The Smoke Break

You want some brie with that whine?

Quotes From Your Children?

By

While there is great beauty in the freedom of expression allowed by the internet, it also shows the ugliness depths to which our society has degenerated as encouraged by the hypocrisy of the progressive ideology.

The following is a series of Twitter posts made after last weekend’s tragic shooting spree in Arizona.  WARNING:   it is graphic.

Freedom of speech may be a right, but it does not automatically grant the moral grounds to call for someone else’s death.  I would hope that if you know any of these people or if you know their parents, you tell them in no uncertain terms that this kind of  behavior is completely unacceptable and has consequences.  (For example, were any of them my employee, they would find themselves without a job.) 

Crybaby Barbie’s Warning About Evil Rich Parents

By

At least according to Barbara (“call me Senator”) Boxer, rich parents are evil.  After both of this morning’s tax increase smackdown votes on the Senate floor, crybaby Barbie took to the podium to deliver what was, I’m sure, in her mind at least, a chiding lecture on the failure of that august body to do right by the poor, hapless American people.  (The same people who voted to replace Democrats in Congress in numbers not seen since 1938 but who’s counting?)  In it she sternly told us that if the “wealthy”* were allowed to continue to keep the money they earned by not increasing taxes on them right now, all they’d do with it is “put it into a trust fund for their children”.

Apparently only the “little people” are entitled to look out for their children’s future.  In progressive liberal la-la land it is the responsibility of the rich to look out for everyone else’s children by contributing more and more of their income to overpay some federal bureaucrat to pass it out as entitlements to the vaguely-defined victim…errr..prospective Democrat voter-du-joeur.

Last time I checked it was neither a sin nor against the law to work hard and accumulate large sums of money.  And if people like Crybaby Barbie find having a stash so wrong, it isn’t against the law for them to write a big, fat check to the IRS, either.

But they don’t, do they?

Wealthy:  A squishy, shapeshifting line drawn between those whose income reaches $250,000 or $1 million a year and those whose icome does not; its exact location dependent solely upon the level of desperation felt by a Democrat on any given day.

Campaigning On The Taxpayer’s Dime

By

I suppose that blundering Joe Biden has to do something to earn the money we pay him to be Vice-President.  But campaigning for other Democrats seems a bit…shall we say, excessive.  I don’t recall ever agreeing to such a thing being in his job description; do you?

Biden, who has been designated as the administration’s political point man for House Democratic campaigns, will be on the road three of seven days a week campaigning for candidates, this official said.

Commentary: Detroit hosts leftist cavalcade

By

We’ve noted here before that they walk amongst us so it’s always refreshing to see someone in the media recognizing it as well.  We couldn’t have said the following any better so are posting Nolan Finley’s editorial in its entirety.  (Link to original at the end.)

The late state Sen. Joe Mack once said of the downstate backpackers who thought they knew more about what was best for his Upper Peninsula district than he did: “They come up here with a $5 bill and a pair of underwear and never change either one.”

Up that to $20 to account for inflation and it pretty well describes the crowd thronging to Detroit this week for the 2010 U.S. Social Justice Forum.

This ain’t no tea party.

The forum is a hootenanny of pinkos, environuts, peaceniks, Luddites, old hippies, Robin Hoods and urban hunters and gatherers. In other words, a microcosm of the Obama administration.

Up to 20,000 of them are expected in Detroit, although the actual count is hard to pinpoint since they’ll be sleeping in tents and 14 to a hotel room. Their mission is to tear down Wall Street and use the bricks to pave a Main Street where everyone lives in racial and social harmony, nobody has too little or too much, and food, shelter, transportation, education, clothing and cell phones are inalienable rights provided by a benevolent government and funded by — well, they’ll let someone else worry about paying the bills.

The actual event starts Tuesday. But the opening act got under way Saturday with the three-day Assembly of Jews: Confronting Racism and Israeli Apartheid. Of course. You can’t have social justice without giving Israel a good, hard kick.

The agenda is loose. According to the event website, it will mostly be an opportunity for jawboning by every possible grievance group, from transgendered Teamsters to tree huggers traumatized because their favorite redwood is now a deck in Bloomfield Hills. Every wart on American society will be mapped and lamented.

Organizers say the forums are transformational, noting the gathering held in Brazil in 2001 led to the election of the socialist, America-bashing Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva as president. But since we’ve already elected a socialist, America-bashing president, the event may be anticlimactic politically.

They also promise the forum will be “a people’s bailout for Detroit” that will make the city “a model for a just transition to a green 21st century economy.”

The last thing a city crippled by an entitlement culture needs to hear is that there is a handout bonanza coming that will spare it the hard work of rebuilding Detroit through individual initiative and raw, messy capitalism.

But the forum could serve an informative purpose. Take a good look at our guests as you step across their sleeping bags on Detroit’s sidewalks.

As incredible as it seems, they’re the ones winning the policy debates in Washington. Congress is frantically enacting their agenda, and they’ve got their man in the White House. You can bet had Barack Obama not been elected president, he’d be in Detroit this week teaching a community organizing class.

If we don’t come to our senses in November, this is what the whole country will look like soon.

By NOLAN FINLEY (editorial page editor of The News)

The Newest Enemy Of Liberals: Best Friends

By

One thing that stands out about progressive liberals is their fear.  Perhaps their greatest fear is that they aren’t good enough to make the cut, so instead of working on themselves, gaining knowledge, building skills, they take the wasteful tack of tearing down others to their level of incompetence.  It is the root cause of entitlement mentality derangement syndrome and why His Transparency was able to successfully cloak a skimpy resume accompanied with the false message of “hope and change”.

But the truth is that there is no such thing as a free lunch.  To get ahead you have to work hard, and you often have more failures than successes.  What we see in our schools today, however, is a rigid “no failure” posture.  Johnny didn’t study for Friday’s test as hard as Janey and therefore can’t properly answer all the questions?  That’s ok.  It’s not really Johnny’s fault (or even his parents’ fault) so we’ll give him a pass.  As the years roll on, Johnny continues to be coddled like some hot house flower and is eventually graduated with a serious lack of knowledge and skills but a strong sense he can do no wrong and that he’ll be taken care of regardless his effort or outcome.  Janey, too, is left with a sense that effort doesn’t really matter; both are left lacking the skills required to push ahead when the going gets tough or any understanding of accomplishment or the pride that comes with it.

In the real world, Johnny would be deemed incompetant and passed over for his lack of knowledge.  Indeed, this is the reality now faced by the current generation of our coddled graduates; is it any wonder that young people voted for President Walking Eagle in record numbers?  He is a walking, talking poster child for this twist on the Peter Principle (the theory that a person will rise to the level of their incompetance).  And it is this reality that the progressive liberals fight with tooth and nail in their fear-filled howls of protest against “big business”, “oligarchies”, and “greedy corporations”.

Now, if attempting to equalize outcomes isn’t bad enough, progressive liberals are dangerously taking this idea even farther.  Marc Thiessen points to an article in The New York Times that has outed their latest “we, the sheeple” ideology:  best friends are a bad thing.

…the classic best-friend bond — the two special pals who share secrets and exploits, who gravitate to each other on the playground and who head out the door together every day after school — signals potential trouble for school officials intent on discouraging anything that hints of exclusivity, in part because of concerns about cliques and bullying.

“I think it is kids’ preference to pair up and have that one best friend. As adults — teachers and counselors — we try to encourage them not to do that,” said Christine Laycob, director of counseling at Mary Institute and St. Louis Country Day School in St. Louis. “We try to talk to kids and work with them to get them to have big groups of friends and not be so possessive about friends.”

“Parents sometimes say Johnny needs that one special friend,” she continued. “We say he doesn’t need a best friend.”

To be sure, bullying has as much place in the schoolyard as it does at the dinner table or in the board room, but to use the fear of bullying in our schools to deny children the means of learning how and when to trust others by deliberately stripping away their opportunity to form close bonds with one another is both absurd and dangerous.  Not receiving an invitation to your best friend’s birthday party does not have the same ramifications as not receiving an offer for a much-needed job.  Yet it is through dealing with such tough denials by others from within the safety of the family that we learn the skills needed to survive and, indeed, to thrive.

