Friday, January 25, 2013

Obama didnt win: Democrats Stole the Election


By David Coughlin

The electoral fraud evidence is accumulating to the point where I must conclude that the November election was stolen by the Democrats.  In the months leading up to the election, report after report surfaced highlighting significant erosion of support for President Obama.

  • In the months leading up to the election, report after report surfaced highlighting significant erosion of support for President Obama.
  • The margin of victory, particularly in the swing states, did not pass the “smell test.
  • There are numerous examples of voter fraud occurring before the November election
  • It is estimated that more than 20% of registered Ohio voters aren’t eligible: in two counties there were 109 registered for every 100 eligible voters;  More voters than is legal!
  • In 31 counties over 90% of eligible voters registered which is 20% higher than national average.
  • Obama lost in each and every state where voter ID laws were in place.
  •  In one precinct, a rout over 99% is a possibility but hundreds of precincts recording over 99% exceed any possibility of credibility. 
  •  In Ohio, Obama won a county by 108% of registered voters.  More votes than there were voters!
  • The sheer volume of fraudulent activities, centered on the swing states, suggests a concerted effort to influence the results of the November election.

Personal observation uncovered that no one, other than die-hard Democrats, who voted for Obama in 2008 was proud of that vote and most questioned whether they would vote for him again. On election night as results trickled in, with strange voting anomalies surfacing, the margin of victory, particularly in the swing states, did not pass the “smell test.” Electoral fraud can occur at any stage in the process, but there are three main types: 1) debasing voter rolls with deceased, illegal, and fictitious voter registrations; 2) preventing eligible voters from voting by disenfranchisement, rendering unable to actually vote or duplicative votes, or instituting rules or tests that voters (particularly military absentee voters) are unable to comply; and 3) altering the results by interfering with the voting process or the counting of votes, or manipulating the means of voting through tampering with machines or altering results.  There are numerous examples of each of these fraudulent activities taking place before, during, or after the November election.

Nationwide it is estimated that there are 24 million ineligible voter registrations, including 1.8 million dead people listed as voters.  The National Voter Registration Act includes provisions to ensure accurate and current voter registration rolls, but has never been enforced, despite known problems in many states.  Dead people remain on the rolls, duplicates are not checked, and many registrations are suspect.  There have been 400 cases of voter registration fraud prosecuted (ACORN under its many aliases) and 491 cases of absentee ballot abuse.  The Columbus Dispatch estimated that more than 20% of registered Ohio voters aren’t eligible: in two counties there were 109 registered for every 100 eligible voters; and in 31 counties over 90% of eligible voters registered which is 20% higher than national average.  Unless voter rolls are rigorously scrubbed each year, natural attrition will gradually erode the accuracy and dependability of the voter rolls.

Obama lost in each and every state where voter ID laws were in place.  A poll watcher in Pennsylvania reported that up to 10% of ballots cast reverted to a default of Obama.  Voters in Nevada, North Carolina, Texas, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Wisconsin had touch screen voting machines that recorded Obama, even after Romney was selected.  Republican poll watchers in multiple states were either turned away or not allowed to enter the precincts or thrown out once they had done so.  People were openly bragging that they voted twice or more.  In North Carolina, workers at a group home coaxed residents into voting for Obama.  In Flushing, NY a Korean-American translator directed voters to vote for Democrat candidates.  In St. Louis, voters found that someone had already voted with an absentee ballot in their name, forcing the use of provisional ballots.  In Ohio, Democrats bussed Somali non-US citizen voters, who could not speak English from state to state, to vote for Obama.  In Maine, a busload of black people was transported from rural town to rural town to vote.  Only 20% of the overseas military turned in absentee ballots in 2008 and less than half were ever received and counted, and predictions are that it will even be worse in 2012.  Requiring voter identification does not suppress the vote, but it does suppress the illegal votes.  It is clear that there were multiple cases where people’s votes were not accurately recorded and ineligible people were able to poison the results with ineligible votes.

There are far too many examples of precincts that delivered fraudulent votes in key cities to pack the totals that may have impacted who got the electoral votes in many swing states.  This tactic was so pervasive it earned its own name of “spigot cities.”  In 59 Philadelphia, PA precincts, Obama recorded 100% of the votes.  In Cleveland, OH districts, Obama recorded 100% of the votes.  In 100 precincts in Ohio, Obama recorded 99% of the votes.  In Broward County, FL precincts, Obama received over 99% of the votes.  In one precinct, a rout over 99% is a possibility but hundreds of precincts recording over 99% exceed any possibility of credibility.  In St. Lucie County, FL, 141% of eligible voters turned out to vote! (Statistically impossible)  In Ohio, Obama won a county by 108% of registered voters.  In two counties in Colorado, voting turnout exceeded the voter-age population.  It is believed that this systemic voter fraud is protected by the Voting Section of the Justice Department, and that no meaningful investigations will ever take place to understand these voting “anomalies.”

The sheer volume of fraudulent activities, centered on the swing states, suggests a concerted effort to influence the results of the November election.  The final totals of absentee ballots cast and actually counted have not yet been released, but new record low turnouts are predicted. Even if the number of fraudulent votes counted did not swing individual election results, the piloting of these criminal techniques portends bigger problems in future elections where these proven techniques can be rolled out beyond deep blue precincts.  Massive and systemic electoral fraud seems to be the newest and slickest way for Democrats to steal elections.

Eighty eight percent of Americans who voted in November support establishing national standards for voting, including the hours polls are open, who is eligible to vote, and the design of ballots.  The fact that there are very few examples of voter fraud prosecuted each year is more a reflection of the partisan nature of this administration than an indication of its scarcity.  The American people are disgusted by the hint of electoral fraud and want it completely removed.  The DOJ has fought against state initiated voter identification laws, despite proof that when voter id was enforced in Georgia higher voter turnout was achieved and no instances of voters being denied.  Now is the time to invest in an internet enabled voting system based on a unique voter id that can be designed to be as secure as our banking system.  The military would be an ideal pilot since the current approach is steadily eroding their ability to participate in this most important right and responsibility of citizenship.

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/51364

Wednesday, January 23, 2013

Gun Control: Catalyst of the American Revolution


EDITORS NOTE:  We are fortunate to have a tool available in our current fight that our forefathers did not.  A tool given to us by our founding fathers through blood sweat and tears:  Representation and a vote.  Write to your representative today, to stop the madness of gun-control and confiscation.


The British Banned Guns On Our Founding Fathers & It Brought About A Revolution
by Tim Brown

Many today don’t realize that we are facing the same sort of tactics by our own Federal government that our forefathers faced from the British just prior to the War for Independence. In fact, I’ll venture to guess that most people never were taught in school what follows in this article. That’s right, gun control is nothing new now, nor was it even new in the twentieth century. It was very much alive in the eighteenth century. So when someone comes along telling you “the founding fathers wouldn’t have envisioned this or that” with regards to arms, just remind them of what they faced during their lifetimes when the primary weapons were single shot muskets and cannons.

Following the events of December 16, 1773, Parliament, with the direct encouragement of King George III, passed the Coercive Acts, or as they were properly known the Restraining Acts, in 1774.

Though Parliament was warned by men like Edmund Burke and Lord Chatham that such legislation would not be wise and would only provoke the colonists more, they failed to listen to reason.

