“I know that much as I’m aware of right and wrong, and freedom and tyranny, the first time someone puts a knife to my or my children’s throats, I’m going to back down. I can’t pretend otherwise. I’d like to be brave, but I doubt that I am.”
I ask again: Why should people who will not defend themselves be defended by others?
The activist game is the only social cultural/political game there is.
Here and elsewhere, people like Bookworm and Neo will identify problems more or less correctly, but then more often than not will limit their solution calls to electoral politics despite that electoral politics are subsumed.
Electoral politics are necessary but not sufficient.
DNW,
Her point is that right now there is still a window where corrective measures can still be undertaken that are within the range of reach of ordinary people.
People like her are willing to “defend themselves” under current conditions, but the window of current conditions is being shrunk and replaced by conditions she is warning will be beyond her reach.
If the people of the Right don’t get full-on activist now, it will be too late soon.
In the next stage, there won’t be another USA over the horizon to save us, at horrendous cost to itself, when that happens.
Eric:
I agree with you that electoral politics is not enough, and that activism of the type you recommend is necessary. However, it requires a lot more of people.
…stand up firmly… ridicule… constantly remind… (to and of) all these other fanatic groups…
then …you can make it clear that, as someone who respects religion, you would not gratuitously draw a deliberately offensive picture of Mohamed.
then If we ordinary Americans, the ones who have passively valued our constitutional rights, don’t push back now – and all that we need to do push back now is to speak up, politely, firmly, logically, and freely
And we wonder how we find ourselves in the present predicament. They target, attack, disqualify, dismiss, discharge; we speak up politely, firmly, logically, freely… and impotently. We limit ourselves. Play, nice, be courteous, civil, mannerly, polite, Marquess of Queensberry and all that, in the midst of a decades long cultural war, and now a national, political war. We meet willful treachery with willful obtuseness. The time even for proportionately measured response is long past. If we do not hit twice as hard, twice as often, at least, we may lay no claim to being defenders of anything but our own heads.
Eric,
I understand what her point is. I was however quoting someone she had adverted to.
His prefatory revelation included that fact that he now understood that he was a de facto moral coward … just like the Germans he used to criticize. The fact that he makes his case in sympathetic and understandable terms, in relating it to feelings most people have (our own Declaration acknowledges mankind’s tendency to hopefully suffer wrongs rather than fight every injustice or threat) makes no logical difference … unfortunately.
His hope of course is that in recognizing this, and by showing a little courage now, he will not be so severely tested later.
I wish him well with that hope.
But what kind of courage do we “as a people” (“we” are not a “we”, of course) have when “we” will not even stand up to our friends and relatives?
There is something seriously wrong with many of the people in this country … Or, at the very least they are very seriously and substantially and essentially different in moral kind than those who used to set – what was at least the the more or less official – moral tone of the polity.
The “progressives” actually believe, or purport to believe if you read their literature, that we are “evolving” into another kind of thing entirely. And that this process can be politically managed. This is not about changing hearts and minds … this is about some segment of the population migrating toward another existential sensibility, (and perhaps, life-nature if they are right that it can be done) entirely. For them, “humanity” is just a stage on the road to something else.
I suppose what can be done through activism depends on what you mean by activism, and what your aims are. If your aims include convincing drug addled state dependent hedonic-nihilist appetite entities that virtue is to be preferred to what they have in hand, well then good luck. If your aims are directed at sharpening the conflict, drawing unmistakeable lines, and cutting off the ability of the enemy to use your own life efforts against you, then you might have something worth at least striving for.
Frankly, I am becoming increasingly convinced that only a radically trans-formative technological leap which will allow one to keep the other where it needs to be kept – away – will avail. On the one side you have a phenomenon of insatiable no limits desire for attention and support – probably a form of mental illness – and on the other you have the people of limits and forms.
They have nothing in common, ultimately. Not even “the ultimate”
Again, I would like to reemphasize the point that I think that a great deal of the trouble we presently have in this country is generated by what would traditionally be called mentally ill people, people whose demand is that their inchoate and ultimately incoherent and self-defeating wants be socially affirmed.
Look at the language of modern politics … inclusion, identification, affirmation, enabling, sharing, transgressing …
What does the demand of the left amount to? It amounts to a no-limits demand that we pledge our allegiance to a doctrine of no limits solidarity and sacrifice.
And in the face of that incoherent insanity, we have people on the supposedly liberty-affirming side, who are afraid to make enemies of ‘friends”.