“No one can teach you what a great friend is, what a fair-weather friend is, what a treacherous and betraying friend is except to have a great friend, a fair-weather friend or a treacherous and betraying friend,” said Michael Thompson, a psychologist who is an author of the book “Best Friends, Worst Enemies: Understanding the Social Lives of Children.”

While in can be argued that schools are one of the most important environments in which our children learn social skills, it is not the school’s responsibility to control a child’s relationships unless it directly interferes with the school’s primary directive:  the teaching of information.  The responsibility for managing a child’s relationships properly belongs to their parents; a responsibility American society continues to abdicate to others with dangerous agendas at greater and greater risk.

The Enemy Within: Islamic Jihadists Controlling U.S. Anti-Terrorism

By

PJTV’s Bill Whittle has posted a very disturbing look at how U.S. counter-terrorism efforts are being controlled by the Islamic jihadists.  Sources within the intelligence community have stepped forward to present some of the details about the liberal progressive politically-correct mindset that is driving an operational model that directly endangers America.

You can watch the interview here (you may have to register first) but I find the information contained in it so unsettling and important that I took the time to transcribe the interview.  Key points have been highlighted.

BILL WHITTLE:  Hi, I’m Bill Whittle from PJTV and I’m standing in front of what is very likely the most photographed structure on the face of the earth.  Inside the White House sits the President of the United States of America; the most powerful man in the world.  The President bears enormous responsibilities, and primary among them is to defend the citizens of the United States of America.  We’re here in Washington today to speak to a Department of Defense analyst and counter-terrorism official who, requesting anonymity, has made some very remarkable charges.  Charges that both the political and the military structure of the highest levels of our government are infiltrated by the very agents of the enemy against which we find ourselves fighting today.

BILL WHITTLE:   Well, you were given an assignment from the Joint Chiefs, essentially from the upper levels of the Pentagon, to understand what the Islamic jihadi enemy’s ideology and operational methods might be.  Is that a fair statement?

DoD Analyst:  Yes.

BILL WHITTLE:   Ok.  What did you discover?

DOD ANALYST:  Well, I was expecting to find that, well, there was some basis to the jihadi arguments that their jihadist warfare, that there were competing arguments and that we could leverage these competing arguments but because they were claiming Islamic laws as basis for their actions we had to start there.  And over a long period of time I ended up collecting a large body of Islamic law, an enormous amount of it available in English, and realized that if Islamic law is the criteria by which you measure legitimacy or illegitimacy you can’t show that the moderates have a doctrinal basis for the position they hold, and you can’t show that on the statement of the law the radicals are wrong. 

I was expecting to find competing views that had some merit. I was expecting to find that the moderate view would be the dominant view, and we’d have to figure out how to make these arguments so that people in the Middle East would know what it was, and could not find it.

Now, I could find that you’re not allowed to fight a jihad you can’t win, and that’s a limiting factor, but when you get to actually what published Islamic law says, it supports the radicals and what they say.  And you come to find, after you kind of get a sense for the language of jihad, and the language of how Islamic law works, that it’s pervasive, even in the U.S. Muslim community.

BILL WHITTLE:   So you got out, you do this research that you were tasked to do by the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Department of Defense; you come back and you say to them, “It’s the radicals that appear to have the doctrinal basis, not the moderates.”

DOD ANALYST:  That’s correct.

BILL WHITTLE:   Ok.  Well, presumably, this would be an interesting piece of information for our Defense department to have.  What were the consequences of you coming back with this information?

DOD ANALYST:  Shock. Because what my experience brought me to was the complete unresponsiveness to facts that as a practical matter they experience every day.  I think that gives way, on a different level, to one that basically has had me believing or holding that if you have no profession…if you have no factual basis to hold a position, you have no professional basis to support it.  If you’re professionals, then you have a duty to be competent; that includes the duty to know.  And if you are national security analysts who are professionals, you’re in violation of your oath to be competent, you’re in violation of your oath to protect and defend.  It just seems they picked up our whole national security apparatus and moved it from a factual legal basis to one that supports the narratives.  But it just struck me that when you hit a certain level, and I don’t want to sound too cynical, but at the same time it seemed where the point at which your future promotion was dependent upon toeing a party line as…let me rephrase that; toeing a narrative as opposed to orienting on facts, or I witnessed a complete shutdown.  A friend of mine used to call my brief, “the redco brief” or the “guilty knowledge brief”, meaning you see this brief that clearly lays out facts that must be accounted for, and at a certain point they just stopped coming.

BILL WHITTLE:   So when officials started telling you, “Hey, we’re not interested in this; we just really don’t care to hear this,” I mean, how pervasive was this attitude?  Was it large numbers of people or one or two key individuals?  I mean, just exactly what are we looking at?

DOD ANALYST:  I can’t give you names and numbers; I have to say, in fairness, there are scores of senior people who got it and were supportive, but it seems that the organizational emphasis, the institutional emphasis, was in the other direction.  And so you would get it in terms of people who would come up and tell you, “We really support you but we can only go so far.”  You know, I supported some missions where the people who I supported made it very clear to me that using the information I used really brought success in a stunning way.  And for a while there I thought that just the sheer force of those successful things would cause some people to do a double look.  It didn’t happen.

BILL WHITTLE:   Well, immediately after we concluded that interview here in the Mayflower Hotel, a second whistleblower came forward.  We received a phone call from another gentleman who’s also extremely concerned about the infiltration of radical Islam into law enforcement and defense.  Let’s go upstairs now and listen to parts of our interview with a former special agent for the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

BILL WHITTLE:   Ok, can you start by giving me a quick thumbnail of your professional experience?

FORMER FBI AGENT: I spent nearly 15 years working in the government with a primary expertise on the Islamic movement in the United States, the Muslim Brotherhood, and Islamic doctrine.

BILL WHITTLE:   And which department did you work for?

FORMER FBI AGENT:  The FBI.

BILL WHITTLE:   So you were a special agent for the Federal Bureau of Investigation?

FORMER FBI AGENT:  Yes.

BILL WHITTLE:   Ok.  You assert that we’re getting many of our cues on how to react to this terrorist threat from the Muslim Brotherhood, that essentially we’re letting our enemy tell us how to fight them.  Now, I think this is a critical point that we really need to make clear:  is this speculation on your part?  Or is this credible, factual information that you’ve been able to obtain as a former special agent with the Federal Bureau of Investigation? 

FORMER FBI AGENT:  It’s all factual information and it’s open to the public to digest if they so desire.  These documents from the Holy Land Foundation trial are available online.  All you need to do is Google “Holy Land Foundation”.  The documents also show that every major Muslim organization in the United States is a Muslim Brotherhood front, specifically the most prominent organizations.  The two most prominent organizations in the United States, or three most prominent, are the Muslim Public Affairs Council, the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), and ISNA (Islamic Society of North America).  CAIR is a Hamas entity; it is Hamas; and ISA is a huge financial entity for Hamas in the United States.  And CAIR and ISNA are the two groups that the U.S. government, including the FBI, DoD, state department, DHS, look to and utilize to do their outreach with the Muslim community in America.

BILL WHITTLE:   Can you tell us how these radical Islamic organizations interface directly with the federal government, in terms of the Defense Department, in terms of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, local law enforcement?  How exactly do these radical Muslim groups use their connections to suppress the defenses of the United States against these type of activities?

FORMER FBI AGENT:  That’s a great question.  At the national level, or the FBI and DHS, they actually are invited in by general council’s office of the FBI and DHS to sit in on brainstorming about investigative techniques that FBI agents are using in the field….

BILL WHITTLE:   I have to stop you because, frankly, that sounds so absurd that I have to really make sure I’m understanding you correctly.  Are you saying that the radicalized Muslim groups are invited in to learn our investigative techniques?  That they are invited in to get their feedback on how we’re going to fight against them?  Is that…is that what I understood you to say?