Patriots that heard of the Acts determined that they would fight and die rather than see such laws enforced upon them

Interestingly enough, a South Carolina newspaper essay, which was reprinted in Virginia at the time, recorded that any law that required the military to enforce it was “necessarily illegitimate,”

The British realized that they could not control the people with only 2,000 troops in Boston. So what did they do? They sought to eliminate the people’s ability to firearms and gun powder.

American colonists believed that if the British were going to use force or violence to seize arms or powder, it was an act of war and they would respond in kind.
“The British government was not, in a purely formal sense, attempting to abolish the Americans’ common law right of self-defense. Yet in practice, that was precisely what the British were attempting. First, by disarming the Americans, the British were attempting to make the practical exercise of the right of personal self-defense much more difficult. Second, and more fundamentally, the Americans made no distinction between self-defense against a lone criminal or against a criminal government. To the Americans, and to their British Whig ancestors, the right of self-defense necessarily implied the right of armed self-defense against tyranny.”   
- Dave Kopel, Research Director, Independence Institute
Ultimately, do you know what started America’s War for Independence? That’s right, it was a tyrannical government that soft peddled “self-defense” while banning firearms and gunpowder.
"We are reduced to the alternative of choosing an unconditional submission to the tyranny of irritated ministers, or resistance by force.—The latter is our choice—We have counted the cost of this contest, and find nothing so dreadful as voluntary slavery.—Honour, justice, and humanity, forbid us tamely to surrender that freedom which we received from our gallant ancestors, and which our innocent posterity have a right to receive from us. We cannot endure the infamy and guilt of resigning succeeding generations to that wretchedness which inevitably awaits them, if we basely entail hereditary bondage upon them.
Our cause is just. Our union is perfect. Our internal resources are great, and, if necessary, foreign assistance is undoubtedly attainable… With hearts fortified with these animating reflections, we most solemnly, before God and the world, declare, that, exerting the utmost energy of those powers, which our beneficent Creator hath graciously bestowed upon us, the arms we have been compelled by our enemies to assume, we will, in defiance of every hazard, with unabating firmness and perseverance, employ for the preservation of our liberties; being with one mind resolved to die freemen rather than to live slaves." 
 - Thomas Jefferson
Now we are facing similar infringements upon our liberties, not by a tyrannical government on the other side of the globe with a few troops here on our soil, but by our own Federal government. They are taking the same steps that the British did against our forefathers. The question for you my fellow Americans, is this: Will you surrender to tyranny or will you stand against it? No one can make that choice for you, but remember the lessons of the past that those who surrender their arms, inevitably surrender their liberty and with it their lives. May God grant you strength to stand against tyranny.


http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/01/the-british-banned-guns-on-our-fathers-it-brought-about-a-revolution/#ixzz2Ioh2JTJ8

To All Naïve Apolitical Gun Owners: THE ENEMY IS THE ENEMY


SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT: THE ENEMY IS THE ENEMY
By Paul Markel
"A burglar breaks into a home and demands that the homeowner give him all of his money. The homeowner stubbornly refuses. The burglar then demands ninety percent of the owner's money. The homeowner again will not comply. Now the burglar demands half of the owner's money. Again he refuses to hand over a penny. "You just won't compromise on anything will you?" the frustrated burglar says accusingly."
Although I find it a bit befuddling, as I pen this piece on January 21st, 2013, there are still people in the outdoor and shooting sports community who are attempting to remain apolitical. They shy away from definitive terms like liberal or conservative. These folks still believe that, if you only try hard enough, you can win a logical argument with people whose decisions are driven by emotion.

I've been scolded and advised not to "provoke" the anti-gun crowd, those who wish to disarm lawful American citizens. We need to be reasonable and willing to compromise ,I've been told. I will admit that I understand the origins of what I call the "reasonableness disease"; it stems from Mirror Thinking. Humans at their base level all believe that everyone else in the world thinks and behaves as they do. If they consider themselves a reasonable, rational person then they expect all other people to act the same. While this type of thinking is childish and naïve, it is nonetheless very prevalent, particularly among those who would rather not deal with problems head on but sidestep them.

Let me set the record straight, as least as far as I am concerned. If you are a person who is actively lobbying a government agency, be it Local, State, or Federal to restrict the ownership of firearms by lawful citizens of the United States you are endangering myself as an individual, my family, my community, and by extension my country. In 2013 the tool most readily used to protect the individual from violence, oppression and tyranny is the firearm. Hundreds of years ago governments worldwide outlawed the possession of swords by the peasant to ensure they paid their taxes and obeyed whichever ruler sat in power. The issue is the same; disarm the peasants so they can be ruled.

When you actively seek to disarm me you are deliberately attempting to subjugate me and put my family in mortal jeopardy. That fact makes you my enemy. The Bill of Rights of the Constitution of the United States did not create the rights of man; it simply enumerated and affirmed them. When you seek to nullify or circumvent the Constitution of the United States as well as the Constitutions of each individual State, you are my enemy.

Pretending that your enemy does not exist does make it so. Ignoring your enemy only gives them the time and opportunity to strengthen their position and deliver their final blow. Attempting to argue logic with a man ruled by emotion is no more productive than attempting to teach Latin to a hog.  It wastes your time and annoys the hog.

I'm reminded of on apt analogy of compromise:

A burglar breaks into a home and demands that the homeowner give him all of his money. The homeowner stubbornly refuses. The burglar then demands ninety percent of the owner's money. The homeowner again will not comply. Now the burglar demands half of the owner's money. Again he refuses to hand over a penny. "You just won't compromise on anything will you?" the frustrated burglar says accusingly.

How do you bargain with someone who wishes to endanger your family? How do you compromise with a person who seeks to subjugate you and to nullify your God-given right to protect your life? In what manner should you negotiate with a group of people who seek to circumvent and make irrelevant the foundational document that has made the United States of America the greatest and most prosperous nation ever to grace this world? The answer is; you don't. No bargaining, no negotiation, and no compromise. The enemy is the enemy and the sooner you accept that fact the better equipped you will be to defeat them.

Paul Markel

http://studentofthegun.com/blog/69-setting-the-record-straight-the-enemy-is-the-enemy.html

Communism is Alive and Well (and strong) in the USA

By nicedeb
"I have a confession to make: I used to be a Liberal. In the 1988 Presidential election, I campaigned door-to-door for Michael Dukakis. In 1992, I was a full-throated supporter of Carol Moseley Braun, the ultra-social liberal Senator from Illinois who, among other things, supported partial-birth abortion, gay marriage and gun control. I voted for Clinton both times, and, despite thinking he was a knob, voted for Gore in 2000. Please believe me when I say that the Democrat Party’s end goal is communism."
Let’s get the terminology right. The fact of the matter is, the entire Democrat party today is Communist/ Marxist/Socialist/Collectivist/Statist. There are no more conservative or moderate Democrats. They all support the big government collectivist agenda – and they’re all willing to lie, cheat and steal in order to maintain it.


Breitbart’s Ben Shapiro called Obama’s inaugural speech,  ‘Orwellian’, proving that he hates the Constitution.
But it’s worse than that. I’ve been saying for over four years now, that the Democrat party needs to be rebranded. They should be called Democrat Socialists because that’s what they are. Democrat voters should at least know what they’re voting for.
Actually, it’s long past time. The Democrat Party’s goal is communism.
I have a confession to make: I used to be a Liberal. In the 1988 Presidential election, I campaigned door-to-door for Michael Dukakis. In 1992, I was a full-throated supporter of Carol Moseley Braun, the ultra-social liberal Senator from Illinois who, among other things, supported partial-birth abortion, gay marriage and gun control. I voted for Clinton both times, and, despite thinking he was a knob, voted for Gore in 2000. Please believe me when I say that the Democrat Party’s end goal is communism.
Okay, they won’t call it communism. To the Liberal Democrat (here on out, let’s just call them Democrats because there are no moderate or conservative Democrats anymore), the government is the source of prosperity. Government can succeed in equalizing outcomes, which free market capitalism does not do. Government must dictate what all citizens believe and what they are educated in. Wealth, prosperity, equality, all come from Government. For the Democrat, if there is a problem in society, it is Government’s role to solve the problem.

The Democrats didn’t just seek to bail out the banks; the Democrats had to demonize the banks. It was those greedy Wall Street Bankers who preyed on poor, unsuspecting people and FORCED them to take out a mortgage that they had no hope of being able to pay back. The Democrats absolved themselves of any culpability, despite the fact they are one hundred percent the cause of the Sub-Prime Mortgage Crisis.
Why? Because Democrats are communists. They want to control the means of production. They want to control the financial institutions. They want to redistribute wealth in order to make all individuals the same – a collective. Because, as Obama likes to point out, that’s what’s fair. To the Democrat, “fairness” is the most important litmus test of a society. It trumps liberty. It trumps private property rights. It trumps the rights of individuals. It trumps out Constitution and system of government. We must make all things “fair.”
Democrats are communists. And if we don’t recognize that and speak clearly about it, we will continue down this road and we will lose this country.
It should surprise no one that Obama’s biggest cheerleaders are Communists.



http://nicedeb.wordpress.com/2013/01/22/obamas-not-a-liberal-hes-a-communist/

Tuesday, January 22, 2013

Martial Law coming soon? DHS thinks so!


Road Signs Marked Martial Law In Effect.Found During Routine Drug Stop In Houston Tx

On January 15, 2013 a law enforcement officer in the north end of the Greater Houston area stopped a semi tractor-trailer driver, who was heading in a southerly direction, during a routine check for drugs. During a search of the cargo of the trailer, he discovered packages of road signs that read the following: “Martial Law in effect”. The driver had a bill of lading in his possession stating that this cargo’s destination was to the Department of Homeland Security.

Martial law is an extreme and rare measure used to control society during war or periods of civil unrest or chaos.  Generally, the institution of martial law contemplates some use of military force. To a varying extent, depending on the martial law order, government military personnel have the authority to make and enforce civil and criminal laws. Certain civil liberties may be suspended, such as the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures, freedom of association, and freedom of movement. And the writ of habeas corpus may be suspended (this writ allows persons who are unlawfully imprisoned to gain freedom through a court proceeding).

In the United States, martial law has been instituted on the national level only once, during the Civil War, and on a regional level only once, during world war ii. Otherwise, it has been limited to the states. Uprisings, political protests, labor strikes, and riots have, at various times, caused several state governors to declare some measure of martial law.


http://beforeitsnews.com/conspiracy-theories/2013/01/road-signs-marked-martial-law-in-effect-found-during-routine-drug-stop-in-houston-tx-video-2448004.html

Shocking claim: Obama only wants military leaders who 'will fire on U.S. citizens'


By Dave Gibson

On Monday, renowned author and humanitarian Dr. Jim Garrow made a shocking claim about what we can expect to see in Obama's second term.

Garrow made the following Facebook post:

I have just been informed by a former senior military leader that Obama is using a new “litmus test” in determining who will stay and who must go in his military leaders. Get ready to explode folks. “The new litmus test of leadership in the military is if they will fire on US citizens or not.” Those who will not are being removed.

So, who is the source?

Garrow replied: “The man who told me this is one of America’s foremost military heroes.”

Understand, this is not coming from Alex Jones or Jesse Ventura, or from anyone else the left often dismisses with great ease.

Garrow is a well-respected activist and has spent much of his life rescuing infant girls from China, babies who would be killed under that country's one-child policy. He was also nominated for Nobel Peace Prize for his work.

This comes on the heels of Sunday's report in the Washington Free Beacon (WFB) that the head of Central Command, Marine Corps Gen. James Mattis is being dismissed by Obama and will leave his post in March.

The WFB article states:

“Word on the national security street is that General James Mattis is being given the bum’s rush out of his job as commander of Central Command, and is being told to vacate his office several months earlier than planned.”

Did Gen. Mattis refuse to "fire on U.S. citizens?"

http://www.examiner.com/article/shock-claim-obama-only-wants-military-leaders-who-will-fire-on-u-s-citizens?cid=db_articles

Monday, January 21, 2013

NYT: Socialist model falling apart in CA

The Gray Lady Confirms Blue Civil War
By Walter Russell Mead

You know the blue model is in serious trouble when even New York Times writers turn against it. Yesterday dyed-in-the-wool Democrat Thomas Edsall responded to Via Meadia‘s take on blue model collapse. In his response he struggles mightily with the bluer angels of his nature, calling our take “apocalyptic,” but in the end admits that 20th-century liberalism is in serious trouble:
Dozens of city and state public employee pension plans are on the verge of bankruptcy—or are actually bankrupt—from Rhode Island to California; in 2010, a survey of 126 state and local plans showed assets of $2.7 trillion and liabilities of $3.5 trillion, an $800 billion shortfall. The national debt exceeds $16 trillion.
The result is that the different power blocks that make up the Democratic base are trampling each other in a rush to grab the last rents of the dying blue system:
In cities from Los Angeles to Chicago to Houston, African-Americans are competing with Hispanics and others for government jobs, good schools, good neighborhoods, political power and basic resources.
Twentieth-century liberalism is a victim of its own success: it gave us longer and more prosperous lives, in turn putting tremendous pressure on social services and pensions. The result is the fragmenting coalition Edsall points to. Though he places part of the blame for the blue civil war on Republican-backed austerity measures, Edsall admits that demographic shifts and outmoded ways of delivering social services also played a role.
The reality of blue model decline is so obvious that nobody can ignore it any longer.

Why collectivism is doomed and the next great crisis will massively shift America toward conservatism


By Mike Adams


There is a very good reason why people who live in cities tend to be liberal while those who live in rural areas tend to be conservative. In a city, the existence of nearby neighbors, the shared dependence on infrastructure and the close proximity of police stations automatically lends itself to a socialist mindset. On issues like guns, city people seem to be unable to imagine why anyone would “need” a rifle, for example, and because all guns scare them, they would prefer to force everyone across the country to turn them all in.
People who live in rural areas, in great contrast, have every reason to be more conservative and independent. Their local sheriff might be 30 minutes away in an emergency, meaning that self protection is truly up to you and can’t simply be delegated to someone else. Self-reliance means survival. In rural living, firearms are absolutely necessary tools to protect your animals from predators, eliminate varmints that are destroying your garden, and provide real security for legitimate threats to your safety. People who live in cities tend not to be able to understand these things because they can’t imagine country life.
Because cities pack so many people in such a small space, there is a commonsense basis for lots of little laws and regulations on things like noise, littering and even your car’s emissions. After all, one incredibly noisy person living in an apartment can prevent a hundred people from getting to sleep, so noise ordinances make sense where people live in close proximity.
Out in the country, where the nearest house might be a quarter-mile away, noise ordinances make no sense. Regulations on every little detail of the lives of the people simply don’t fly.
FACT: Today, about 80% of the U.S. population lives in cities.
The political divide in America today is largely a division of “city folks” versus “country folks”
City people tend to be socialist-minded. Their motto is: Conform! Obey! Be part of the collective!


Country people tend to be libertarian-minded. Their motto is: Survive! Work hard! Stand out as an individual!
City people are afraid of non-conformity. They’re afraid of tractors, guns, farm animals and anything else they don’t understand.
Country people are afraid of being told what to do by a bunch of city people who have no clue where their food comes from, where water comes from, what “growing seasons” are, or how to survive in the real world.
City people tend to believe in “living off the government” and collective welfare and other entitlements wherever possible.


Country people tend to believe in “living off the land” and finding ways to survive on their own or with the help of family. They feel a sense of personal shame if driven to use food stamps or other forms of welfare.
City people tend to vote democratic because democrats reflect the lean toward socialism and everything socialism brings them: welfare, subsidized housing, conformity, obedience, etc.
Country people tend to vote Republican because Republicans reflect more of a rugged individualism mindset that encourages business ownership, financial savings and living a more free life with fewer regulations and government controls.
If you look at every voting map of America over the last few years, you’ll find that rural areas overwhelmingly voted Republican while urban areas overwhelmingly voted Democrat. The following map shows the congressional district results from the 2010 election:
Modern-day cities are artificial constructs ripe for collapse
Cities are artificial constructs. They are not the “real world.” Cities only exist because a massive amount of energy is expended to import water, food, electricity, consumer goods, fuel and other items to the people living there.
Cities offer tremendous advantages to residents, of course, including convenience, efficiencies of commerce, shared defenses against the wilderness, specialization of the workforce, a critical mass of population needed to offer universities, and so on. People live in cities precisely because cities seem to offer them more advantages than living in the country. For most people, this comes down to a single answer: JOBS.
Most people can’t find work in the country, so they live in cities in order to get a job. Unfortunately, living in the city is far more expensive than living in the country, so much of their paycheck goes to paying the rent on their expensive city apartment, parking permits, higher food costs and so on.
Ultimately, however, cities are death traps. Let’s look at Los Angeles as the perfect example of why this is the case.
Example: Why Los Angeles is a death trap
• LA has no inherent water supply. Virtually all the water used throughout the region must be imported and pumped over a mountain range at great cost. This pumping of water is entirely dependent on the power grid remaining functional.
• LA is incapable of being evacuated. The population density of the city is mathematically far too great to be evacuated via the limited number of roadways exiting the city.
• LA has multiple points of systemic failure. If the power grid goes down, LA is finished. If the water supply stops pumping, LA is finished. If farmers go on strike and stop producing food for the cities, LA is finished. If the police stand down or quit, LA is finished. If gasoline and fuel supplies are cut off, LA is finished. If the sewer and sanitation systems fail, LA is finished.
• LA has a scary population density of about 7,000 people per square mile. That’s the highest of any city in the USA. This population density results in almost immediate panic and violence in any collapse scenario. Humans are not biologically designed to live in such high density environments.
• LA is infested with gangs that are barely kept under control right now. Those gangs would love nothing better than the see law enforcement go on strike or a power grid failure or some other kind of systemic collapse. That would give them the opportunity to go on the offensive and start looting, pillaging and murdering.
There are more reasons why LA is a death trap, but these five should paint the picture clearly enough. And it’s not just LA, of course. Here are the top 20 death traps in America today…
The top 20 death traps in America
Source: 2010 census
1) New York City
2) Los Angeles
3) Chicago
4) Miami
5) Philadelphia
6) Dallas-Fort Worth
7) Houston
8) Washington D.C.
9) Atlanta
10) Boston
11) Detroit
12) Phoenix
13) San Francisco
14) Seattle
15) San Diego
16) Minneapolis
17) Tampa
18) Denver
19) Baltimore
20) St. Louis
While all of these cities are death traps, each has its own unique risks and vulnerabilities. Phoenix, for example, is especially susceptible to disruptions in the water supply. New York City is geographically cut off from the mainland and can easily be crippled by the destruction of its bridges. Houston and Miami are susceptible to hurricanes. Denver is heavily targeted by Russian nukes, and so on.
The more dense cities become, the more insane their leadership becomes
One thing you’ll notice about this list is that the mayors and city council members of these cities tend to be some of the most outrageously insane people walking the planet today.
Why is that? Those who have a kind of mental sickness that causes them to seek control over others naturally flock to the highest population density areas where they can attempt to control as many people as possible. This is one reason why cities become home to control freaks who seek total domination over the private lives of everyone else.
New York City mayor Bloomberg, for example, wants to control the sizes of sodas you can buy, whether or not you get painkillers in the hospital emergency room and even how much rent landlords can charge tenants. If he could get away with it, he would probably also like to control how many square sheets of toilet paper you wipe with and how many times you chew each bite of food before swallowing. Control freaks love cities because that’s where people can more easily be dominated. Citizens of cities tend to be more obedient and conformist than people living in rural areas. Plus, city folks are generally not as well armed, making them easy to dominate by force, if necessary.
“Any government that does not trust its citizens with firearms is either a tyranny, or planning to become one.” – Joseph P. Martino, author of Resistance to Tyranny.
Community leaders of rural areas tend to be less insane and more practical than city leaders. That’s because people know each other better, so there’s more trust and reputation familiarity in small towns than in large cities. Plus, leaders of small towns know that if they try to become tyrants, some local rancher will just put a bullet in their head with a long-range hunting rifle. It’s that kind of awareness that helps keep community leaders honest and accountable.
Why the coming collapse will shift America away from liberalism and toward conservatism
Here’s the real point of this entire article. I wanted to start with this but needed everything above to provide the appropriate background and context.
Pick your crisis, any crisis: Global debt collapse, solar flare followed by power grid failure, EMP weapon strike by North Korea causing power grid failure, biological weapons attack, martial law declaration followed by civil war, etc. In any sufficiently large scenario, the cities become death traps.
• A sustained power grid failure (lasting several months) would likely result in something approaching an 80% fatality rate for those living in cities.
• A biological weapon release could easily cause a 30% fatality rate for those in the cities.
• An economic collapse (bank failures, etc.) could also see mass casualties across U.S. cities due to starvation, disease, outbreaks of violence and so on.
Aside from the devastating human cost of such scenarios, which I won’t really focus on because that’s not the point of this article, the net effect of any mass die-off would be a shifting of the population toward individualism, conservatism and country living.
A mass die-off of people living in cities, in other words, is essentially a mass die-off of Obama voters (or more liberal-minded, socialist-minded people). This is one reason why rugged individuals, survivalists, preppers and rural people are ultimately going to be in the majority: because crisis comes to civilization with surprising regularity. Every crisis resulting in a mass die-off inevitably kills those who are less able to survive because they are living as parasites on a system that will ultimately fail them. The true long-term survivors are those who live and breathe independence, self-reliance and personal defense.
To put all this another way, collectivists don’t survive very long in a real crisis. Because they live their lives dependent on the system, they have lost the skills — and the spirit — to survive on their own.
The cycles of civilization
As populations tend to become more lazy, apathetic and dependent over time (enjoying the spoils of abundance and innovation their ancestors put in place), populations tend to slide toward collectivism as long as conditions allow. Click here to see my related video called the Cycle of Civilization.
This brings us to the following conclusion:
As population rises, nations tend to slide toward collectivism / socialism until there is a die-off crisis, at which point those remaining will largely be proponents of conservatism and libertarianism.
This is one of the reasons why civilizations tend to go through predictable cycles: After abundance and innovation comes apathy and collectivism. Then corruption, exploitation, a stripping of liberties and so on. This is then followed by revolution and a new era of freedom which creates abundance and innovation. Then the cycle repeats.
Today, America is in the downward stroke of the collectivism cycle, with the government having already crossed the threshold into criminal corruption, and now the effort to strip all rights from the people is well under way. History shows us that this will be followed by a dark period of intense violations of human rights, then a revolution and a new era of freedom.
But this cycle can be interrupted at any time with a sufficiently large crisis that causes a mass die-off. This is because die-offs are not equally applied across the population. It is the collectivist-minded societal parasite who is far more likely to die in any crisis than a productive, individual-minded taxpayer who currently supports the system.
The silver lining for the future of human civilization
In one sense, this is the silver lining that emerges from any potential crisis. While massive loss of life is always tragic, it may be precisely the thing that jolts a civilization out of its downward spiral of collectivism and restarts the engine of individualism and innovation that results in real progress.
Put another way, it is difficult to imagine the United States of America, as it exists today, achieving anything really profound in the sciences, space exploration, physics or human understanding because the nation is presently caught in a suffocating debt spiral consumed by paying out entitlements to a growing class of parasitic takers who contribute nothing meaningful to humankind. We have become, in part, a nation of mindless consumers whose lives really make no different whatsoever to the advancement of humanity. Should a crisis emerge that results in a massive die-off of the parasitic “takers,” although the tragic loss of life would be immense, it would also have the effect of vastly reducing the masses who are holding back civilization from real progress in human understanding and achievement. For the record, in no way does this mean I wish for such an outcome nor endorse any such outcome. I have long been a defender of life, and I have no desire to see anyone suffer or die. I am merely discussing cause and effect and how demographics shift due to large-scale crisis.
I have heard this crudely (and incorrectly) paraphrased with the statement that, “What America really needs right now is a massive die-off to purge all the useless eaters.” That’s not what I’m saying, and it smacks of a desire to engage in genocide.
Instead, what I’m saying is that cities tend to breed a “failure” mindset that infects the population and turns otherwise productive and rugged people into pathetic, spineless, obedient cowards. This explains why nobody fought back during the Aurora, Colorado shooting carried out by James Holmes. It explains why people call 911 after an intruder has already smashed down their front door, screaming into the phone, “SHOULD I SHOOT THEM?” (And it also explains why 911 operators reply with, “No! Don’t shoot!”) It explains why city people tend to go along with tyranny and oppression.
It explains why humanity is stalled in a cycle of pathetic conformity, raising a generation of over-Google-fied morons who have lost all imagination and are but a shadow of their ancestors. The convenience of city life has, with some exceptions of course, produced apathy, timidity and acquiescence. The real values of progress — innovation, invention, determination and self-reliance — are now far more prevalent in rural-minded citizens who are strong, rugged survivors and explorers. (You want to see the future of humanity? Home-schooled children.)
That’s the kind of mindset that’s going to help human civilization reach for the stars. It’s going to take courage, innovation and risk — all the things that a “city mindset” sucks out of our souls and diminishes in our minds.
Cities are the last refuge of the weak-willed, weak-minded and conformist socialbots.And that’s why they will suffer a disproportionate number of fatalities in any sufficiently severe collapse.
You want to survive? Learn country living
If you are a rural-minded person still living in a city, and you can’t wait to get out of the city, the time to act on it is now. Get out to the country, learn some real-world living skills, toughen your will and sharpen your mind.
You will learn more in ONE YEAR of living on a working farm then you did in four years of college. The best education I ever got was living on a ranch in central Texas. It turned me into a hard-core survivor and problem solver who can overcome almost anything the universe might throw our way.


