood
A "spiritual" movement
Values education in the schools
Censorship
Reduced science education
College students ratting out professors for lack of loyalty
Torture
Abstinence
Early marriage
High birth rate
State control of the media, arts, and science
Making nationalism part of the school curriculum
Worship of an idealized version of the past
Rebellion against "weak" authority
Blaming minorities and immigrants for everything
Invoking destiny and being judged by history
Claiming to do "God's will"
Posted by: Burford Holly at August 06, 2010 12:09 PM (TO9vv)
26
OK.
So I am supposed to be reassured that the revolution will not simply involve killing people who think and say the wrong things.
So who, with as much precision as possible, are the fans of revolution wanting to kill?
Fantasizing about hanging all of Congress is old hat. I presume some large portion of the judiciary will be hanged. I'd be interested in knowing which revolutionaries will decide which judges are authentically American enough, and what criteria they will use. They'll have a lot of reading to do.
I'm not surprised to see one person in the thread advocate violence against the dreaded MSM. I assume that will be broadened to include the likes of Media Matters.
How about open counter-revolutionaries -- people who openly oppose the revolution? Is it the firing squad for them?
Surely some will respond that I am misinterpreting or misrepresenting the pro-revolutionaries. That's easy to do, since so much of the revolutionary jargon is vague and subject to multiple interpretations. The recent fawning over the "ruling class" concept seems to involve a substantial widening of the scope of people to be killed --- or, at least, to be the subjects of fantasies about killing.
Is anyone who is cheering the concept of revolution willing to stand up and specify who is going to be killed?
So I am supposed to be reassured that the revolution will not simply involve killing people who think and say the wrong things.
So who, with as much precision as possible, are the fans of revolution wanting to kill?
Fantasizing about hanging all of Congress is old hat. I presume some large portion of the judiciary will be hanged. I'd be interested in knowing which revolutionaries will decide which judges are authentically American enough, and what criteria they will use. They'll have a lot of reading to do.
I'm not surprised to see one person in the thread advocate violence against the dreaded MSM. I assume that will be broadened to include the likes of Media Matters.
How about open counter-revolutionaries -- people who openly oppose the revolution? Is it the firing squad for them?
Surely some will respond that I am misinterpreting or misrepresenting the pro-revolutionaries. That's easy to do, since so much of the revolutionary jargon is vague and subject to multiple interpretations. The recent fawning over the "ruling class" concept seems to involve a substantial widening of the scope of people to be killed --- or, at least, to be the subjects of fantasies about killing.
Is anyone who is cheering the concept of revolution willing to stand up and specify who is going to be killed?
Posted by: Ken at August 07, 2010 01:51 AM (vPAlX)
27
People need to know that armed revolution should only come when the government ignores the ballot. If people are voting for idiots who will destroy our constitution, then do we have any right to revolt? No we don't. Because the will of the people trumps everything. If people want a socialist government, then that's what we are going to have.
I'm not picking up a weapon to fight against policies that were legitimately voted in. Now when the government begins to take power while ignoring the ballots, then it's time for a real revolution.
Personally I believe a socialist government is inevitable. Though I'll fight against it all the way. Each generation of our children become lazier and more irresponsible. They will be looking for somebody to take care of their responsibilities. Therefore, they will vote in politicians that promise them that they won't have to take care of anything. I hope I'm wrong, but I doubt it.
I'm not picking up a weapon to fight against policies that were legitimately voted in. Now when the government begins to take power while ignoring the ballots, then it's time for a real revolution.
Personally I believe a socialist government is inevitable. Though I'll fight against it all the way. Each generation of our children become lazier and more irresponsible. They will be looking for somebody to take care of their responsibilities. Therefore, they will vote in politicians that promise them that they won't have to take care of anything. I hope I'm wrong, but I doubt it.
Posted by: Ryan at August 09, 2010 01:37 PM (sjPJr)
28
I've never understood why those in love with socialist ways, don't just move to a socialist country? Like the guy just hired to implement obamacare, who is in love with Britian's socialist healthcare, why don't people like that just move there instead of trying to force that crap onto the greatest country there ever was, this one? Can anyone answer that? I've always wondered that. If they hate this country, then just LEAVE!
To David:
You said, "I just returned from Europe and can assure you that the world is waiting for November. If things don't change significantly, then you can expect violence."
Posted by: David at July 31, 2010 05:09 PM
Can you please expand on this statement?
To David:
You said, "I just returned from Europe and can assure you that the world is waiting for November. If things don't change significantly, then you can expect violence."
Posted by: David at July 31, 2010 05:09 PM
Can you please expand on this statement?
Posted by: Corrine at August 09, 2010 03:36 PM (06Nwg)
Posted by: Corrine at August 09, 2010 03:37 PM (06Nwg)
30
April 19 1775 the British attempted to seize a cache of weapons and powder at Lexington Massachusetts. This sparked a successful American Revolution...This is a hint.
I spent thirty years in Electronic Warfare the majority of that time as an "aggressor". I have studied planning and operations, Everyone is talking up the November elections. My fear is a manufactured emergency that will allow the regime the excuse to cancel the election. I pray I am wrong but all the signs are there. Expect a ramping up of tensions even riots through September with a major event in mid to late October that would create the "emergency". Needless to say this event will be blamed on the "Tea Party" with demands to confiscate privately owned weapons with the same result as in 1775.
I spent thirty years in Electronic Warfare the majority of that time as an "aggressor". I have studied planning and operations, Everyone is talking up the November elections. My fear is a manufactured emergency that will allow the regime the excuse to cancel the election. I pray I am wrong but all the signs are there. Expect a ramping up of tensions even riots through September with a major event in mid to late October that would create the "emergency". Needless to say this event will be blamed on the "Tea Party" with demands to confiscate privately owned weapons with the same result as in 1775.
Posted by: EWoldcrow at August 09, 2010 09:21 PM (Kal6m)
31
The midnight you speak of is not so obscure or vague as you make it to be. The machine of federal power that has become master, lording it over us, now trashes the constitution at will. It does this with aide and abetance of the servile judicary. Few in government even pay lip service anymore to constitutional governance. But worse than that has been the emergence and empowerment of the fourth branch of government, the alliance of multinationals within the government. This is the gun held to our collective heads. Our economy was broken on the backs of small farming and manufacturing by the globalists and their ilk. The jobs and the strength of our country vanished with the wind of the empty promises made. With every lost job the government and the socialist agenda advanced like the army of doom and now today freedom and liberty seem more like a cliche than a tradition. The operative term within the federal power structure is BOHICA and most of us recognize this fact. Yes, we are divided; simply because we are not united. Shamefully, we seem not able to unite "for something". And that, my friends in liberty, leaves us the lone option to unite "against something". Think about it because in the words of Bobby Dylan: "When you ain't got nothin, you got nothin to lose."
Posted by: machinewarden at August 10, 2010 01:39 AM (5s/gZ)
32
A recent poll that 67% of the ruling elite in Washington DC felt that our country was heading in the right direction while 83% of Americans felt it was heading in the wrong direction. That really shows a disconnect between those who are supposed to be serving us and looking out for our best interests and the people whom they represent. Hopefully voting is all that will be necessary, but there is a lot of damage by people not elected as well. Obamas czars and administrators have been given way too much power and equal congressional law with their decrees. They also need to be reigned in.
Posted by: 1776Federalist at August 10, 2010 11:23 AM (cQhQZ)
33
"So who, with as much precision as possible, are the fans of revolution wanting to kill?" Ken
I do you want to kill anyone and I do not think this is a revolution but instead a restoration.
"How about open counter-revolutionaries -- people who openly oppose the revolution? Is it the firing squad for them?" Ken
Again not revolution but restoration and no firing squads but actions taken to fulfill an oath I took and am still duty bound to exercise ...
"I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.
5 U.S.C. §3331"
"Is anyone who is cheering the concept of revolution willing to stand up and specify who is going to be killed?" Ken
I do not know about cheering the concept but I will oppose any who they themselves by their actions oppose the rule of law. The law of this land is the US Constitution, period.
I do you want to kill anyone and I do not think this is a revolution but instead a restoration.
"How about open counter-revolutionaries -- people who openly oppose the revolution? Is it the firing squad for them?" Ken
Again not revolution but restoration and no firing squads but actions taken to fulfill an oath I took and am still duty bound to exercise ...
"I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.
5 U.S.C. §3331"
"Is anyone who is cheering the concept of revolution willing to stand up and specify who is going to be killed?" Ken
I do not know about cheering the concept but I will oppose any who they themselves by their actions oppose the rule of law. The law of this land is the US Constitution, period.
Posted by: GWpart2 at August 11, 2010 10:18 AM (BwND/)
34
There are is a lot more to the laws of the USA than just the constitution. The constitution gives authority to states, US Codes, the president, you name it.
If you pick and choose you're just a criminal. Headed for jail or the gas chamber, eventually.
If you pick and choose you're just a criminal. Headed for jail or the gas chamber, eventually.
Posted by: Steve at August 11, 2010 11:51 AM (pQYM9)
35
And there's nothing in the constitution that says the nation HAS to have one economic system or another. Capitolism and socialism are economic systems, not political systems.
Sweden for example, is a socialist democracy,
who enjoys more freedoms than the US. The US has always had a mix of both systems. Over the past 10 years we've leaned more towards capitalism. To the joy of the ruling class and the detriment of the working class.
Sweden for example, is a socialist democracy,
who enjoys more freedoms than the US. The US has always had a mix of both systems. Over the past 10 years we've leaned more towards capitalism. To the joy of the ruling class and the detriment of the working class.
Posted by: Steve at August 11, 2010 11:57 AM (pQYM9)
36
"possible revolution"
Go ahead, I dare you. Don't forget a lot of progressives are combat hardened and we also own guns. So, you think you want to commit treason against our country? Go ahead I dare you. Our military would mop you up like a puddle of pee.
Go ahead, I dare you. Don't forget a lot of progressives are combat hardened and we also own guns. So, you think you want to commit treason against our country? Go ahead I dare you. Our military would mop you up like a puddle of pee.
Posted by: karma at August 11, 2010 12:10 PM (W13Jg)
37
Geez! What a whiner. Out of power for less than two years and you are already willing to kick over the checkerboard and call the entire game a fraud.
In America we vote for representatives. Sometimes your guy gets enough votes and wins an election. Sometimes he doesn't. That's the way it's supposed to work.
I'm sick of this minority of the US population crying foul because they only get their way most of the time, but not all of the time. You got NAFTA! You got two wars! You got ICE agents rounding up illegals! And there still isn't gay marriage! You got the Citizens United ruling helping you out! You got Gitmo! You haven't had any tax increases, either! And, we are still dependent on oil! Our public schools are still underfunded! And real wages are still falling for the lower 95%, while the upper 5% are earning even bigger salaries! Unions are on the decline, while the investing class has more power than ever! Conservatives are getting just about everything they've asked for.
So what are you complaining about? The ball has bounced in your favor for a long time. And just because some moderates are having their day in the sun..... you want to end the United States!
I'm sick of hearing conservatives complain. They compare the life we live to the Holocaust! They compare it to the Gulag! They compare it to life under Mugabe! But if you talked to people that actually lived through these events, there is NO comparison to be made.
In America we vote for representatives. Sometimes your guy gets enough votes and wins an election. Sometimes he doesn't. That's the way it's supposed to work.
I'm sick of this minority of the US population crying foul because they only get their way most of the time, but not all of the time. You got NAFTA! You got two wars! You got ICE agents rounding up illegals! And there still isn't gay marriage! You got the Citizens United ruling helping you out! You got Gitmo! You haven't had any tax increases, either! And, we are still dependent on oil! Our public schools are still underfunded! And real wages are still falling for the lower 95%, while the upper 5% are earning even bigger salaries! Unions are on the decline, while the investing class has more power than ever! Conservatives are getting just about everything they've asked for.
So what are you complaining about? The ball has bounced in your favor for a long time. And just because some moderates are having their day in the sun..... you want to end the United States!
I'm sick of hearing conservatives complain. They compare the life we live to the Holocaust! They compare it to the Gulag! They compare it to life under Mugabe! But if you talked to people that actually lived through these events, there is NO comparison to be made.
Posted by: blarf at August 11, 2010 01:13 PM (avKEm)
38
Confederate Yankee,
If you would like another civil war in this country, please commence...this time, however, we will NOT allow you back into the United States Of America...and this time, your beating will be worse than it was in the 1800's.
If you would like another civil war in this country, please commence...this time, however, we will NOT allow you back into the United States Of America...and this time, your beating will be worse than it was in the 1800's.
Posted by: MakeANoise at August 11, 2010 01:53 PM (5ovBT)
39
I'm glad to find out that there are so many cancervative christian patriots who are ready to kill people while burning down the country they love.
And you say all the violence comes from the left? When?
And you say all the violence comes from the left? When?
Posted by: ChristianLibrul at August 11, 2010 08:44 PM (Kn5Ro)
40
Pamela, I really don't care what you and the rest of the Copperheads think about me. You see, I've actually read American history and I know that an American's Founding Father is an Englishman's traitor. George Washington wasn't called the "Father of his Country" in General Cornwallis' officers mess.
Posted by: SDN at August 15, 2010 09:01 AM (V22gQ)
Processing 0.01, elapsed 0.0377 seconds.
18 queries taking 0.0303 seconds, 48 records returned.
Page size 44 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.