Sovereign states taking victory from the coming federal tyranny
An Obama Victory in 2012 is very likely for the reasons stated in this article. The solution to constitutional abuses by the federal government is also the one stated. States and local governments simply do not have to go along with unconstitutional federal decrees because each State in this Union has sovereignty to decide its own fate. Sure, that means that the federal government will attempt to blackmail and intimidate local governments by cutting off federal funding but States can also withhold taxes to the federal government and secede from the Union if necessary. When that happens federal government will obviously use federal forces and expose themselves to all American patriots as the out of control central government that they will have become. When Heartland America wakes up some States will get victory from federal tyranny.
American Thinker: How Barack Obama Will Ensure His Victory in 2012
The coup de grace Obama will use against rightist opposition is mostly embodied in one word: Amnesty. This, along with some other measures, will both grow the Hispanic voting block and ingratiate Obama to it. This will enable him to create a powerful coalition of blacks, young voters and Hispanics that, along with the older whites he will be able to retain, will constitute an insurmountable electoral force. And this is why amnesty has long been a dream of the Democrats. Even easier than brainwashing new voters (which the media and academia specialize in) is importing them.
But having a water-carrying mainstream media isn’t enough — the left will also try to stifle voices that would report the truth. To this end, they will attempt to reinstitute the Fairness Doctrine. And although it may be ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of two years hence, this may not be the case once Obama has the opportunity to appoint two or three justices. Also lying further down the road may be hate-speech laws, which target “hate” about as much as legislation that would destroy talk radio ensures fairness. They already exist in most of the western world and, incredibly, some judges actually view this as precedent. Ruth Bader-Ginsberg, that affirmative-action appointee, said herself that the Internet makes other nations’ court rulings readily available and that we should learn from them. Said she, “[As judges and lawyers] we must look beyond our borders, to the laws and constitutions of other nations.” By the way, some people call this a judicial philosophy. I call it malfeasance and treason.
So this is our probable dystopian reality. Yet we do have some recourse. And here is what I recommend for now.
The Founding Fathers meant for us to be a nation of states, not a nation state; they intended for most power to rest on the state level and for localities to largely shape their own destinies. We must embrace this model with boldness and vigor. Huge swaths of our nation are now in the pocket of the left, but there are yet bastions of light wherein traditionalists can hold sway. In these places, campaign hard and seize control of the local governments. Then, resist any and every unconstitutional mandate.
Date posted: Wednesday, November 12th, 2008 5:25 pm | Under category: American patriot topics, Danger to the US, Illegals, Liberals/Left, constitutional issues, politics
RSS 2.0 | Comment | Trackback
The author paints a bleak but likely scenario. There are plenty of “wildcard” events that could change things, but short of continental nuclear devastation, it looks like we as a united group of states are doomed to fall leftward.
I am glad to see that people are realizing that secession may the only way true Americans can survive, but I grow more doubtful that it will be a bloodless divorce.
I do not see it that way. I do not think our military would fight their own people. There might be a couple of incidents at first if they got orders from the top but each member in the military is sworn to uphold the constitution and in the end the majority of low and middle leaders in the military would not obey unlawful orders of a tyrannical federal government. I see a break up of the Union as much more a possibility then our military using extreme force against Americans. See what people at the VFW’s, American Legion’s etc. think about Obama and the far left now and believe me that will be nothing compared to what it will be like if the military ever is used in force against Americans.
I certainly hope you are correct.
If Obama’s “Gestapo” takes-hold, I’m confident they won’t have any problem fighting us.
Actually even under the Third Reich in second world war there were high-ranking officers that were close to Hitler, and they privately denounced the SS and their inhumane treatment of the Poles and the Jews living there. After all, these guys were professionals and many of them were in the military long before Hitler became “Reichsführer”. Not all of them were necessarily National Socialists. It’s said that some of Hitler’s staunchest opponents were actually among his military staff. Erwin Rommel was one of them. So I think there are always some people left with some sanity - unfortunately they’re usually in the minority. I’d be surprised if the entire U.S. military decides to just take the orders even if it goes against proper procedures and rules - not to mention the Constitution. I do think that in the case martial law is declared, there might come a division between those men that stick to the orders to save their own butts, and those that will stick to their faith, principles or simply the Constitution.
Lets pray it never comes to that. More likely they would send in Federal agents and have all the state politicians supporting secession and the militia leaders arrested and then they would set up a puppet State government.
That would not work in Texas or Oklahoma because patriots would not allow it to happen but it could work in smaller states. So for secession of any state to succeed it has to all start in Texas or Oklahoma. I think Texas would support Oklahoma and Oklahoma would support Texas.
If Federal troops were ordered to use force against Texans I can see a whole lot of military people just leaving and taking their weapons with them. I also do not think what will be left of any such Federal army could take and hold Texas even if they wanted to. You also have to realize that the Federal government would be totally bankrupt. Foreign nations would stop buying U.S. debt. That means you will need troops in every city in the U.S. to deal with the looting and rioting from those who are government dependents. In fact, the Feds could not handle the ciaos of a nation in depression and a nation in civil war. Local militias would have to take matters into their own hand all over the nation.
It’s chilling that we are having this discussion as a serious matter.
Hmmm, here’s a little “hope” by way of sinful human nature:
(The Clintons) Dissed
http://politicalmavens.com/index.php/2008/11/12/dissed/
It’s just like the Lord to use evil people fighting amongst themselves as His way of punishing them.
Since the left will be pretty much unchecked by the opposition party, provocateurs in the form of the Clintons and their
croniessupporters might be the “check” against them them that the god-fearing need.This is nothing just wait until next year. It starting to look like the Democrats are going to steal enough Senate seats through voter fraud to get the super majority to pass anything they want and we know what that means.