http://www.infowars.com/why-collectivism-is-doomed-and-the-next-great-crisis-will-massively-shift-america-toward-conservatism/

Friday, January 18, 2013

West Point vs America


There is disturbing news out of West Point this week.


“It says anti-federalists “espouse strong convictions regarding the federal government, believing it to be corrupt and tyrannical, with a natural tendency to intrude on individuals’ civil and constitutional rights.”

And so West Point thinks that makes constitutional conservatives a violent threat to overthrow the government??  What?

Do they know what the United States of America is?  The United States of America is a republic form government (not a democracy) that forms a union between the several sovereign states via the Constitution.  Our forefathers had just fought a war against Tyranny.  They took every step necessary to prevent tyranny and to preserve the rights of the individual and the sovereignty of the States, while allowing for necessary federal level organization and arbitration.  "powers not granted to the federal government by the Constitution, nor prohibited to the States, are reserved to the States or the people."

Do they know what an anti-federalist is?  Anti-Federalism began as a movement opposed to increasingly stronger U.S. federal government.  Yes, they  originally opposed the signing of the constitution in its current form  But why?  Because they worried, among other things, that the position of president, then a novelty, might evolve into a monarchy.  The US Government, as it is defined by the Constitution, has no fear from anti-federalists (if any still exist).  However, individual power hungry politicians who are high on government over-reach and don't want to get voted out may.

Do they remember their vow to protect the constitution?  Given that candidates to west point are usually recommended or appointed there by senators, this may well be a conflict of interest, </snark> but they DO take the vow to protect the constitution.

Constitutional and fiscal conservatives believe in the federal government:  The foundation, structure and military that our constitution sets forth is sound.  And they want to protect that, not destroy it.

However, the facts remain facts: Many politicians in our federal government are corrupt and tyrannical, with a natural tendency to intrude on individuals’ civil and constitutional rights.  We simply have far too many people in these otherwise valid federal government positions and offices that hold ideologies that are either anti-American, or simply greedy & selfish.

This is the nature of humans and power.  Power corrupts.  The more power the more corruption.  The federal government as expanded beyond it's intended power base and needs to be reined in.  We are a nation of laws.  Laws depend on both legislation and precedent.   We need to remove the corrupt, and set the precedent that when the federal government over expands, we will contract it.  Stripping them of certain powers with explicit legislation -even constitutional convention if necessary - since they apparently can't read the constitution as it is.

Over the years, the power hungry have boiled the frog.  Step by step, going over the slippery slope until the federal government is so far removed from the public that they no longer represent us. 

But still, we do not advocate violent protest or the violent overthrow of  our government.  The pen is mightier than the sword.

America:  The federal government is not lost.  Your vote still counts.  And if we can remove voter fraud, teach our children, educate the public and de-fund the conflict of interest that is government dependent voters, then we can make it count for more.

We must take our offices back, and remind them who they work for.  We must remove the current trappings and privileges of public office.  As public servants, they should not have the luxuries and life-long reassurances that "rich and powerful" men and women have.

There is an old saying "Anyone who wants to be king is not fit to be king".  We need statesmen, not politicians.  The job should be a duty, not a country club.

  • Defund extravagances. Restrict tax funded expenses. 
  • Set term limits. 
  • Ban pork on legislation.  Limit bills to 1500 words and a single topic. 
  • Restrict campaign funding - allow no contributions, give everyone a set limit they can spend & no more. 
  • Remove executive privilege.
  • Have congress men stay in state with their constituents & vote remotely, so as not to get "DC living mentality"

The evidence of failed socialism



Today the evidence of failed socialism is encapsulated in Detroit and in states like California and New York. Yet still, the left wants to blame others for their demise. Today Detroit is a wasteland of bankrupt ideology. The only thing left standing in Detroit is the staleness of hate.

It would seem simple enough for anyone with a grade school education to connect the dots between success of entrepreneurialism and its demise by overzealous government, taxation, and regulation. Below are two maps indicating the correlation of this phenomenon.

Anyone looking at those maps with average intelligence would at least scratch their head in thought—unless they are blinded by hate or some other agenda.

Democrat politicians are taking advantage of the poor by creating the idea that successful people are inherently evil. Obama knows that, and that is why his campaign will drive a wedge into “evil capitalism” and the “evil wealthy.”  Truth is to be ignored by many on the left and replaced with the Utopian idea of “equality for all.” I’ll put that in the same bucket as “World Peace” and “Coexist“. It’s a nice dream, and we should always work toward peace, but most of us live in reality, not fantasy. 

 






 

-

Tuesday, January 8, 2013

Who was Thomas Jefferson ?

Credit unknown

Thomas Jefferson was a very remarkable man who started learning very early in life and never stopped.
  • At 5, began studying under his cousin's tutor.
  • At 9, studied Latin, Greek and French.
  • At 14, studied classical literature and additional languages.
  • At 16, entered the College of William and Mary.
  • At 19, studied Law for 5 years starting under George Wythe.
  • At 23, started his own law practice.
  • At 25, was elected to the Virginia House of Burgesses.
  • At 31, wrote the widely circulated "Summary View of the Rights of British America? And retired from his law practice.
  • At 32, was a Delegate to the Second Continental Congress.
  • At 33, wrote the Declaration of Independence.
  • At 33, took three years to revise Virginia's legal code and wrote a Public Education bill and a statute for Religious Freedom.
  • At 36, was elected the second Governor of Virginia succeeding Patrick Henry.
  • At 40, served in Congress for two years.
  • At 41, was the American minister to France and negotiated commercial treaties with European nations along with Ben Franklin and John Adams.
  • At 46, served as the first Secretary of State under George Washington.
  • At 53, served as Vice President and was elected president of the American Philosophical Society.
  • At 55, drafted the Kentucky Resolutions and became the active head of Republican Party.
  • At 57, was elected the third president of the United States.
  • At 60, obtained the Louisiana Purchase doubling the nation's size.
  • At 61, was elected to a second term as President.
  • At 65, retired to Monticello.
  • At 80, helped President Monroe shape the Monroe Doctrine.
  • At 81, almost single-handedly created the University of Virginia and served as its first president.
  • At 83, died on the 50th anniversary of the Signing of the Declaration of Independence along with John Adams.
Thomas Jefferson knew because he himself studied the previous failed attempts at government. He understood actual history, the nature of God, his laws and the nature of man. That happens to be way more than what most understand today. Jefferson really knew his stuff. A voice from the past to lead us in the future:

John F. Kennedy held a dinner in the white House for a group of the brightest minds in the nation at that time. He made this statement: "This is perhaps the assembly of the most intelligence ever to gather at one time in the White House with the exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone."


Thomas Jefferson Quotes:

  • "When we get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, we shall become as corrupt as Europe."
  • The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not."
  • "It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it goes. A principle which if acted on would save one-half the wars of the world."
  • "I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."
  • "My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government."
  • "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."
  • "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."
  • "To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical."
  • "I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property - until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."
  • "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

Is Civil War Coming to the USA again?

With the interest in emergency food storage and disaster/crisis preparation at an all time high, and with DHS and the American public both buying up all the guns and ammunition they can find, are we subconsciously asking ourselves: is Civil War Coming to the USA again?

A few supporting ideas & articles:
 
Americans aren't buying AR-15s in record numbers just so they have something to turn in in "gun ban day"
As discussed before, Senator Dianne Feinstein's (D-CA) proposed legislation to ban so-called "assault weapons" would amount to gun confiscation for many tens of thousands of peaceable, responsible, law abiding Americans. For the rest of the owners of these politically incorrect firearms, Feinstein's (as yet unreleased, but described in some detail) bill would merely mean a requirement for registration with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE).

Saying that the legislation would "merely mean registration" somewhat implies that registration does not lead to confiscation--that ease of confiscation is not, indeed, pretty much the point of registration. That notion is probably a tough sell for anyone who has followed the history of gun politics, both in the U.S. and abroad. Feinstein's home state, in fact, received "extra credit" in the Brady Campaign's ranking of states for anti-gun tyranny, specifically for using the gun registry for the purpose of wholesale confiscations.

Meanwhile, Americans are buying so-called "assault weapons" at a pace never seen before, and gun shows are packed like never before (see sidebar video), with "assault weapons," and ammo in calibers most associated with such firearms being by far the most highly sought items.

Ammunition and accessories, AR-15 magazines (of any size), upper receivers, and ammunition in .223 Remington or 5.56mm NATO are simply not to be had (generally not even via backorder)--and the rest of the gun retail world is in the same boat.

Think about that. With the specter of registration (not to mention confiscation) looming, Americans are buying precisely the things to be registered (not to mention confiscated) faster than manufacturers and distributors can keep up.
Even the idea that much of the buying is with an eye toward selling at a profit later does not make much sense, as Feinstein's law would make resale illegal.

People don't buy expensive (especially expensive now) gear just to have something to turn over to Feinstein when she finally gets to say, "Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in." The kind of American most likely to want AR-15s tends also to be the type least eager to register them with the government--particularly not a government agency as historically hostile to private gun ownership as is the BATFE.

In other words, Feinstein proposes to make millions of new "gun criminals" out of decent Americans. So be it. How does she intend to arrest us, and whom does she propose do the arresting?

http://www.examiner.com/article/americans-aren-t-buying-assault-weapons-just-to-have-something-to-register




President Obama has ordered Homeland security to "Prepare for Civil War"

Homeland Security Prepares for Civil War
By Jack Swint

Its Clear Our Military Is No Longer The Nation's Only Standing Army When It Comes To Killing Power

Over the past 2 weeks, everyone from the mainstream media to bloggers and conspiracy theorists have questioned the government's mass purchasing of ammunition for federal agencies like the National Weather Service and even the Social Security Administration. Combined, both agencies ordered over 210,000 rounds. This ammunition is mostly made up of "hollow point" bullets, which are designed strictly for maximum damage to the human body and have been outlawed for use in warfare since 1969.

On the surface, these purchases alone are scary enough and raise questions as to why these unlikely agencies need any amounts of ammo, especially bullets that have been outlawed. The Social Security Administration (SSA) has given no specific response to questions regarding their purchase of 174,00 rounds. They said their "agents' need them. But, keep this in mind:  the SSA only deals with US Citizens in America. The SSA has never been involved with anything outside of this country for any reason. And what do they need with armed agents?  All SSA offices employ private contracted security for their offices.

