Nemo me impune lacessit

No one provokes me with impunity


No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

Article 1, Section 9, Constitution of the United States

If this is the law of the land...why in a republic (little r) and as republicans, do we allow mere POLITICIANS to the right to use a "title of office" for the rest of their lives as if it were de facto a patent of nobility. Because, as republicans, this should NOT be the case...just saying...

The Vail Spot's Amazon Store

Monday, December 21, 2009

The Socialist Revolution Has Come to America


This comment is right on the money ALL the emphasis is mine.

24. AQUA:

Those who voted for Obama who are not on the extreme left themselves, and who are now “shocked,” ought to do some deep self-reflection and never, never allow themselves to be gullible sheep again.

The fact is that our system, with all its faults, is the best the world has seen. But don’t ever take it for granted — it is vulnerable to destruction. Complacency and the belief that it is so strong that it will stand no matter what — is the enemy. It must be respected, nurtured and protected by We The People or it will be (may already be) lost forever. Never again allow its strengths to be stretched and stretched at every whim, fancy and false idea, until the “fundamentals” are paper thin, and finally gone.

Now the next “fundamental” to be challenged is going to be the First Amendment and Freedom of Speech. Subsidized newspapers, oh yeah. And the O has already not only signed us onto — but actually co-sponsored — a U.N. agreement to limit speech, criminalizing criticism of “religion” (guess which one). Of course, it can’t be law here — Yet. But it’s on the way. You know, International Cooperation and a twisted version of Rule of Law and all he spews out. You didn’t know? Why Not?

It was clear from the early days of his campaign, that this man was going to be extremely destructive to everything the non-leftist, overwhelming majority of Americans — including most Democrats — hold dear.

Although, by his “words” and his ambiguity, he was attempting to sell himself as a “moderate,” it was sooooo absolutely and unquestionably clear that he was coming from the Extreme Radical Left. Anyone who was of a mind to examine the man by his past would have had to have blinders on not to have seen it. Were you “in denial” or what?

ANY ONE of the many, many revelations, that appeared in blogs and on Fox easily confirmed this.

In addition, two interviews on NON-Fox TV made his intentions clear.

One, in which he said that it didn’t matter if lowering taxes actually brought more revenue into the Federal coffers — what mattered was (his interpretation of) “fairness.”

The Second, where he stated that he was going to close down the coal industry, and that, of course, would cause energy prices to skyrocket.

There was also universal coverage of his statement to Joe the Plumber that we should “share the wealth,” and his speech telling us that “You Can’t just drive any car you like, or eat as much as you want, or keep your homes at 72 degrees.”

What on earth did you think these statements indicated — a moderate??? Did this give you the impression that he would give a damn what the majority of We The People would be in favor of or against — like for instance in Health Care or wealth destroying Cap and Trade?

Did you think that his wife’s statement — that this is the “first time” she was “proud of her country” — an opinion so heavy in extreme radical leftist anti-Americanism — would not be shared by the man she was living with?

Did you ever hear him (except for the occasional qualified and without any of his usual enthusiasm) speak highly of or praise this Nation? Oh, yes, he (with reluctance, if you listened closely) “conceded” that he realized America had given a man with his modest background the opportunity to have gotten where he has — but then his wife did say, it was the “first time” after all.

There was the audio circulating the Internet of his disparaging the Constitution as being inadequate in that it only contained what the government could not do. That he preferred that it would contain what the government “must do for” citizens — and that blah, blah, Community Action blah blah REVOLUTIONARY CHANGE. (Now there’s a hint!)

How could you expect him to “Protect and Defend” what he has little respect for, appreciation for, and as far as I’m concerned, even understanding of.

Not just Wright, Ayers and Khalidi, but ALL of his associations were with radicals of one type or another. (Were there ANY associations he had or projects you heard about that he had done with truly “Centrists” or “Moderate” types? Any at all? No.)

How far did you have to deceive yourselves to fall for his story of not knowing what Wright was preaching after 20 years? Did you know that Wright’s church — he was a member don’t forget — was dedicated to Black Liberation Theology which is socialist and race-biased — one could even easily say, racist? If you didn’t, Why Not?

Didn’t it disturb you that all of his records from his Chicago office disappeared — where he had voted “present” a hundred and something times? Or that not one bit of his writing while at University was available — even though he was the “Editor” of the Harvard Review? And that he refused to release his grades?

Did you know there was a video of a speech he gave at a party for Rashid Khalidi which the L.A.Times refused to release because it would be damaging to him? What do you suppose it revealed? Something innocuous perhaps?

The man lied with a straight face over and over — obvious lies — knowing the MSM would never call him on it. And NOT the kind of fudging and spin most politicians do — outright lies about what his intentions and plans were — and he had zero compunctions about just simply either denying what he had previously said, or giving some obviously measly “I really meant …” when he’d contradicted himself — sometimes the very next day! (By the way, that’s right out of Alinsky. Say whatever you have to to get the power — the point is to get inside to do what you will “from within.”)

Did you know about the $50 Million Chicago Annenberg Challenge (for education) he worked on with Ayres, that totally failed to improve the scholastic levels of the students because the program was geared to politicizing the children instead of giving them the skills that would improve their lives? Why Not?

Did you know, the man who was being sold as the “savior” and for the “poor,” granted state money to and made deals with the Rezko crew for improvement of a Chicago housing project — left those poor people freezing in the winter and living in broken down (unrepaired) buildings, while Rezko made a fortune on it? Rezko, the man who is in prison now — who did a deal to help the O buy his Chicago mansion?

Why not? Or, if you did, didn’t you think these might be an indication of at least his character and abilities?

His Alinsky connection. His ACORN connection. It goes on and on, and deeper and deeper at every turn.

In 2007, he proposed a bill that would commit us to transfer almost $1 Trillion of our money under the U.N. Global Poverty Act. Moderate? If you didn’t know about it, WHY NOT? The information was readily available.

And, to top it all off, he TOLD US that he was a deceiver. In his book and in several statements he made, he said outright, that people saw in him what they wanted to see. Isn’t it clear that this is only possible in one who deliberately makes himself vague and ambiguous.

Finally — what the #*^! did you think he meant by “Fundamentally Changing America!”????

What we have in the White House is now much worse than “socialism.” It’s the kind of very dangerous, very embroiled alliances with huge corporations combining extreme regulation with government influence. Czars with no Congressional oversight. A combination of Extreme Radical Ideologues and Crooks — following Alinsky guidelines — which have zero, zero scruples — and is all about accumulating and weilding unemcumbered POWER.

The O gang should never be called “Liberals” again. They are not. They are Extreme Radical Leftists and should always be referred to as such.

Watch one (in two parts) of the David Horowitz Restoration Weekend Videos here:
David Horowitz, Pat Caddell (A Democrat!) and Scott Wheeler

No comments: