Things have been rather busy as of late, and much has taken a back seat as a result. Not only have my contributions (rants) on this page suffered, but other projects have felt the impact as well. A planned podcast is sitting in idle status, and likely testing the patience of my partners, and my personal studies with a Wiccan training group have fallen behind. Even when I seem to get a breather, it is consumed by needed rest. But that doesn't mean I am not paying attention to what is going on in the world.
From time to time I make statements that might carry the whiff of radicalism to the more compliant. For instance, in a previous post I likely did more than insinuate that armed resistance may be merited in response to the current political animus dominating the country. Certainly the thought of open rebellion against a tyrannical government is a notion that doesn't cotton well with the milquetoast sensibilities of your average American Joe. We want things simple...nice and easy. No ruffled feathers. To achieve that we are willing to endure much, even when our values and intelligence are insulted regularly.
But I would submit that we have become dangerously complacent, all but forgetting that freedom must be constantly fought for, as there always have been and always will be those who are willing to deprive us of it. Furthermore, it is a monumental mistake to believe that would-be tyrants are always obvious. Because we have historical figures such as Hitler and Stalin, it's as if we expect all villains to be equally as blatant in their megalomaniacal evil. This is profoundly erroneous and simplistically infantile.
Evil today comes with a seemingly warm smile, assurances that they "feel your pain", and promises to remedy any and all injustices against you, real or perceived. These warm and fuzzy dictators understand the relationship that you do not; they are the parent, and you are the child. This is the essence of the nanny state, and of modern liberalism. And they are succeeding, slowly but surely, while we breed larger and larger groups of (voting) entitlement minded generations who are more than willing to trade freedom for a sense of security and the relief of personal responsibility.
So what of those of us who see things from a more traditional, and certainly more thoughtful point of view? You know, those of us who actually learned from the lessons of history? It is one thing if the ignorant would trade their freedom so cheaply, but this is a zero sum game. It's all or nothing, and the self reliant responsible folks will have their rights and freedoms stripped from them as well...like it or not. Surely this is not just. But then again, liberals care little for real justice. You are part of the collective, just another worker to feed the hive.
Anyway, this is the perspective that I come from when I talk of resistance against the liberal socialist machine. Let's call it dissent. While liberals believe that dissent is the highest form of patriotism, it seems that it is only so when they are the ones doing the dissenting. Even so much as a peep from the conservative corner (which constitutes, ironically, twice as many as those who identify as liberal), and they are either ignored or harangued into submissive silence with constant charges of extremism, racism, bigotry, homophobia, sexism, etc. So whats a reasonable patriot to do?
We have been wussies...period. We have sat by in our aw-shucks civility and watched not only as the ideological enemies of freedom have come to power, but as they have become mainstream. And now that we are not taken as a serious threat, what have we left to fight civilly with? Who will hear our pleas? Liberal to "moderate" politicians? Liberal to "moderate" Justices? The deck is stacked, my friends...the media, academia, popular culture...all dominated by fringe ideology. Even the Church...the longest trusted ally of traditional values, is slowly but surely coming around to "mainstream" liberal thought.
This is why I say that there are few options left. At some point, we will have to make the choice of either allowing our country to be wholly usurped and transformed into something utterly un-American, or we will have to get serious about our fight...and it will not be one of words. In the meantime, the enemy within builds it's troops and resources.
Is this a radical view? Extreme? For those content to bury their heads in the sand and deny the obvious, sure, I suppose it would seem that way. But I rely upon the historical record of not just America, but of nations throughout the ages.
As I stated in the outset, this is going to be long rant. Think of it as me catching up for my previous neglect. To the point, my issue at hand is none of the above, except that I recently found an article that did much to vindicate my "radical" ideas on this matter. For the life of me, I cannot recall the article in particular, but suffice it to say that each and every one of my views were expressed in a mainstream media outlet. And then I took heart even further in Michelle Bachman's recent comments that she wants Minnesotans "armed and dangerous" against Obama's recklessly over-reaching power-grabs. It seems that the genuine spirit of patriotism is starting to wake. The question is, is it to little too late? Is it strong enough to be fully realized, or will it again die down with a typical conservative whimper?
Beyond the overdue dissent by conservatives against a radical socialist government, here's another point I have made early on that seems to be getting some traction universally; that Obama is in fact an incompetent and amateurish excuse for an American President. In fact, it is my belief that he is historically the most incompetent amateur that we have ever had in the Oval Office.
Now I suspected this early on, even when I thought he would lose out to Hillary Clinton in the primary process. I had no doubt that he was slick. He was (and is) very well spoken, although highly reliant upon teleprompters to aid in delivering canned speeches written by ideological hacks. And he certainly musters a sense of confidence that went a great length in persuading gullible voters...even if we now see this confidence to in reality be little more that arrogant narcissism with the skill set of a used car salesman. But there is no denying that he was cool. And if we have learned one lesson from William Jefferson (Blythe) Clinton, it is that there are far too many of us who vote for style over substance.
But while we did not see the shadow side of these characteristics early on, they are now fully on display. One has to be in complete denial to avoid buyers remorse with this hollow excuse for a leader. Looking back, I too saw the appeal. But the thing that struck me more than anything was his ability to side-step or completely avoid serious answers to serious questions. And I noticed that the media, caught up in their orgiastic idolatry, gave him complete passes on just about everything. So I suspected, as I expected of any rational and responsible adult, that he was a sham.
It caused me no small measure of irritation to see Sarah Palin completely trashed as lacking experience. I was willing to buy the argument that some wanted more than a couple years of Executive experience, but it was maddening to see the same critics give Obama, who lacked any Executive experience, a complete pass. He was a first term Chicago politician, for crying out loud...corruption may as well have been tattooed on his forehead. Yet here he was going for the number one slot, whereas she was going for the number two slot, and they called her into question?
So I watched. And watched. And then I watched some more. At the end of the day, I was all but convinced that while Obama was certainly a gifted politician (in the worst way), he was also of no substance, except that fueled by ideology and a lust for power. Now it seems that the rest of the world is catching up with yours truly, although even I could have never guessed that he would be the only President that would make Jimmy Carter look good.
As of late the media has been buzzing with criticism of the Obamessiah. And I am not just talking about the reliable sources who have been calling "O" on his BS all along...I am also talking about the left wing nut job press and media. Chris Matthews, Keith Olberman...you know, the retarded left who masquerade as intelligent and unbiased sources. Heck, even Janeane Garofalo has had a few criticisms to level. And let me tell you, when the left starts to break ranks with their own anointed, you got problems. In this case, the problem is that while they wont come out and say it, they see that Obama is exactly what I have said all along...an incompetent excuse for a President, a complete amateur.
If the number of critical articles are to be any measure, it would seem that we are having a moment of large scale awakening in de-masking our con-man-in-chief. It's as if we are experiencing a national coming-to-Jesus moment, where we once were blind, but now we see. One can only hope.
As an example, here is one of many articles currently in circulation on the topic. Just for giggles, here are portions with a bit of Page commentary:
"...the Iraq war lingers; Afghanistan continues to be immersed in an endless cycle of tribalism, corruption, and Islamist resurgence; Guantánamo remains open; Iran sees how North Korea toys with Obama and continues its programs to develop nuclear weapons and missiles; Cuba spurns America's offers of a greater opening; and the Palestinians and Israelis find that it is U.S. policy positions that defer serious negotiations, the direct opposite of what the Obama administration hoped for.
The reviews of Obama's performance have been disappointing. He has seemed uncomfortable in the role of leading other nations, and often seems to suggest there is nothing special about America's role in the world. The global community was puzzled over the pictures of Obama bowing to some of the world's leaders and surprised by his gratuitous criticisms of and apologies for America's foreign policy under the previous administration of George W. Bush. One Middle East authority, Fouad Ajami, pointed out that Obama seems unaware that it is bad form and even a great moral lapse to speak ill of one's own tribe while in the lands of others."
Aside of Carter, this has to be perhaps the only American President in history to have been seen as completely impotent internationally. Within the space of merely his first year, Obama has alienated long time historical allies and emboldened enemies from third rate backwater countries. Quite an accomplishment, I would say. Try as I might, I have great difficulty in coming up with even a single country who has any measure of real respect for the current President. Israel has shrugged him off, since he utterly failed to comprehend the well-known unique and persistent issues it has faced for over half a century now. You know, that whole pesky "peace in the middle-east" thing? Britain is all but fully prepared to concede an end to our "special relationship" with them, not for lack of desiring to maintain it, but in recognition that Obama is utterly oblivious to its importance. In short, they can no longer trust us to maintain our end in said relationship. Even Nicolas Sarkozy has less than kind words for the current Commander-in-Chief. Say what you will, but when the French gain the moral high-ground and seem "tough" compared to you, you are way past due for a critical self-assessment. And then there are are our middle-eastern despotic friends. It hurts my head to try to think of a single one that he hasn't backed down to. Later in the article, the question is justly raised if perhaps the world view is now that "there is no cost in lining up with America's most serious enemies and no gain in lining up with this administration". Indeed.
In short, there is no reasonable debate about the fact that Obama is a moron on the international scene, and he is seen as such by friends and foes alike.
As a war-time Commander, the article points out that "Obama's policy on Afghanistan—supporting a surge in troops, but setting a date next year when they will begin to withdraw—not only gave a mixed signal, but provided an incentive for the Taliban just to wait us out."
