Useful Idiots, Part II
"Revolution, man!"
"Yeah, like anarchy, man!"
"We're gonna take it back from the fat cats, man!"
"Power to the people!"
Mr. Obama, the POTUS, is a Marxist. Marxists care nothing for "the people," who are merely an abstraction, useful only in their temporary, situational utility to the state. Marxist leaders and their states have no conscience, recognize no limits on their power, and if history is any judge, inflict upon 'the people" terrible suffering such that it eventually destroy the very state they claim must be immortal, for Marxist theory can never be wrong, it can never be falsified even as the state crumbles around their ears.
Marxism is utterly incompatible with democracy. When these world views conflict, one must give way, which in our democracy causes Marxists to settle for varying degrees of Socialism just as leftist Bill Clinton was forced to settle for centrist policies. But Bill Clinton is not Barack Obama. Mr. Clinton was a conventional leftist American politician while Mr. Obama is an entirely different political animal. The protestors want Revolution? Since the coronation of Mr. Obama, millions of patriotic Americans have been urgently motivated to return to the first principles of our Founders as embodied in Thomas Jefferson's 1787 aphorism: "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." What, such Americans wonder, would be sufficient cause for rebellion? What would cause Americans to rise against the federal government? Obamites freely call patriots contemplating these profound questions terrorists, radicals and worse, but how can those contemplating our foundational principles be radical? Our Founders well understood that freedom, once gained, is not eternally secured. They knew that the threat of armed conflict to regain freedom lost would always be present. They knew that it would once again become necessary to preserve liberty and to secure the inalienable rights of men, among them, life, liberty and property. Marxists recognize and honor no such rights. They admit only to state-bestowed privileges which may be altered or revoked without notice or concern for the welfare, health or the very lives of "the people," they rhetorically claim to love and represent. Here are the seeds of Revolution, but not the safe, secure Revolution imagined by the pampered children of privilege. Weak, unschooled mentally and physically in the arts of survival, they would be among the first to perish in the kind of conditions they foolishly seek to create. What might be the triggers of the real kind of Revolution the Founders foresaw? Colonial Americans were far from united on the specific usurpations, or their degree, which might spur them to armed conflict against their Government. So it is today. Marxists recognize only that Revolution which brings them to power and which maintains it. American patriots seek that bright line, that trigger, hoping it is never necessary to cross it. What conditions might provoke real Revolution? Running thousands of guns to Mexican killers to provoke support for gun control policies is a good start (remember, Marxist states have no conscience). National economic collapse such as the kind now more and more possible certainly will. Wiping out from 8.9 to 25% of our electric generating capacity surely will. The blackouts in periods of peak demand, particularly in southern and northern states, would cause unprecedented suffering, plunging entire regions of the nation into the social conditions of the late 1800s. Hundreds of thousands, even millions, will die with the elderly, the very young, and the ill among the first to perish. As food spoils in unpowered refrigerators, as water cannot be pumped to homes, as sewers no longer function, as trucks can no longer deliver food which can't be refrigerated anyway, as all manner of communications we have come to depend upon vanish essentially overnight, Americans will be provoked to unimaginable despair, desperation and rage. They will be particularly provoked by the fact that none of it was necessary, by the indisputable fact that Barack Obama chose to make it happen and the Congress did not stop him. Americans watching children, parents, spouses and friends dying on the altar of environmental and Marxist economic purity will not be moved to tolerance, moderation and accommodation. None responsible will be safe. Americans will put up with a very great deal, but the Obamites and the rebels without a clue occupying Wall Street foolishly seek to implement policies that will inevitably unleash forces they are utterly unprepared to resist and which they will not survive. Am I advocating armed rebellion? Certainly not, but even as staunch a liberal as Hubert H. Humphrey understood these issues: "Certainly one of the chief guarantees of freedom under any government, no matter how popular and respected, is the right of the citizens to keep and bear arms. This is not to say that firearms should not be carefully used and that definite safety rules of precaution should not be taught and enforced. But the right of the citizens to bear arms is just one guarantee against arbitrary government and one more safeguard against a tyranny which now appears remote in America, but which historically has proved to be always possible." I pray that sufficient Americans will oppose, through democratic means, all of Mr. Obama's usurpations, and will correct our national mistake in 2012. To whatever degree Americans have been forced to contemplate rebellion, the fault rests on the doorstep of the White House. We appreciate aphorisms because they not only remind us of our essential nature, but illuminate useful, universal truths. Obamites and faux-rebels would be wise to heed this one: "Be careful what you wish for; you just might get it."Posted by: MikeM at 12:48 AM
Comments
1
"There are many parallels between the rebels without a clue of the 60s and these equally clueless children of privilege, including no understanding of the system they wish to overthrow or the horrors unleashed should they be successful."