Is it just a coincidence that the government will also be running most of our large corporations and banks by next year? That is the very definition of socialism but the power brokers also made sure a socialist was elected President at the very same time and not just any socialist but a Marxist socialist who has no experience or accomplishments of his own and one who could be totally shaped by CFR advisers. Who would have ever dreamed that America would turn socialist just a few years ago. Then the President elect puts a pit bull in charge as chief of staff. Is history repeating itself here or what? Perhaps the dream of fascist national socialism or really fascist world socialism never died with Hitler and the Communists it just was put off to the next generation after they brainwashed everyone through the leftist education system and the left controlled national media. Even the churches have done a hard left turn.
Now we will see its fruition unless American patriots rise up and squash their dreams. Like Joe Farah, I think Conservatism is now dead. I am not going to identify with them anymore it is a joke. There is nothing to conserve anymore. What we need is a radical patriot movement that will bring the U.S. back under the constitutional government given to us by our forefathers.
Conservatism as a political philosophy was never really about plainly conserving things. It’s about defending truth, virtues, principles, honoring the hard work of our forefathers and the wisdom that comes to us by tradition. The radical patriotic movement you describe is Conservative per definition. There is no contradiction between these patriots and Conservatism.
As the father of modern Anglosaxon Conservatism, Edmund Burke, so eloquently said: “All that is needed for evil to triumph, is for good men to do nothing.”
Amen to that!
Nasrani, I think that what is happening is that people who hold to conservative values have just recognized that the typical defensive posture taken by many (most?) conservatives has led to these values being “trampled under foot” by the “swine.” They have not divorced the “defensiveness” from the other values, hence they consider Conservative dead because they believe it is unable to defend itself.
I think what is also happening is that (conservative) people are recognizing that they must be willing to set teeth to their beliefs, up to and even including “watering the tree of liberty” with one’s own blood.
Yes, I do understand your position. In fact, I wrote elsewhere myself that I think true philosophical Conservatism is dead. Most people who are considered “conservatives” these days just aren’t true conservatives. It’s just a label. For instance, in Europe, the liberal media call anyone, including right-liberals and those on the center-Right, “conservatives”, while most of those on the Right totally reject that label and regard conservatism with contempt. But unlike the Right in Europe, it seems the American “Right” (aka Republican Party) is willing to call itself conservative, but in reality it holds on to an ideology that is not in lign with Anglosaxon conservatism and constitutional thinking.
In my understanding, Western/Anglosaxon Conservatism stands for truth and liberty within a framework of Judeo-Christian values. If a movement that holds on to these values arises to fight against tyranny, that is not anti-Conservative at all. In fact, it is what conservatives ought to do! I’ve used this example before, but this explains why an Old Whig like Edmund Burke supported the American Revolution and yet at the same time vehemently opposed that of the French. The American one was just and virtuous, in his view, while the French would replace one tyranny (absolutist monarchy) by another tyranny (anticlerical radical enlightenment). And a few years after his death, he was proven right.
People that have nothing they are willing to die for are not fit to live.
Yes, you are both correct but people put different meanings on Conservatism. There are some things that I do not even agree with “so called” U.S. conservatives on. But I would not disagree with the political philosophy that Nasrani expressed.
The problem I have having with American conservatism is much like what Brett expressed it has no fire in its belly. People want to sit back and say they are conservatives but most have not done a damn thing to defend truth, virtues, principles etc. In fact, some who call themselves conservatives have just voted for a Marxist leaning socialist and helped to elect the most radical anti conservative government this nation every had. How then can the conservative movement be alive?
It is sort of like the evangelical movement. Evangelicals used to mean those believing in the infallibility of the Bible for all faith and practice with a emphasis on a new spiritual birth and bringing the good news to the world. But now many call themselves evangelicals who redefine the clear truths of the Bible and who support pluralist alternative paths to God apart from the Gospel. They are 180 degrees apposed to what evangelicals stood for but yet they call themselves evangelicals.
Conservatives in the same way were grounded in Judeo-Christian religious teachings and the traditions and the writing of our founding fathers. Instead now conservationism is often linked to big business and defending predatory Capitalist practices and maintaining a lavish lifestyle for those within the Capitalist system. I can’t even say the free enterprise system because in many ways it is not a free enterprise system anymore but Conservatives continue to promote what they helped kill by doing nothing.
So I am not real comfortable with calling myself a evangelical anymore because the meaning has been corrupted. I also am not comfortable with being identified by the name conservative anymore either because many in it have been corrupted by greed, power, and corrupt politicians. Often they identify with Christianity as a personal prosperity message and they de-link themselves from the social moral teachings of scriptures. In other words, they use predatory capitalism to justify their lavish often immoral lifestyles and do not use their God given prosperity to help others.
Thus I would now just like to call myself a bible believing Christian and an American patriot who wants to radically change this nation back to where individual States retain most rights - That is the government that our founding fathers set up. Not that we should agree on every single point with the founders, because they were not right about everything either. So we do need to build on their foundations but we must do that within the system that they set up to protect us from tyranny. We do that through constitutional amendments not through unconstitutional legislative laws and activist judaical decrees. We only have a living constitution in the sense that we can change it by amendments. We do not have a constitution that can be changed by minority views, congressional decrees and individuals opinions.
Therefore there has to be grass roots movement that will insure that all elected and appointed officials abide by our constitution, bill of rights and all other amendments. I think only American patriots who believe in and are swore to our constitution can now bring that restoration about. Conservatives for the most part might agree but like the liberal evangelicals many have broken off from the foundational tree and most are actually allowing the tree to die by either doing nothing to restore it or by being part of the problem.