“Feelings”. It will be the death of many of us if not all.
Bookworm has good reasons for her fears, given her special circumstances.
I was however quoting someone she had adverted to.
That wasn’t a quote. The entire passage was Book talking about her own progression from Democrat zombie into a free human being with individual will, a soul, and a conscience.
Many of the things we have are inherited, we didn’t earn it. Which includes our beliefs about WWII and national histories. Some of it is for our benefit, while others are made by the Left to mind control their slaves. An individual cannot truly become free until they realize the restrictions society has put on them, and choose to either accept that, reject it, change it, etc.
People read all kinds of sci fi and fantasy stories about people saving the world. I wonder how much of that is due to the fact that many people want to “save” the world in this reality, but are too weak to resist evil, and I wonder how many know it in their hearts.
Fighting evil doesn’t require courage. Courage is a leadership trait, it’s not something everyone needs, a leader that is. What people need are two basic items: resources and the willpower to use it.
Smoke em if you got em. Use em or lose em.
Acquire the resources to bend and break the Leftist zombies to the limit. Then acquire the willpower to do it. Both are not simple tasks, they require hard work, just like a job does.
As a comparison, snapping the fingers of the subject and imposing my will upon the subject, is one of the “softest”, most “merciful” tasks I’ve undergone conditioning for. It does not make one resistant to the force of violence, it just makes it easier to tolerate and understand. Breaking the fingers causes a specific level of damage that can be managed. Breaking the neck is more serious and has life threatening implications. Which one we choose to use, is a rational decision, not merely an emotional one. If your mind cannot grasp the difference, it also becomes incapable of grasping what it takes to defend against evil doers. Because you’re really considering the same subject, violence, but from a victim vs predator mentality. If the mind and spirit is too weak to grasp violence, then it can’t attack or defend using it at all. The body will not do the job if the mind is out on vacation. Not when it comes to complicated topics like verbal violence, physical violence, politics, war, tactics, strategy, legal decrees, etc. Running and swimming, the body can do automatically, maybe.
Violence is something society has conditioned people to reject, since violence is a power society reserves for itself, the leadership even. It doesn’t allow peons, slaves, and serfs the power of violence or education. If you understand the efficacy of violence, that it is merely a tool, then the Leftist social conditioning has far less effect on you. But that is hard to break free of, if one has to live with Leftist careerists, bosses, family members, etc who have power over you.
The first requirement of a warrior when they change loyalties, is to kill their former comrades. Or at least, that is one potential loyalty test to ensure that the warrior has burned the bridges behind em, that they are committed to the new cause. To kill your society, your social circle, requires the same amount of Willpower as killing your own emotions, your fears, your desires, your weaknesses.
The Willpower it takes to inflict violence upon the target, necessitates the ability to accept violence being inflicted upon you. It makes a person tougher, not because rage empowers them, but because by accepting their own death, they can go for an ai uchi (sp) or instantaneously double kill. For most people, their social conditioning makes them afraid to use violence, whether against enemies or against people threatening their families. Using violence is verboten, something forbidden, on the level of cannibalism or incest, something society will never, ever forgive you for doing. That is under an impression that society is the only thing that is allowed to have the Authority to forgive or permit such things.
For a normal sane person, their survival instincts say that if you harm another person, that person will then attack you. So social conditioning is so strong that Westerners when faced with Islamic barbarians, who know that their death is soon to come, won’t attack because of that social conditioning. A lot of people’s fears come from the social conditioning, rather than any instance or absence of courage. Being too afraid of the attacker to kill the attacker is one thing, that might be called cowardice. Being too afraid of your society to attack the attacker, because you feel your society will cause you more pain than the attacker, is something else. Courage is not being motivated by fear, thus you can’t be surviving merely because you fear one over the other, fearing death and your attacker enough to kill them isn’t courage any more than fearing your society and obeying your society is.
In order to utilize violence on a human target, that’s not an animal or insect or something most people consider inferior to human life, you must become capable of overriding personal hesitation and weakness along with social conditioning. This is why people who can get the wetwork job done is feared and sometimes out of control. It’s hard to put the djinn back in the bottle, so to speak. The mind machine, the zone, is akin to altered state of consciousness, an altered personality. Most people lack the mastery or the motivation to think in such a foreign realm.
People who fight, have to come up with their own reasons to do so, ones that aren’t necessarily the same noble reasons society gives them. In the case of Vietnam, it is easy to see how shattered the psyche of a human can become when the society they fought for, rejects them and casts them out.