Now I thought that we had resolved the issue some time ago that it was a horrendously foolish "strategy" to telegraph our intentions to the enemy. In other words, you don't establish and advertise self imposed time tables for withdrawal. As much as we (and Obama) criticize Bush for his military mistakes, it seems that this guy, who some still think is oh-so-smart, failed to grasp even a single lesson from the mistakes of his predecessor.
"...he is one of those people who believe that the world was born with the word and exists by means of persuasion, such that there is no person or country that you cannot, by means of logical and moral argument, bring around to your side. He speaks as a teacher, as someone imparting values and generalities appropriate for a Sunday morning sermon, not as a tough-minded leader."
Like I said, good with speechifying, but pathetically hollow. And it is certainly true that he does "speak as a teacher", but this is borne out of his unbridled and unmerited arrogance. When put to the test, however, while that which Mr. Obama has to teach us simple folk might find value in the cloistered fantasy world of liberal Universities, it never conforms to the realities of the world. It's as if he truly believes that we can counter the treat of a fully armed suicide bomber with heartfelt chants of Kumbaya. And this is his approach to virtually every problem, to address very real issues with wishful thinking. In the meantime, we continue to pay the price for his delusions. As one journalist put it, Obama has an "excessive belief in the power of rhetoric with too little appreciation of reality and loyalty."
"The end result is that a critical mass of influential people in world affairs who once held high hopes for the president have begun to wonder whether they misjudged the man. They are no longer dazzled by his rock star personality and there is a sense that there is something amateurish and even incompetent about how Obama is managing U.S. power."
There are my very own words: amateurish and incompetent. Ya think? I suppose I can take some consolation in the fact that there are those outside of US borders that fell for Obama's slick salesmanship too. Personally, from the moment he was gaining popularity in the primaries, I felt embarrassed at our own shallow stupidity. I suppose that it is some consolation to know that we are not stupid alone.
On the issue of terrorism, "Obama has asserted that America is not at war with the Muslim world. The problem is that parts of the Muslim world are at war with America and the West. Obama feels, fairly enough, that America must be contrite in its dealings with the Muslim world. But he has failed to address the religious intolerance, failing economies, tribalism, and gender apartheid that together contribute to jihadist extremism."
In other words, he's equally clueless on this score as well. Dangerously clueless. I could be gracious and attribute his ignorance to a sense of misplaced devotion to his own Muslim heritage (not to imply that he is himself a Muslim) by way of his deadbeat Kenyan father, but the truth is likely more akin to the fact that liberals tend to be horrifically ignorant in understanding the nature of real enemies, and are most likely to cower before them while spending their full energies in battles with demonized opponents such as the Tea Party. They would rather fight their own than another.
"America right now appears to be unreliable to traditional friends, compliant to rivals, and weak to enemies. One renowned Asian leader stated recently at a private dinner in the United States, "We in Asia are convinced that Obama is not strong enough to confront his opponents, but we fear that he is not strong enough to support his friends."
More of the same, put another way, but hopefully the point is becoming quite clear. You can expect the conservatives to criticize a President this radical. But now we have many of his own fellow radicals finally coming to grips with his ineptitude, and the world leaders finding him incompetent and unreliable.
So here I am, feeling quite content in finally seeing some of the talking heads stating that which has been obvious to me for some time now. We are in a helluva pickle here. Whether we want to acknowledge it, we are at war. And I am not talking about military engagements overseas here, I am talking about the war for our very soul as a nation, one that has been escalating within for decades now. Call me radical, or extremist, or whatever else you like, but make no mistake, America is being transformed. Already it is something that would not be identifiable to many of the Founding Fathers, how much farther can we go until it is no longer America? Will we follow their example and fight to maintain the ideals and freedoms they died for? Or will we knuckle under, settling for a nanny state that dictates our lives in Marxist fashion disguised by the warm and fuzzy charade of Oprah-like compassion?
Here's the challenge: take off the kiddie gloves. We can continue on as we have, being respectfully quiet. But that is what has gotten us exactly where we are today. I suggest something different, unapologetically calling a duck a duck. Obama is a recklessly dangerous moron, and we should say so plainly. He's a socialist. Let's say so. He's an amateur. Let's say so. He's a clueless excuse for a leader. Let's say so. I did, and now it seems that others are coming around to the realization as well. As it stands, he is pound for pound the worst President in American history...to the point that we should be ashamed we ever elected someone so vacuous. Let's own it, and if we pound it into our public consciousness enough, perhaps we can shame the less intelligent amongst us enough that they dare not vote so frivolously again.
Maybe next time somebody will listen to the guy with a GED and a couple years of community college. We can't possibly do worse than buying into the stupidity of self-styled intellectuals pushing for "change".