FORMER FBI AGENT:  Yes.  So for instance, in the FBI, the general council of the FBI, Valerie Caproni, invited these Muslim organizations, as well as the ACLU and other groups, in to make sure the investigative techniques and the attorney general guidelines and the way the FBI was going to implement the attorney general guidelines was ok and not offensive to these organizations.  As an investigator, and certainly speaking for many others that I know, that is…ummm…that’s nothing short of outrageous.  If you can imagine any group, whether it’s the Costa Nostra or the mafia or any kind of organized crime syndicate, certainly the Muslim Brotherhood could loosely fall under that category, certainly it’s much, much more significant than the mafia was, but to invite them in to make sure that our investigative techniques aren’t offensive to John Gotti; I mean, it’s absurd on the face of it but that’s exactly what we’re doing.

BILL WHITTLE:   Sure. Because you’re revealing in great detail exactly what your investigative and interrogation techniques are, right?  I mean, in a meeting like that you’re giving away the farm, essentially, in terms of how you’re going to be operating in order to make sure that their feelings don’t get hurt.  And then you’re essentially giving the enemy all of the details about how you plan to operate against them, right?

FORMER FBI AGENT:  Certainly a significant strategic look a how we’re doing things,yes; as well as some specific techniques.

BILL WHITTLE:   Well, you’d mentioned earlier that there’s no training; that people ranging from upper-level administrators in the FBI down to some local sheriff’s deputy in some county out in the middle of Arizona, some place local, local law enforcement; you mentioned that there’s no training for these people whatsoever in terms of the real nature of the threat.  Why is that?

FORMER FBI AGENT:  Well, again, I think there are a lot of pieces to that but number one is when the people advising the assistant directors, the special agents in charge in the FBI, the assistant secretaries, and the Department of Homeland Security, etc., when those are Muslim Brothers you’re not going to get training that discusses Islamic doctrine and who the Muslim Brotherhood is, their history and their influence, and their penetration operations here in the United States.  And, to boot, the people who ARE training the FBI are groups like CAIR, which is a Hamas entity and an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorism financing throughout the history of the United States.

BILL WHITTLE:   Now I have to stop you again because this is virtually impossible for me to process.  You’re saying that the training that our counter-terrorism forces get is determined by radical Islamic groups like the Muslim Brotherhood?

FORMER FBI AGENT:  No, I’m not saying it’s determined.  It’s given by them.  They have been in our FBI field offices, they’ve been in our FBI headquarters teaching and training our agents and our employees.

BILL WHITTLE:   Is this not too dissimilar to saying that the people who were determining the landing zones for  the D-Day invasion of Germany were Nazi S.S. officials giving out information on gunner placements, and where the best places to come ashore are; is it too far-fetched to say that? 

FORMER FBI AGENT:  It’s not about analogy.

BILL WHITTLE:   And then when the plans are finalized and all of the operational details are locked and sealed up in a little envelope, and then it’s handed over to the Gestapo and hopefully they won’t do anything mean with the information.

FORMER FBI AGENT:  Right.

BILL WHITTLE:   I think that as an average American citizen listening to this information, my first response would be, “How on God’s green earth did this happen?  How did this get this far?”

FORMER FBI AGENT:  This has happened because the Muslim Brotherhood has a long-term strategy; they are well-organized with hundreds of front groups that support their public relations, their research arms, they’ve insinuated themselves into our largest universities, they have Muslim student’s associations, which is the first Muslim Brotherhood group that formed in the United States in 1963.  MSA is on every major college campus in the United States, recruiting people to the Brotherhood in our own campuses.

BILL WHITTLE:   So even something as innocuous as a Muslim student association at any American university campus, you can categorically connect those campus groups to the most virulent, radical, anti-American organizations like the Muslim Brotherhood? 

FORMER FBI AGENT:  I can say that that’s 100% legally and factually true. The evidence entered into the Holy Land Foundation trial demonstrated the Muslim Students Association was the first Muslim Brotherhood entity in the United States formed in 1963 for the sole purpose of being and establishing the Muslim Brotherhood here, and it continues today to be a Muslim Brotherhood entity that has expanded and recruits students on campuses in the United States.

I did a Google search and the NEA Foundation site has a good compilation of court documents, etc.  for the Holy Land Foundation trials. 