Ymarsakar Says:
June 22nd, 2015 at 3:49 pm
‘Bookworm has good reasons for her fears, given her special circumstances.
I was however quoting someone she had adverted to..
That wasn’t a quote. The entire passage was Book talking about her own progression from Democrat zombie into a free human being with individual will, a soul, and a conscience.
The phrase “I was however quoting someone she adverted to”, was in reference to Neo – to someone Neo was adverting to, not “Bookworm”.
I was quoting “Bookworm” as someone Neo had linked to.
Now, I did use the possessive pronoun “His”, in reference to “bookworm” because the opinion piece pictured a male with tape over his mouth, and because if there were any gender references in the text from which I quoted, I missed or overlooked them. See below:
“This isn’t because they’re evil, it’s because they lack moral and physical courage – something that, when push comes to bloody shove, most of us lack.
I know that much as I’m aware of right and wrong, and freedom and tyranny, the first time someone puts a knife to my or my children’s throats, I’m going to back down. I can’t pretend otherwise. I’d like to be brave, but I doubt that I am.
What this means is that, when the bad guys start to move in, there is an achingly small window of time within which the ordinary people, the ones who just want to live their lives and lack the fortitude to face down raw evil, can speak and act to stop the bad guys in their tracks …”
Why should people who will not defend themselves be defended by others?
Personally, some people are important to the continuation of the Race, humanity itself. Other people are… not so important. Thus a system of priority asserts itself.
So if I were deciding whether to shed my blood, a cat that I like which is semi feral, I would stand in front of, to defend the cat against dogs. Why? Mostly because I decided to do so, that this was my territory, and I’d rather chop up a few rabid dogs than allow them to push me out.
A warrior, a citizen soldier, a gentleman, or any other kind of fighter or dirty deeds clean up crew, has to have their own reasons to fight. Because getting the job done up close and personal requires more Willpower than Hussein pushing a button and killing a bunch of America’s former allies in Libya.
I do not think a civilization needs too many warriors or soldiers. That’s not really a civilization.
Bookworm is a housewife and a lawyer. If that will help clear up any misunderstandings.
Bookworm is a bit overheated. Yes, the Nazis took over with a violent minority, but it wasn’t a new development in Weimar Germany. The Communists and the Nazis were constantly battling it out in the streets during the prior decade. I think that there were other violent polical groups too and the Weimar government was too weak to supress them.
They took over using voting and democracy. The other parties made a deal. The Reichstag folded and bent knee to their conquerors.
Democracy or any other system, is only as good as the leaders and the people in it. That includes America’s Republic and non existent freedoms right now.
The Left has had several internal purges by now. It only makes them stronger. The point of socialism vs fascism is to see who wants power the most and that’s the one that wins.
Also the topic isn’t about the Nazis, the topic is actually about Americans who think they are superior than the Nazis or Germans of WWII.
Since what people care about now aren’t the Nazis, but the Leftists. In power.
1. And it is all on BHO for not crushing ISIS when he had the chance. They came out of Syria and right through the dessert. Sitting ducks.
For the life of me I will never understand why we didn’t carpet bomb the ISIS victory parade down Main Street in Ramadi. Heck, right now ISIS is running a hotel and we have the address.
2. The most frightening speech and religious censorship issue was the recent blackmail by Lily, CAT and the NCAA of the State of Indiana over its RFRA.
Gov. Mike Pence caved in record time; it was hours.
Pence is an idiot and coward.
Imagine a CEO explaining to the owners the expense of a move from Indiana in order to appease the gay lobby.
3. The Progs will be doing their end zone dance over gay marriage next week. Next up will be a test case against a religious college like Bob Jones or Georgetown. Issue: Let us have a gay marriage in your church or lose your tax exempt status.
The Human Rights Campaign probably already has a “cute” couple (of the correct religion) already lined up.
If donors can’t fully deduct their gifts to religious schools, the colleges will terminate their religious affiliations.
That was a good post.
As the saying goes, “Our forefathers would be shooting by now.” They certainly would be. Their levels of taxation and government repression were not remotely comparable with what we suffer today.
I honestly believed that we would be in a shooting war in 2009, when enough people realized that we had elected a Communist dictator. The fact that there hasn’t been any meaningful resistance suggests to me that it may already be too late. We’re surrendering without a whimper. The political system has failed. There is no opposition party, and the most egregious lawbreaking goes unpunished.
