“AN ALL-OUT FRONTAL ASSAULT”
by Michael Gaddy, ©2015
(Jul. 31, 2015) — “None so deaf as those who will not hear. None so blind as those who will not see.” ~Matthew Henry
It has been downright funny at times to sit and watch as the Republicans react to the political antics of Donald Trump. Here, I believe, is a classic example of the factualness of a theory that has been posited by many: there is really no philosophical difference between the two major political parties in this country. Would the verbal attacks on Trump by Graham and McCain have been different in substance had they been delivered by Hillary or Obama? Is there not the common denominators of perpetual war, unlimited borrowing and open borders shared by all four?
When one dons the mantle of Republican Party faithful, membership in the inner sanctum requires logic and true insight be sacrificed on the altar of party loyalty. There could never be a better example than when a hysterically ignorant member of the local Republican Party hierarchy informed me in a rather loud voice that George W. Bush was a “true hero” because “He kept this country safe.”
Donald Trump set the whole political world atwitter when he made his comments about those who are in this country illegally. I personally believe what most politicians and pundits refer to as immigration policy should instead be referred to as an invasion policy by those who wish to destroy the culture that once made this country great. Why do these wonderful Republicans continue to support and vote for candidates who don’t believe in shutting down both our unprotected borders and the welfare system that brings most of the illegals to this country? When and if they ever do, they might again be worthy of consideration.
The more than obvious fact a country cannot maintain an open borders philosophy while at the same time supporting social welfare should be obvious to anyone whose primary focus is not getting more voters into the system—especially if those prospective voters are recipients of social welfare monies. Face reality, people; both parties realize that to maintain the illusion of legitimacy for this thing called government, there has to be the semblance of cooperation on the part of the masses in the form of voting. This is especially relevant considering the tens of millions of former voters who have given up, fully cognizant that no matter who you vote for, you get an ever-increasing oppressive form of government.
Now, back to the hysterically ignorant Republican dupe who stated good ole’ Dubya Bush was a hero for keeping us safe. In 2005, former FBI consultant and so-called “terrorism expert” Paul Williams wrote that MS-13, a violent street gang (you remember—those violent gangs the BATFE helped acquire weapons in Operation Fast and Furious) had brought at least two suitcase nukes into this country across our porous southern border with Mexico. According to consultant Williams, then-CIA Director George Tenet informed President Bush in October of 2001, just a month after 9/11, those suitcase nukes were actually in this country, describing the weight, design and serial number of one of the devices. (An inquiring mind would want to know how Tenet knew the serial number on the device—would this not indicate someone had visually examined the device—sorry, just my ole tin-foil hat mind engaging again.) Would a president truly intent on keeping us safe have immediately closed down the border and placed our military on that border in order to prevent the crossing of even more nukes? If not, WHY?
Why, then, if Bush was intent on “keeping us safe,” would he have described those of us in the Minuteman Project in 2005 as “vigilantes?” Is there not a history in our country of civilians watching for invaders on both the Atlantic and Pacific coasts during WWII? Don’t believe I have heard or read of them being called “vigilantes.” Well, I guess the difference is in whether your goal is to let the invader in or keep them out.
While on the subject of logic perversion, I would like to make a point that I’m sure is going to anger quite a few folks who call themselves both republicans and Second Amendment supporters. I have been receiving quite a few emails lately about the new treaty, agreement or whatever one wishes to call it with Iran reference their nuclear program. Obviously, this treaty/agreement has really angered those on the political right while most of those on the left accept anything Obama.
I believe all who speak on the merits of the Second Amendment will agree that the 2A was put in the Bill of Rights, not to protect hunting rights, but to allow a people to defend themselves from a corrupt, overreaching, tyrannical government. You know—one that resembles greatly the one we have now. In addition, all of us with the possible exception of those who continue to wear the rose-colored-glasses of Republican Party loyalty realize that we have been lied to over and over in order to gain support for war after war since 9/11. Obviously, hundreds of thousands of people in the Middle East have been killed, maimed, had friends or family members killed, or been made refugees by Neocons like Graham, McCain, Hillary, Tom Lantos, Joe Lieberman and others. Yes, Virginia, there are Neocon Democrats!
Witnessing one war after another for the past 14 years where in several instances we have supplied arms and training to those we claim represent international terrorism, if you were the leader of a country in the Middle East would you fear the government of the United States? Would you perhaps believe our government to be the purveyors of oppression and tyranny? Does it matter if it was a lie by Dubya Bush; a lie and missing emails by Hillary or a lie by Obama that led to a war and attendant devastation in Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen, Pakistan or Afghanistan?
Could it be the greatest threat to world peace and harmony resides in the Neocon element within both major political parties? Noted economist and author Dr. Paul Craig Roberts stated the Neocons who control our government are more insane with power than Hitler ever was, because they actually believe they can win a nuclear war.
Could it be the government we fear is determined to eliminate constitutional governance and individual freedom is the same government feared by Vladimir Putin, the people of Iran or any other country? Is our government not constantly using any tragedy they can find or create to advance their stated goal of disarming the citizens of this country? Are a great many of the citizens of this country fearful of the constant advancement of a police state? If you are unwilling to give up your rights to keep and bear arms because you fear this government, is there any reason the people in Iran should not have the same fear? Is the propaganda machine in this country not just as busy demonizing the ownership of guns by private citizens as they are demonizing Iran for desiring to possess weapons for their country?
So-called “conservatives” have puzzled me for some time. They claim to the heavens their belief in the Second Amendment and their right to maintain the means to protect themselves and their families yet willingly vote for and support the only candidate in a presidential election that had signed into law an assault weapons ban as governor (Romney). This provides irrefutable proof that these “conservatives” place political party politics on a higher plane than they do constitutional principles.
I suppose this perverted thinking allows a man who supports his rights to “keep and bear arms” in order to protect himself from a tyrannical, overreaching, oppressive government to believe that people in another country do not have the right to protect themselves from that same tyrannical, overreaching, oppressive government.
Of course, none of this should come as a surprise considering in 2001, after 9/11, the majority of people in this country fully bought into the theory that we were attacked “because we were free.” To further add fuel to the belief the vast majority of people are political morons, was the acceptance of the belief that in order to prevent future attacks and keep us safe, we should be more than willing to give up those supposed constitutional freedoms to a government we didn’t trust before 9/11, and accept in their place a police state intent on destroying our Bill of Rights.
After almost 14 years of an all-out frontal assault on our Bill of Rights and the expenditure of trillions of dollars we didn’t have—how safe do you feel now?
In Righteous Liberty