I will let Clare Lopez, Vice President of the Intelligence Summit and a professor at the Centre for Counterintelligence and Security Studies have the final word:

To be sure, enemy influence within the Intelligence Community didn’t begin in 2009. In fact, the blueprint for the Muslim Brotherhood information warfare operation against the West goes back to a 1981 MB document called “The Project” that was discovered in a raid in Switzerland. More recently, the FBI discovered the MB’s 1991 U.S. Manifesto in a 2004 raid, a manifesto that not only confirmed the existence of the Brotherhood in the U.S., but outlined its organizational structure and agenda in this country.

The dozens of groups listed as associates in that document include a number who’ve succeeded in forging close relationships inside the structures of U.S. national security. One of them is the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA, another unindicted co-conspirator in the HLF trial). The FBI itself has maintained a longstanding liaison relationship with ISNA officials and placed ads in its monthly publication seeking Muslim applicants to become agents. A top FBI lawyer named Valerie Caproni joined senior ISNA official Louay Safi on a 2008 panel discussion at Yale University for a discussion entitled “Behind the Blindfold of Justice: Security, Individual Rights, & Minority Communities After 9/11.” Worse yet, in the wake of the horrific November 2009 military jihad assault at Ft. Hood that took fourteen lives and left dozens injured, it was revealed that Louay Safi was at Ft. Hood providing seminar presentations about Islam to U.S. troops about to deploy to Afghanistan. That’s an amazing record of successful penetration. And it’s just the tip of the iceberg.     

—

Until and unless the United States proves capable of appointing and electing officials to the top ranks of our national security leadership who both understand and reject the influence of Islamic jihad groups like the Muslim Brotherhood, our country will be incapable of effective defense against either kinetic or stealth jihad attack. We can do better than this…..much better.

If You Love America

By

I’d like to share some thoughts that are taking shape as I take a year-end look at this horrible administration, the media coverups for it, and the reactions to all of it from my fellow citizens.  The Left has so quickly caricatured itself post-inauguration that to criticize them is like holding out a bucket to catch common sense pennies raining down from Heaven.  For those who have eyes to see, what the Democrats have accomplished lo these last 12 months is a suicide mission to which even the most exalted (sic) jihadist would bow in respect.  And from a seat in the right-hand wings, good.  Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch of affirmatively graduated “equality for all” types.

But though I am personally a Constitutional Conservative and firmly believe that our inalienable Rights include reaping the consequences of exercising them, what I am fast finding tiring are those on the Right who make their arguments waving a gun in one hand and a Bible in the other.  Far too many of them are demonstrating the same, blind perspective as those on the Left they are so willing to gleefully bash.  There are many conservatives, myself included, who do not lay claim to any particular Judeo-Christian dogma, and while we may acknowledge a higher power, many of us have spent a good portion of our lifetimes fighting against the narrow zealousness of both the Christian Right and the athiests; seeing any zealousy towards religion as an enemy to America’s foundation of Liberty on equal footing with Islamic jihadists.

I believe that America is cut out of cloth that is, when push comes to shove, conservative, but that conservatism is moderate.  “Your rights end where mine begin” is a tolerance demonstrated time and time again when one looks outside of the ego-fogged spaces of those bastions of bureaucracies we call government offices.  We pay no mind to teenagers with the crotches of their baggy pants hanging down around their  knees, we look with bemused eyes upon our neighbors who sell their souls for a mortgage on a house so big they must work incessantly to pay for it and therefore never spend time rattling around its vast, undecorated space.  We begrudge no one the free expression of their individualness, though we retain the right to laugh at them and understand that when we pratfall we’re going to be laughed at, too.  That’s simple fairness, by the way.  Not democracy.

And so it is that in the heartland of America, which is pretty much anywhere outside the big, Democrat-ruled camps like D.C., New York, Detroit, and the entire state of California, that life is good.  But that goodness doesn’t mean we simply ignore those Democratic strangleholds.  On the contrary, we look upon them with great concern.  But we cringe in equal measure when any of our friends and neighbors demonstrate their own blind jihadism of guns and Bibles.