On Election Night 2008, I commented elsewhere that I now understood how the non-Nazi Germans must have felt.
Far as I know, Hussein was sending AQ money and weapons while killing off US allies in Libya. That’s what started ISIS. The Syrian rebellion was an outcome of Libya.
Benghazi was part of that arms transfer, which is why the AQ tribes turned from protector to enemy.
Leave a Reply
HTML tags allowed in your
comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>
I ask again: Why should people who will not defend themselves be defended by others?
The activist game is the only social cultural/political game there is.
Here and elsewhere, people like Bookworm and Neo will identify problems more or less correctly, but then more often than not will limit their solution calls to electoral politics despite that electoral politics are subsumed.
Electoral politics are necessary but not sufficient.
DNW,
Her point is that right now there is still a window where corrective measures can still be undertaken that are within the range of reach of ordinary people.
People like her are willing to “defend themselves” under current conditions, but the window of current conditions is being shrunk and replaced by conditions she is warning will be beyond her reach.
If the people of the Right don’t get full-on activist now, it will be too late soon.
In the next stage, there won’t be another USA over the horizon to save us, at horrendous cost to itself, when that happens.
Eric:
I agree with you that electoral politics is not enough, and that activism of the type you recommend is necessary. However, it requires a lot more of people.
…stand up firmly… ridicule… constantly remind… (to and of) all these other fanatic groups…
then
…you can make it clear that, as someone who respects religion, you would not gratuitously draw a deliberately offensive picture of Mohamed.
then
If we ordinary Americans, the ones who have passively valued our constitutional rights, don’t push back now – and all that we need to do push back now is to speak up, politely, firmly, logically, and freely
And we wonder how we find ourselves in the present predicament. They target, attack, disqualify, dismiss, discharge; we speak up politely, firmly, logically, freely… and impotently. We limit ourselves. Play, nice, be courteous, civil, mannerly, polite, Marquess of Queensberry and all that, in the midst of a decades long cultural war, and now a national, political war. We meet willful treachery with willful obtuseness. The time even for proportionately measured response is long past. If we do not hit twice as hard, twice as often, at least, we may lay no claim to being defenders of anything but our own heads.
Eric,
I understand what her point is. I was however quoting someone she had adverted to.
His prefatory revelation included that fact that he now understood that he was a de facto moral coward … just like the Germans he used to criticize. The fact that he makes his case in sympathetic and understandable terms, in relating it to feelings most people have (our own Declaration acknowledges mankind’s tendency to hopefully suffer wrongs rather than fight every injustice or threat) makes no logical difference … unfortunately.
His hope of course is that in recognizing this, and by showing a little courage now, he will not be so severely tested later.
I wish him well with that hope.
But what kind of courage do we “as a people” (“we” are not a “we”, of course) have when “we” will not even stand up to our friends and relatives?
There is something seriously wrong with many of the people in this country … Or, at the very least they are very seriously and substantially and essentially different in moral kind than those who used to set – what was at least the the more or less official – moral tone of the polity.
The “progressives” actually believe, or purport to believe if you read their literature, that we are “evolving” into another kind of thing entirely. And that this process can be politically managed. This is not about changing hearts and minds … this is about some segment of the population migrating toward another existential sensibility, (and perhaps, life-nature if they are right that it can be done) entirely. For them, “humanity” is just a stage on the road to something else.
I suppose what can be done through activism depends on what you mean by activism, and what your aims are. If your aims include convincing drug addled state dependent hedonic-nihilist appetite entities that virtue is to be preferred to what they have in hand, well then good luck. If your aims are directed at sharpening the conflict, drawing unmistakeable lines, and cutting off the ability of the enemy to use your own life efforts against you, then you might have something worth at least striving for.
Frankly, I am becoming increasingly convinced that only a radically trans-formative technological leap which will allow one to keep the other where it needs to be kept – away – will avail. On the one side you have a phenomenon of insatiable no limits desire for attention and support – probably a form of mental illness – and on the other you have the people of limits and forms.
They have nothing in common, ultimately. Not even “the ultimate”
Again, I would like to reemphasize the point that I think that a great deal of the trouble we presently have in this country is generated by what would traditionally be called mentally ill people, people whose demand is that their inchoate and ultimately incoherent and self-defeating wants be socially affirmed.