The feds have actually ordered over 1 billion rounds of ammo in 2012 alone. They received 750,000,000 in March and are awaiting another 450,000,000 arriving soon. All in conjunction with large-scale orders for riot gear, bulletproof checkpoint outposts with red and green stoplights, human shaped paper practice targets, and other crowd control and containment equipment.
The federal government is expecting either a catastrophic financial collapse that could provoke nationwide food riots and all out civil unrest, another civil war
There is no "conspiracy theory" here.  The federal government is expecting either a catastrophic financial collapse that could provoke nationwide food riots and all out civil unrest, another civil war, or even Armageddon. All in the very near future. Some theorize that the mass purchase of ammunition is an attempt to hoard as much as possible from the American public whom the feds believe may be in preparation for civil war right now.

High-level, reliable sources inside Homeland Security, claim the agency is preparing for a massive civil war in America. The DHS source states that the federal government foresees and prepares for a massive civil revolt. "Every time you hear about troop movements, military equipment, the militarization of the police, and the buying of the ammunition in the US, all of this is orchestrated by the DHS who are reportedly preparing for a massive uprising."

The concerns of the DHS stem from their belief in an impending collapse of the U.S. dollar as the the world's primary reserve currency, and their fear that a significant portion of the population is already armed and will rise up over the crash of our monetary system.
"We are preparing, we, meaning the government, we are preparing for a massive civil war in this country."
Since Celente's "Civil War' prediction of last year, President Obama signed executive orders known as the National Defense Resources Preparedness, which are politically damaging actions taken by a sitting president.  Of course, he also signed the National Defense Authorization Act, abolishing habeas corpus and the Bill or Rights, and permitting indefinite detention without charge or trial of American citizens at home and abroad.  He further claims the power to murder American citizens without indictment, trial or conviction upon his finding that they support or substantially assist an enemy of the United States or one of its allies.  Let the firing squads begin.

And most recently, additional requests made by the DHS for another procurement of 750 million rounds of hollow-point ammunition only fuels speculation of an upcoming tragic event expected on American soil.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Homeland-Security-s-Intent-by-Jack-Swint-120821-433.html

 Americans are preparing for Civil War

"Liberals like President Obama hold gun owners in contempt. Many expect further gun control laws, especially on assault weapons. America is responding by purchasing firearms in a hurried pace. Are lawful Americans preparing for civil war?"

By Bob Owens

Most of the downtown shops, in fact, weren’t doing much business except the two gun stores.  There were no less than six clerks working feverishly with the dozen or so customers, so I simply stepped to the side and walked the aisles. The cases of ammunition that typically lined the far wall were picked to pieces.

They didn’t know when they’d be getting anything back in stock, from magazines to rifles to pistols. Manufacturers were running full-bore, but couldn’t come close to keeping up with market demand.It wasn’t just the AR-15s, the AK-pattern rifles, the M1As, and the FALs that were sold out. It really hit me when I realized that the World War-era M1 Garands , M1 carbines, and Enfield .303s were gone, along with every last shell. Ubiquitous Mosin-Nagants—of which every gun store always seems to have 10-20—were gone. So was their ammo. Only a dust free space marked their passing. I’ve never seen anything like it.

Every weapon of military utility designed within the past 100+ years was gone. This isn’t a society stocking up on certain guns because they fear they may be banned. This is a society preparing for war.

I wonder if this is what it felt like during the time of the Powder Alarm of 1774, and fear politicians both sides of the aisle are no more speaking the same language as most Americans as Gage was unable to think like the Colonials. There is an earnestness now on both sides, and a great chance for unintended consequences. 
http://www.bob-owens.com/2012/12/something-funny-happened-on-the-way-to-the-tyranny/


Monday, January 7, 2013

The Socialist Coup is Nearly Complete

by Welshman at The Liberty Sphere.

Good evening, dear reader, and welcome to another episode of my infamous "Musings After Midnight" during which I ruminate and cogitate over the state of the country, usually on sleepless nights well after midnight.

I invite you to participate in these exercises with me for the purpose of fostering fellowship and goodwill among like minded people who share my alarm over the state and direction of the nation. We are very much in this together, and we need to know that we are not alone in the battle.

I happen to know that there are millions of us out there who are not only deeply alarmed about what we face at this dire hour but who are contemplating what they wish to do about it.

And so, here we are -- a place where we can gather to give deep and careful consideration to these matters of extreme importance.

This is why I invite you to warm yourself by the virtual fire and avail yourself of warming beverages, virtual of course. But in this age of the Internet, virtual reality often closely mirrors real life, and indeed, what we experience online can be ultimate "real life," provided it is grounded in what's real rather than fantasy.

It has been cold here in the mountains and Piedmont of the Carolinas, and many areas have snow on the ground. So it's a good time to gather and ponder.

My subject today may come as no surprise or news to many of you. Those who regularly visit these pages tend to be the most well informed citizens in America. And thus, you know as well as I do that in spite of all of our talk of staving off a coup by forces that neither recognize nor value the final authority of the Constitution as the ultimate rule of law in this land, in a very real sense we have already been seized in a war-less, bloodless coup.

No shots were fired. No one was killed. No army tanks rolled in the streets. No one announced from loud speakers that we were being taken over by a malevolent force. Yet the coup is every bit as real as if these things had happened.

The election of Barack Obama in 2008 and his subsequent reelection in 2012 is the culmination of that coup that has been in the making for nearly 50 years. None of this happened overnight. It wasn't as if suddenly out of the blue over 50 percent of our fellow citizens decided on a whim that they were going to discard the founding principles and put into office a man who represents something our Founders detested. The forces of evil that perpetrated this coup have been working tirelessly, relentlessly behind the scenes for nearly 50 years to get the country to this point.

There is some disagreement as to when the coup actually began. But this is, in the final analysis, irrelevant. Several factors were at play from the beginning, all happening simultaneously. The nitpickers can argue over which occurred first. But the fact remains that all of these circumstances came together at roughly the same time to form the foundation of the coup that would culminate nearly 50 years later.

One of these factors is the disintegration of the American system of education, both at the primary and secondary level, and at the higher level in academia. After World War II, a distinct change began taking place in education that would forever change the thinking of generations of young Americans. No longer was the United States viewed in the classroom as a force for good but as a symbol of evil. Marxism was hailed as the ultimate force of good. Religion was no longer viewed as an essential adjunct in the development of decent, well rounded citizens. Rather, religion was held up to disdain, a force of oppression that must be eradicated through ridicule, dismissal, and neglect. And American exceptionalism was no longer taught but a subtle, sometimes overt, notion that other cultures and nations were somehow superior to our belief that America was the ultimate pinnacle of freedom and prosperity in the world took hold in the classroom that led to an outright hatred for America by the 1960s, a hatred so deep that professors such as Bill Ayers, close friend and financier of Barack Obama, was bombing federal buildings and urging teenagers to kill their parents.

Closely related to this development was the advent of what has become known as America's "collective guilt" regarding racial discrimination in the past. Somehow white people today are supposed to take on the blame for what others did centuries ago, leading to displays of such overreach as to be laughable, such as the feeling that we need to make financial "reparations" to people of minority races for what our ancestors did to their ancestors, although none of us living today had one thing to do with any of it. And I am deeply convinced that the apparent compulsion of many liberal whites to vote for Barack Obama, against their better judgment, stems directly from this "white collective guilt" that has been foisted on them by an educational system that is stacked in favor of minorities and those who hate America.

