Obamunist
reaction to citizens working to stop the socialization of the United
States has been to call them (us) domestic
terrorists. To the extent that Sam Adams and pals terrorized
British loyalists, they're right. Good on us.
The concept of leaving the threat of force on the the table is
salutary. Liberalism doesn't recognize it, but it's true, and an
appropriate tool when properly used. Today, 75% of Americans
adamantly oppose having Obamacare forced on us. So far, the
Democrat response has been, "we don't care what you want." To that end, they've lied, bullied, and now threaten to impose
it by the sneak attack called reconciliation. That's just item
#53 on a long, long list. Whose country is this? We may find out
soon enough.
Here's the thing. Any number of assholes,
from Charles Manson, to white, black and brown separatists,
supremacists, sophists and anarchists have tried to foment bloody
revolution in this country. They, all of them, failed because
said movements were transparently hate-based, a non-starter in the
U.S. Spontaneous combustion, and that's necessary for the
purpose, requires that a very
large number of good people see a clear and present threat to their
freedom. Nothing less will support a flame.
This current government is more radical than could have been imagined by, say Hubert Humphrey, when he broached the possibility.
But, here we are. Wrong doers ought to be fearful of the consequences,
what's wrong with that? Nothing. If you don't hit a
trip-wire, there's nothing to worry about. So be good, and
stay clear. IMHO. And hell, Liberals are fond of
instructing us, usually when siding with our nation's enemies, what a "terrorist" is." There you go.
|
|