Look at the language of modern politics … inclusion, identification, affirmation, enabling, sharing, transgressing …
What does the demand of the left amount to? It amounts to a no-limits demand that we pledge our allegiance to a doctrine of no limits solidarity and sacrifice.
And in the face of that incoherent insanity, we have people on the supposedly liberty-affirming side, who are afraid to make enemies of ‘friends”.
“Feelings”. It will be the death of many of us if not all.
Bookworm has good reasons for her fears, given her special circumstances.
I was however quoting someone she had adverted to.
That wasn’t a quote. The entire passage was Book talking about her own progression from Democrat zombie into a free human being with individual will, a soul, and a conscience.
Many of the things we have are inherited, we didn’t earn it. Which includes our beliefs about WWII and national histories. Some of it is for our benefit, while others are made by the Left to mind control their slaves. An individual cannot truly become free until they realize the restrictions society has put on them, and choose to either accept that, reject it, change it, etc.
People read all kinds of sci fi and fantasy stories about people saving the world. I wonder how much of that is due to the fact that many people want to “save” the world in this reality, but are too weak to resist evil, and I wonder how many know it in their hearts.
Fighting evil doesn’t require courage. Courage is a leadership trait, it’s not something everyone needs, a leader that is. What people need are two basic items: resources and the willpower to use it.
Smoke em if you got em. Use em or lose em.
Acquire the resources to bend and break the Leftist zombies to the limit. Then acquire the willpower to do it. Both are not simple tasks, they require hard work, just like a job does.
As a comparison, snapping the fingers of the subject and imposing my will upon the subject, is one of the “softest”, most “merciful” tasks I’ve undergone conditioning for. It does not make one resistant to the force of violence, it just makes it easier to tolerate and understand. Breaking the fingers causes a specific level of damage that can be managed. Breaking the neck is more serious and has life threatening implications. Which one we choose to use, is a rational decision, not merely an emotional one. If your mind cannot grasp the difference, it also becomes incapable of grasping what it takes to defend against evil doers. Because you’re really considering the same subject, violence, but from a victim vs predator mentality. If the mind and spirit is too weak to grasp violence, then it can’t attack or defend using it at all. The body will not do the job if the mind is out on vacation. Not when it comes to complicated topics like verbal violence, physical violence, politics, war, tactics, strategy, legal decrees, etc. Running and swimming, the body can do automatically, maybe.
Violence is something society has conditioned people to reject, since violence is a power society reserves for itself, the leadership even. It doesn’t allow peons, slaves, and serfs the power of violence or education. If you understand the efficacy of violence, that it is merely a tool, then the Leftist social conditioning has far less effect on you. But that is hard to break free of, if one has to live with Leftist careerists, bosses, family members, etc who have power over you.
The first requirement of a warrior when they change loyalties, is to kill their former comrades. Or at least, that is one potential loyalty test to ensure that the warrior has burned the bridges behind em, that they are committed to the new cause. To kill your society, your social circle, requires the same amount of Willpower as killing your own emotions, your fears, your desires, your weaknesses.
The Willpower it takes to inflict violence upon the target, necessitates the ability to accept violence being inflicted upon you. It makes a person tougher, not because rage empowers them, but because by accepting their own death, they can go for an ai uchi (sp) or instantaneously double kill. For most people, their social conditioning makes them afraid to use violence, whether against enemies or against people threatening their families. Using violence is verboten, something forbidden, on the level of cannibalism or incest, something society will never, ever forgive you for doing. That is under an impression that society is the only thing that is allowed to have the Authority to forgive or permit such things.
For a normal sane person, their survival instincts say that if you harm another person, that person will then attack you. So social conditioning is so strong that Westerners when faced with Islamic barbarians, who know that their death is soon to come, won’t attack because of that social conditioning. A lot of people’s fears come from the social conditioning, rather than any instance or absence of courage. Being too afraid of the attacker to kill the attacker is one thing, that might be called cowardice. Being too afraid of your society to attack the attacker, because you feel your society will cause you more pain than the attacker, is something else. Courage is not being motivated by fear, thus you can’t be surviving merely because you fear one over the other, fearing death and your attacker enough to kill them isn’t courage any more than fearing your society and obeying your society is.
In order to utilize violence on a human target, that’s not an animal or insect or something most people consider inferior to human life, you must become capable of overriding personal hesitation and weakness along with social conditioning. This is why people who can get the wetwork job done is feared and sometimes out of control. It’s hard to put the djinn back in the bottle, so to speak. The mind machine, the zone, is akin to altered state of consciousness, an altered personality. Most people lack the mastery or the motivation to think in such a foreign realm.
People who fight, have to come up with their own reasons to do so, ones that aren’t necessarily the same noble reasons society gives them. In the case of Vietnam, it is easy to see how shattered the psyche of a human can become when the society they fought for, rejects them and casts them out.
The phrase “I was however quoting someone she adverted to”, was in reference to Neo – to someone Neo was adverting to, not “Bookworm”.
I was quoting “Bookworm” as someone Neo had linked to.
Now, I did use the possessive pronoun “His”, in reference to “bookworm” because the opinion piece pictured a male with tape over his mouth, and because if there were any gender references in the text from which I quoted, I missed or overlooked them. See below:
As you can see the passage I quoted at, http://neoneocon.com/2015/06/22/a-sliver-of-time/#comment-903320 was in fact from the “Bookworm” text immediately above, whatever Bookworm’s actual sex may be.
Why should people who will not defend themselves be defended by others?
Personally, some people are important to the continuation of the Race, humanity itself. Other people are… not so important. Thus a system of priority asserts itself.
So if I were deciding whether to shed my blood, a cat that I like which is semi feral, I would stand in front of, to defend the cat against dogs. Why? Mostly because I decided to do so, that this was my territory, and I’d rather chop up a few rabid dogs than allow them to push me out.
A warrior, a citizen soldier, a gentleman, or any other kind of fighter or dirty deeds clean up crew, has to have their own reasons to fight. Because getting the job done up close and personal requires more Willpower than Hussein pushing a button and killing a bunch of America’s former allies in Libya.
I do not think a civilization needs too many warriors or soldiers. That’s not really a civilization.
Bookworm is a housewife and a lawyer. If that will help clear up any misunderstandings.
Bookworm is a bit overheated. Yes, the Nazis took over with a violent minority, but it wasn’t a new development in Weimar Germany. The Communists and the Nazis were constantly battling it out in the streets during the prior decade. I think that there were other violent polical groups too and the Weimar government was too weak to supress them.
They took over using voting and democracy. The other parties made a deal. The Reichstag folded and bent knee to their conquerors.
Democracy or any other system, is only as good as the leaders and the people in it. That includes America’s Republic and non existent freedoms right now.
The Left has had several internal purges by now. It only makes them stronger. The point of socialism vs fascism is to see who wants power the most and that’s the one that wins.
Also the topic isn’t about the Nazis, the topic is actually about Americans who think they are superior than the Nazis or Germans of WWII.
Since what people care about now aren’t the Nazis, but the Leftists. In power.
1. And it is all on BHO for not crushing ISIS when he had the chance. They came out of Syria and right through the dessert. Sitting ducks.
For the life of me I will never understand why we didn’t carpet bomb the ISIS victory parade down Main Street in Ramadi. Heck, right now ISIS is running a hotel and we have the address.
2. The most frightening speech and religious censorship issue was the recent blackmail by Lily, CAT and the NCAA of the State of Indiana over its RFRA.
Gov. Mike Pence caved in record time; it was hours.
Pence is an idiot and coward.
Imagine a CEO explaining to the owners the expense of a move from Indiana in order to appease the gay lobby.
3. The Progs will be doing their end zone dance over gay marriage next week. Next up will be a test case against a religious college like Bob Jones or Georgetown. Issue: Let us have a gay marriage in your church or lose your tax exempt status.
The Human Rights Campaign probably already has a “cute” couple (of the correct religion) already lined up.
If donors can’t fully deduct their gifts to religious schools, the colleges will terminate their religious affiliations.
That was a good post.
As the saying goes, “Our forefathers would be shooting by now.” They certainly would be. Their levels of taxation and government repression were not remotely comparable with what we suffer today.
I honestly believed that we would be in a shooting war in 2009, when enough people realized that we had elected a Communist dictator. The fact that there hasn’t been any meaningful resistance suggests to me that it may already be too late. We’re surrendering without a whimper. The political system has failed. There is no opposition party, and the most egregious lawbreaking goes unpunished.
On Election Night 2008, I commented elsewhere that I now understood how the non-Nazi Germans must have felt.
Far as I know, Hussein was sending AQ money and weapons while killing off US allies in Libya. That’s what started ISIS. The Syrian rebellion was an outcome of Libya.
Benghazi was part of that arms transfer, which is why the AQ tribes turned from protector to enemy.