At the same time these events were occurring, an alarming fact became known to American liberals in the Democratic Party that led to a proactive change in a key area of American life. During the late 50s and into the 60s the powers that be in the liberal/progressive intelligentsia began to notice that Democrats were showing signs of weakness, even as Lyndon Johnson enjoyed skyrocketing approval numbers and Democrats practically owned both houses of Congress with overwhelming majorities. Some cracks were seen developing in the walls. And the harsh truth became clear -- unless the Democratic Party found a way to expand its base in the future it would be relegated to permanent minority party status.

Why? Because whites were abandoning the Party in droves. My own grandfather, for example, had been a lifelong Democrat, a union member. But the 60s forced him to change his thinking. He began to feel as if he no longer recognized the Party to which he had long professed unquestioned loyalty. By 1980 he told me that he was voting for Ronald Reagan. He said, "I did not change. They did. They left me behind."

Such was the thinking of millions of citizens who would come to be known as "Reagan Democrats."

Some within the Democratic Party foresaw what was coming as far back as the 1960s. Lyndon Johnson was one of them. Thus, Johnson made a major, far-reaching change in the immigration policy of the United States.

Liberals were losing whites. The already had 98 percent of the blacks in their pockets. There was no group left from which to draw, unless they could devise a strategy for producing a new minority group that could help propel them to majority status. But such a thing would mean they would have to go outside the country.

This they did. Johnson changed the formula for who was allowed to immigrate to the United States. Until the 1960s immigration and naturalization had favored Europeans. After the Johnson change, the formula would favor Hispanics and limits would be placed on the number of Europeans allowed to immigrate and become naturalized.

I distinctly remember when the change took place even as a school boy. When I came through elementary school the foreign language everyone was required to learn was French. But by the time I reached junior high and high school, the preferred second language had shifted to Spanish.

When I inquired as to the reason for the change, I was told by an educator that students were encouraged to learn Spanish because of "all of the new Hispanic immigrants coming into the country."

Now, I have no problem whatsoever with Hispanics, or Latinos, or others from the Spanish speaking world. But at the time U.S. policy shifted toward them, the reason was purely political. They were being used as pawns for someone's ulterior political motives, namely, liberals and Democrats. At the time, such persons were impoverished, much more so than Europeans. And thus, they were tailor made for American politicians who pandered to such persons, promising them everything from low cost housing, free medical care, free public education for their children, all at taxpayer expense.

In short, the Democrats figured out that they could buy the votes, bribe Hispanics into being Democrats for life.

In time, this proved invaluable. The Democrats put together a coalition of minority groups -- blacks, Hispanics, radical feminists, anti-capitalists, pro-union Marxists, dependents who are addicted to big government programs, etc., enough to beat Republicans who still rely on whites to win elections.

Liberal Democrat demagogue Sam Donaldson, who masquerades as a journalist, told Chris Matthews last week that he got angry over Tea Party assertions that they "wished to take their country back." "Well," he said, "It is not your country any more. It is our country." He then went on to recount how the Democrats put together a coalition of minorities, denoting major "changes" in America over the past 20 years.

Everyone who sat on Matthews' panel at MSNBC that day nodded their heads approvingly of Donaldson's remarks.

Now, to a degree he is right. But not entirely. Things have, indeed, changed to the point to where a politician can demagogue his way to office by pandering to a half dozen or so minority groups--just enough to squeak out a win. But what Donaldson curiously failed to say was that it is only when Democrats succeed in getting all minorities on the same page can they win.

Had only 2 percent or so of the Hispanic vote gone the other way to Romney, for example, then the outcome of the presidential election would have been very different. That is a razor thin margin and points to the fragility of the minority coalition the liberals have managed to put together.

Many pundits have mused that had Romney simply gone directly to the Hispanic community and noted how their values and ours are one and the same, and pointed out the reasons why American taxpayers do not support endless giveaway programs but wish to help the poor become self-sufficient, he could have won enough Hispanic votes to put him over the top. George W. Bush was able to do so, for example. And contrary to conventional wisdom, it is not the immigration issue that turns Hispanics against Republicans and conservatives. Legitimate Hispanic citizens who came here legally and went through the lawful process of being naturalized have just as much resentment toward lawbreakers from Mexico who seek to get ahead of the line illegally as do American taxpayers.

Thus, there are ways to get Hispanics on board with us.

But as it stands now, Hispanic citizens who voted for Obama have been duped by political opportunists who do not care about them at all but see them only as pawns in a political game. And they have inadvertently participated in a coup, a takeover of the American system of government that has rendered our Constitution meaningless.

I do not believe most Hispanics want that kind of society. But in order to change it, they must be made of aware of what has happened and how they played a role. Many whites also played a role.

And now that the coup has been completed, the real agenda of the progressive minions has come to the forefront. It is not gun control they want but gun CONFISCATION. It is not "reasonable restrictions" they want but outright gun BANS. They do not want to leave law abiding citizens alone but wish to fingerprint and register us if we want to own certain types of firearms.

What part of "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" do they not get? The fact is, they get it, and they are going to violate it. And this is my whole point. These people have a deep, abiding disdain for the Constitution and the rights guaranteed therein. And they WILL disregard our rights.

This is lawless, bloodthirsty tyranny of the worst sort, my friends. Our Founders would not be shooting right now. The shooting would be long over and done. And Jefferson, Madison, Henry, Franklin, and Adams would either have the perpetrators in prison, or they would have them swinging from the nearest trees.

What we are facing right now in America is the proverbial line in the sand. Are we going to let them confiscate firearms as they did in Nazi Germany, Communist Russia, or Communist China? Are we going to allow ourselves to be fingerprinted and registered?

I say no.

So what are they doing to do? Arrest us all?

And if they send army tanks down the middle of the streets to quell an uprising of citizens, are they going to blow the heads off of the lone citizens who, as did the courageous anti-Communist Chinese students in Tienanmen Square, stand in front of the tanks and dare them to shoot?

And if you happen to be a anti-gun bigot, a gun control nut, reading this right now, let me be as clear as I can possibly be to you. We will never disarm. You are not getting our guns, period. We will resist. We will fight you to the death. You will have to kill us before you get one single concession of liberty guaranteed to us by our Founders.

Are you willing to do that? Are you ready for the fallout? If you and your jackbooted government hit squads fire on us first, it is "Katy, bar the door." All bets are off, and it will be war in the streets. Are you ready for such blood shed all because you want our guns?

We are not going to start a war. We have vowed that many times. We will never fire first. But if you fire on us, we will finish what you start. You had better be ready before you start down that path.

This is about much more than guns. This is about Constitutional rights as a whole. We will not stop until we take back what you have robbed from us. We WILL restore Constitutional law in this nation one way or another. THAT is a promise.

And woe be unto you who defy our Constitution. You are a traitor and a tyrant. And that Constitution spells out in no uncertain terms the legal recourse that is to be carried out against all of those who defy that Constitution.

You had best think through your position and come to a more reasonable conclusion.

http://thelibertysphere.blogspot.com/2012/12/musings-after-midnight-war-less.html