Maybe it’s just another example of the power of the anonymity of the internet but so far in my face-to-face discussions with even the most red-blooded of Constitutional Conservatives I’ve not yet heard the ugliness of the threats bantered about in online comments, nor the unpalatable amount of Bible-thumping preaching to make some or another point.  Yes, the Left has been utterly despicable in its verbal treatment of the Right for a very long time, and their vitriol does not go excused.  But I do not find any comfort from self-professed conservatives who would beat a liberal with either their Bible or a gun in retaliation.  Indeed, such fundamentalist cowboy tactics are exactly the fodder the Left looks for, the fodder they deliberately attempt to pry out of conservatives in order to have even the flimsiest of excuses to slap chains on our freedoms before their time in office runs out.  And while it’s obvious that logic doesn’t enter into any argument with a liberal, deliberately handing them your gun and pulling the trigger for them while holding up your Bible as a shield is an equally losing proposition.

It’s time that conservatives gather their collective, smoldering anger and do what we keep advising the pablum-drunk progressive liberals.  Grow up. While it’s true you don’t need to bring a gun to a knife fight, it’s just as true you can’t have a battle of wits with those who are unarmed.  The battle to restore the Republic of these United States will not be won with words directed to a deliberately deaf enemy who doesn’t have enough gasoline in their brain cell’s engine to process them even if they could hear.  You don’t stop an evil from sucking you dry by throwing a Bible or a cross at them.  You stop them with a silver bullet or a stake through the heart.

And those tools of the most enduring fiction are available to everyone who wants this country back, in the form of the ballot box and in the form of their dollars.  It’s time to get out from behind the safety of computer screens and televisions and cast votes for candidates who are willing to buck the current system of pork and earmarks and self-proclaimed special interest “victims”.  Such conservative candidates are rising up from the ranks even as you read this.  FIND THEM.  Deliberately seek them out.  If you have it in you, put your money where your font is and become one.  Ask them the hard questions and listen carefully to their answers.  Then support them with everything you’ve got.  Conservatives who love this country must begin to fight FOR what’s right, not just fight against what’s gone so terribly wrong.

I believe the majority of Americans are good and kind lot.  I believe that they have a lot more common sense than the progressive liberals dare to believe.  Even in the most blue of districts there remain honest, hard-working people who hunger for the truth.  The facts of what this administration in particular have done to set the stage for enormous and dangerous disaster right here within our own borders are clear enough.  It’s time to put down the gun, put down the Bible, and give the facts the lip service they deserve.  Don’t waste your time on those still drunk on the Kool-aid; we don’t call it entitlement derangement syndrome for nothing.  Those people are hopeless but like an idiot savant they are clever enough to keep pulling on your heartstrings to get your hard-earned money out of you in the form of donations to their cause de jour and collect a paycheck, especially where it concerns the environment or social “justice”.  The answer to this ludicrous behavior is simple.  And like charity, it must begin at home.  If  conservatives are to become at all effective, it’s time to starve the beast.  Stop donating to organizations like, for example, the Sierra Club, the American Heart Association, the American Diabetes Association, the Catholic Charities.  Any charity that has their hands out for government funding should be on your own personal conservative political watch list.  (Go to Guidestar and look up every non-local organization that asks you for money; all charities must file IRS documents and state how much of your hard-earned tax money they receive from the government.  Then do a search for how they spend your money to advertise for or to support progressive liberal causes.  I dare say you’ll be more than a little surprised.)  Ok, yes, it’s work but nothing, especially our liberty, comes without a price.  You can, of course, choose to keep it simple and invest your charitable dollars locally.  And, indeed, I dare say that is where they will do the most good.

The progressive liberals in this country have thrown themselves with a breathtaking belly-flop of truly unfathomable joy onto the Green Mile.  The blatancy of their avarice and greed is the rope with which they now hang themselves.  Where cool heads prevail, to take back this country and return it to the firm foundation set forth in the Constitution will be child’s play for conservatives in 2010 but such “play” doesn’t mean stooping to their level of vacuous visciousness; hiding behind Bibles and guns is no different than hiding behind progressive liberal “equality” and “social justice”.