Thursday, February 25, 2010
The Pied Piper: An Enemy of the State
One would believe that over the last few decades of political scandals, shenanigans, wasted monies, alien appointments, presidential indiscretions, outright lies, and general felonious action from the top of our government that we might have become a nation of cynics. Quite the contrary: a child-like trust has crept over the electorate to prevent them from assessing reality and drawing logical conclusions. Up to now, we have had a series of presidents and legislators who have occasionally worked to defeat the American system. Today, it appears to be an all-out assault.
Regardless of how you felt about their policies and actions, we rarely came to the point that we would accuse them of not having some measure of concern for the republic. Lyndon Johnson saddled us with “Great Society” programs to the future detriment of our nation but in his final decisions not to run for office again showed a human side of a man conflicted and actually concerned for something greater than self. Richard Nixon, a man of foul personal habits and acquiescence to a felonious act was subject to moments of patriotism and wise national guidance. Even Jimmy Carter, who was cowed in the face of an enemy he never truly acknowledged, at least made a lame attempt to rescue the hostages.
As you continue the inventory you find a government of men, who faithfully demonstrate the capacity for error, misjudgment, avarice, and just plain clumsiness interspersed with gravitas worthy of their office. In no case was it possible to examine their background or administration in search of some laudable trait or action and come up empty. Hoover was a distinguished Secretary of Commerce caught in a financial distress not of his own making. FDR positioned America for war in the late thirties but had the will to see it through to the end, once it started. Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Ford, all vets in their own right, the ultimate test of patriotism, never gave outrageous cause to have their goals questioned. Reagan and both Bush’s support of troops and the general “America First” attitude are legend and tend to over-shadow most of the criticism leveled against them. Even Clinton could be observed rendering respect for traditions and the American purpose.
Each had to deal with a congress either of their own party or at least characterized by “mal-contents” from the other side of the aisle who were intent upon disruption. Each also learned how to deal with the opposition with varying degrees of success. As the last century progressed we found an ever-burgeoning contingent of malcontents in the congress ever willing to enact legislation not in concert with the founding principles. If the names were each to be listed there would be no further room for content and it would be election time again.
The time has come for America to wake up! Not everyone in Washington, D.C. is there out of a sense of devotion to the United States of America. As the number of decent persons has become so minimal, we frequently hear the suggestion that “we throw them all out and start over.” With a few exceptions, that might not be a totally outrageous idea. When the new crew comes in, billions in tax dollars could be saved in the time wasted trying to find the cloak room and not funding favorite projects. Add in the restrooms, dining rooms and other physical features which would have to be located and far less mischief could be accomplished.
Is it too much to ask that each elected national official, their aides, staff and appointed officials and their hired help above GS-2 be required to read and pass a simple test on the United States Constitution? How does one swear allegiance to and pledge to support a document which apparently no one has read? I happen to own and have read both the Constitution and the Communist Manifesto and be assured the Constitution is far simpler and easier to understand. If those who pass laws and enact regulations covering the behavior of Americans enacted nothing but material which would pass Constitutional muster, there would be little use for our Supreme Court. Do not for a moment believe that this is over-simplification. That document is very straightforward and recent interpretation often entails subtle views involving modernization of age old principals. A large number of the Articles start with the words: “congress shall make no law…” How ambiguous is that?
The principal violator is the current resident of the White House. For those who voted for him—you will probably never admit it!—you may foolishly think you voted for a Democrat of the same mold as Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter or Clinton. You are wrong! Those men, for all their faults, had a measure of respect for the Constitution, our military, the sanctity of the ballot box, and every day Americans. They held, even with UN membership, a notion of American sovereignty and respect for the country. I found much disagreeable with each but not to the point of questioning their fundamental understanding of how this country works. Even as I watched an assault on our freedoms over time, it was, at least, difficult to isolate the problems posed by support of individual programs and issues.
Today, no such difficulty exists. On a continuous river of issues from January 4, 2009 to date, we see a steady attack on the United States. It would not be nearly so worrisome if it involved air, land, and sea assault. We have the world’s finest military and they would no doubt repulse it. This is far more insidious and consistent with the modus operandi of the Taliban. This is an enemy who blends with the civilian population, respects no rules of sanctity, takes no prisoners, has no moral fiber, and demonstrates no respect for any demographic category other than its own confused mix of race and nationality. In today’s world, a 50% Irish background is not a political plus. Among thinking people, neither is being 43 3/4% Arab. That leaves 6 ¼% black African as his most endearing characteristic.
The overall view one is forced to finally accept is his principal goal of an absolute dictatorship. The appointment of three and a half dozen “czars” should be a sufficient tip-off. These people report directly to the president and each is in a highly sensitive position to shape American policy through regulation and advice. When the peoples’ behavior is directed by those who hold no accountability to the electorate we see a repetition of the infamous cabals of Soviet Russia and Germany of decades gone by.
Beyond the “czars” issue, we find our people confronted with matters which the average person has little familiarity. Reckless commitment of our national resources, total alteration of a governing style, absolute disregard for the national mind and opinion, and most seriously, the assumption that the electorate does not have the wit to recognize this ongoing all-out war on America. Here, the philosophy of governance may well be the most critical issue. Herbert Hoover made a comment which may be the key to isolating our current threat: “the difference between dictatorship and democracy was simple: dictators organize from the top down, democracies from the bottom up.” The current administration has definitely shown a penchant for top-down governance.
The time has definitely come for resistance. Not only must we be prepared to wage an Herculean effort to replace those in our government who are complicit with the administration, we must also alter our outlook on the matter of politics in its entirety. If we ever hope to see a return to sanity in our government, the people must become aware of the reality of the current situation. This administration depends on citizen ennui to forward their vile agenda. The president has moved at an unusually fast pace to make the changes he desires. We must keep up and be informed, vote, participate in local groups, vote, attend patriotic functions, vote, read, share, debate, and vote. We must become familiar with our actual history, not revisionist, and insist that we be as mindful of the founding principles as our ancestors.
We are the front line of defense on this insidious takeover of the government. Our role in the preservation of this nation is equally important to the role played by those who were at Concord and Lexington in the raw beginning of the republic. God willing, we shall not have to take up muskets to defend the country from tyranny. We must, however, be prepared and willing to make sacrifices, alienate those who insist on the status quo and don’t understand, and take this struggle directly to the enemy.
We must, in contrast to those who would rule us, be honest in all things. Lies are not scarce in Washington, D.C. or your local state house. We must not allow anything but the plain unvarnished truth to be dispersed in our presence. A scrupulous attitude toward airing only factual information and attitudes is absolutely essential. The resultant contrast between the parties of lies and those who insist upon the truth will be an obvious plus in changing minds and innervating people to resistance.
Unless we recognize what the Obama administration represents for the future of America, we shall be doomed to governmental control and oppression. We, as a people, can no longer casually stand back and be interested observers. If we are to overcome the evil force which is dedicated to the overthrow of the United States, we must rise as a people in opposition. Right now, the people are not being taken seriously. Unless we make ourselves known and alert to a public takeover we will be subject to a bloodless coup.
In His abiding love,
Posted by One of the Moons at 8:05 AM