which is hardly surprising as they're in large part the children and grandchildren of those same useless idiots from the 1960s (most of whom never grew out of it, instead becoming the BHOs and Cindy Sheehans of today.
which is hardly surprising as they're in large part the children and grandchildren of those same useless idiots from the 1960s (most of whom never grew out of it, instead becoming the BHOs and Cindy Sheehans of today.
Posted by: JTW at October 10, 2011 01:32 AM (oU0J/)
2
Shows how stupid these country hicks are in America. Makes one understand why the country has such a terrible image of the state-fat, toothless, uneducated idiots. This country is in this terrible condition because of one person---Bush, so if you want to blame someone then blame him. And welcome the next president of the United States--Barack Obama, because yes he will be elected again, so it doesn't matter what you stupid hicks think.
it boggles the mind that people take the idea that Obama is a Marxist/Socialist/Fascist seriously and are willing to make a fool of themselves by admitting it publicly.He isn't a marxist, you're just a racist liar!
it boggles the mind that people take the idea that Obama is a Marxist/Socialist/Fascist seriously and are willing to make a fool of themselves by admitting it publicly.He isn't a marxist, you're just a racist liar!
Posted by: -1Questionman at October 10, 2011 04:30 AM (ojWG1)
3
@1questionman, calling people stupid hicks is kind of unproductive and demonstrates a very infantile mindset. Having said that, anyone who thinks BHO is a Marxist or Socialist obviously has no grasp of what those words actually mean, and has almost certainly never met either one. Maybe the writer should speak to an actual Socialist and hear their opinions on BHO, who is a corporatist Democrat and knows how to serve the capitalist elites with the best of them.
Posted by: Ted Gold at October 10, 2011 08:42 AM (8CSt3)
4
So, what you are saying 1Qman, is that you see a strong correlation between one's genetic makeup (this 'race' which you speak) and political leanings?
Posted by: Druid at October 10, 2011 09:42 AM (7MFxV)
5
I don't care WHAT 'ism' BHO is, as far as I'm concerned it doesn't matter, it is the damage he has done to this country that needs to be addressed. Obama has damaged the country nearly beyond the capacity to repair it. The move to cripple coal generated electricity is only one facet of the damage.
The rule of law has been flouted by the very department that is responsible for enforcing it, the economy has been damaged by ruinous policies and other outrages too numerous to mention.
The occupy Wall Street ninnies are just fleas on the body politic. The main problem are the various governmental departments that are infested with left-wing ideologues who are determined to bring about a 'fundamental change' in our way of life. It isn't enough to get a new president, we need a thorough house cleaning.
The rule of law has been flouted by the very department that is responsible for enforcing it, the economy has been damaged by ruinous policies and other outrages too numerous to mention.
The occupy Wall Street ninnies are just fleas on the body politic. The main problem are the various governmental departments that are infested with left-wing ideologues who are determined to bring about a 'fundamental change' in our way of life. It isn't enough to get a new president, we need a thorough house cleaning.
Posted by: NevadaSteve at October 10, 2011 09:50 AM (Q6IZg)
6
Dear Readers:
I call Mr. Obama a Marxist and assert that he is promulgating Socialist policies because I have taken the time to extensivly research his background. His associations, mentors and friends during his formative years were virtually all self-described communists or socialists and in his two (?!) autobiographies, Mr. Obama admits that in college he chose to hang out with Marxist people and organizations. He hired an avowed Marxist (Van Jones) and a woman whose favorite historical character was Mao (Anita Dunn), the most prolific communist mass murderer in history. Every one of his hires in the Department of Justice have been people with far, far left, even socialist and communist associations and ties.
His rhetoric is the rhetoric of class warfare and his underlying economic principle is redistribution of wealth, both fundamentals of Marxist thought. Regarding the idea that some Socialists don't like him or consider him impure, there is more than ample evidence that Mr, Obama consciously practices stealth socialism, which is the American way of necessity. That such people violently object to the suggestion that Mr, Obama is a Marxist/socialist may well be case of people objecting too much.
It is useful to use such labels because they are far more descriptive of his writings, rhetoric and actions (ObamaCare, anyone?) than any label reserved for conventional American politicians such as Bill Clinton. Is there anyone that doubts that without the restraints of our democratic institutions, Mr. Obama would have turned us into a European Socialist state--or worse, by now?
I'm entirely comfortable with such labels in Mr, Obama's case, labels that have, by the way, nothing whatever to do with race. People of all races have been caught up in the totalitarian, anti-Democratic impulses of Marxism, which shrivels the soul and destroys the mind equally well regardless of skin color.
Call him what you wish, but work together to give America a fighting chance in 2012.
I call Mr. Obama a Marxist and assert that he is promulgating Socialist policies because I have taken the time to extensivly research his background. His associations, mentors and friends during his formative years were virtually all self-described communists or socialists and in his two (?!) autobiographies, Mr. Obama admits that in college he chose to hang out with Marxist people and organizations. He hired an avowed Marxist (Van Jones) and a woman whose favorite historical character was Mao (Anita Dunn), the most prolific communist mass murderer in history. Every one of his hires in the Department of Justice have been people with far, far left, even socialist and communist associations and ties.
His rhetoric is the rhetoric of class warfare and his underlying economic principle is redistribution of wealth, both fundamentals of Marxist thought. Regarding the idea that some Socialists don't like him or consider him impure, there is more than ample evidence that Mr, Obama consciously practices stealth socialism, which is the American way of necessity. That such people violently object to the suggestion that Mr, Obama is a Marxist/socialist may well be case of people objecting too much.
It is useful to use such labels because they are far more descriptive of his writings, rhetoric and actions (ObamaCare, anyone?) than any label reserved for conventional American politicians such as Bill Clinton. Is there anyone that doubts that without the restraints of our democratic institutions, Mr. Obama would have turned us into a European Socialist state--or worse, by now?
I'm entirely comfortable with such labels in Mr, Obama's case, labels that have, by the way, nothing whatever to do with race. People of all races have been caught up in the totalitarian, anti-Democratic impulses of Marxism, which shrivels the soul and destroys the mind equally well regardless of skin color.
Call him what you wish, but work together to give America a fighting chance in 2012.
Posted by: Mike Mc at October 10, 2011 11:53 AM (/SIbp)
Posted by: Orion at October 10, 2011 09:26 PM (lD7QZ)
8
@1Questionman The OWS crowd are not country hicks rather pampered spoiled elitist urbanites.
Country Hicks are more likely to be found at a Tea Party rally and THEY do not leave a mess like the Progressive Left does.
I understand the OWS folks have a nice juicy bank account of donations, wonder if anyone has thought about having a summary judgement issued freezing that account until funds are placed into escrow for cleaning up and restoring the park after they have wrecked it??
Country Hicks are more likely to be found at a Tea Party rally and THEY do not leave a mess like the Progressive Left does.
I understand the OWS folks have a nice juicy bank account of donations, wonder if anyone has thought about having a summary judgement issued freezing that account until funds are placed into escrow for cleaning up and restoring the park after they have wrecked it??
Posted by: Dan Kauffman at October 10, 2011 10:20 PM (hxRR8)
9
The Tea Party wanted their liberties left alone. The "Wall Street" twits want a free lunch. This administration needs to be put in a zoo. At least they would be behind bars.
Posted by: Mike at October 10, 2011 11:39 PM (Tyr6c)
10
I don't know if you noticed... but there veterans, soldiers, and union workers next to the clueless youngins. Not everyone who supports OWS is a twit. That's just who is shouting the loudest. They're more like you than you think, they're unhappy with the system. If anyone here is a twit, it's you, for allowing the media to brainwash you with their divisive strategies. You want change in America? We all gotta work together. Otherwise, we can sit here all day squabbling while the guys on top laugh at us.
Posted by: anonymoose at October 13, 2011 03:54 PM (C1WeZ)
11
Wz6w7c zavmavsgddse, [url=http://jlmxtjcnrdee.com/]jlmxtjcnrdee[/url], [link=http://omqptubgzxfu.com/]omqptubgzxfu[/link], http://capwhchxpaqm.com/
Posted by: rljeoi at October 16, 2011 03:54 PM (WOVGQ)
Processing 0.0, elapsed 0.0177 seconds.
18 queries taking 0.0146 seconds, 19 records returned.
Page size 19 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.