Would a coup make things better? ~ By Patrice Lewis

Exclusive: Patrice Lewis says only solution is to 'divvy up our land mass into 2 nations'

But miracles, by definition, are not the norm. Consider these immortal words, stated by Daniel Webster in a Fourth of July speech in 1802:

We live under the only government that ever existed which was framed by the unrestrained and deliberate consultations of the people. Miracles do not cluster. That which has happened but once in 6,000 years cannot be expected to happen often. Such a government, once gone, might leave a void, to be filled, for ages, with revolution and tumult, riot and despotism.

The point that Patrice makes in this column is quite extraordinary: We must keep Daniel Webster's immortal words in mind.  "Revolution and tumult, riot and despotism" could get awfully ugly in this day of age. 

Would a coup make things better?

Occupy Wall Street and Madame Guillotine ~ By Phil Elmore

Phil Elmore writes about the great contrasts in what the "Occupy Wallstreet" movement groups want. The contrast is that the very people that all of this social upheaval is focused on are the ones that provide not just the jobs, but the very technology that the revolutionaries depend on. So, lop off their heads, you revolutionary mobs, and then watch not just the Blackberries, but the IPhones and everything else quit working.

What we have to worry about, I guess, is that Phil is right. Notice I didn't say, "IF he is right." And can I throw in one more point? Anyone that think it is the rich that are greedy is sadly mistaken. It is those that aren't willing to actually work to get ahead, that want more in return than they are worth, or willing to give, that are greedy. That pretty much defines most of those that want to disrupt life for the rest of us. It's just about greed.

*     *     *     *

Occupy Wall Street and Madame Guillotine

PHIL ELMORE

By Phil Elmore

October 12, 2011 ~ 1:50 pm Eastern

© 2011

As the Internet and social media help increasingly well organized Marxist protesters bring their "Occupy Wall Street" mobs to cities across America, the sense that history is repeating could not be more keen. Not since French peasants dragged nobles to the guillotines have so many been so excited about emptying the pockets of so few.

In Glorious Leader Obama's America, this is not a fad, and it is not a passing trend. This is, instead, a cultural shift that sees whining entitlement, peevish jealousy and naked covetousness become the public norm for the liberal left and the Democratic Party in America.

A hilarious image posted online sums up the hypocrisy of the protesters, who snarl and growl about "evil corporations" while clothed in, decorated by, transmitted across and connected through the products of the capitalist industries they mindlessly condemn. Amusing as this may be, there is nothing funny about the proliferation of "occupy" protests. These demonstrations are blooming like fungus throughout our beleaguered nation. They are a threat to every productive citizen.

READ MORE on WND.com

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

So you say you want a revolution? ~ By Patrice Lewis

We need look no further than our own history to find an example of constitutional government. Riddled with mistakes as it was, our nation leaped ahead 5,000 years in terms of technology, medicine, manufacturing, standard of living and other benefits – all due to the unique freedom from governmental interference our founders laid out. "By 1976," notes author W. Cleon Skousen, "the 'noble experiment' of American independence and free-enterprise economics had produced some phenomenal results … [it] allowed science to thrive in an explosion of inventions and technical discoveries …" Communication was revolutionized, the average life span was doubled and our standard of living was exponentially enhanced.

But this isn't good enough for the progressives. They want to make over our nation in their own image. They desire power instead of freedom. They prefer to be slave masters of a bankrupt state over being part of a free society.

So let's give them what they want.

Let's leap ahead and pretend that our nation has already divided. Most of the people reading this column will chose to live in the CSA. But what about those who chose to live in the PSA?

When the dust of producing a new country has settled and the hoopla has died down, the citizens of the PSA may eventually recognize what we've been trying to tell them all along: They've been able to get away with all their whining about entitlements and fake "rights" for as long as they have because they've been riding on the backs of those who supported our original Constitution. When that document is thrown out, everyone will want to get on the government dole. To paraphrase Margaret Thatcher, their socialism will work just fine until they run out of other peoples' money.

Then, and only then, might they realize how good they had it before screwing it up. And then we'll get to say, "I told you so."

There was a column that Patrice wrote last September which I have not quit thinking about, and which this column expounds on. Patrice wrote the following in "A House Divided":

We will never agree.

When it comes to progressives versus conservatives, there is no middle ground to agree upon. In other words, my liberal reader holds opinions so far in contrast to mine, and vice versa, that we will always differ on everything of political significance.

Here's the thing I worry about. Let's say that somehow, America divided as Patrice suggests. We're here in the CSA (Conservative States of America). A bloody civil war or revolution is avoided. So... Are we going to be unified? Would there not be disagreement on any issue? Assuming we have a Constitution similar to what the Founding Fathers came up with, there would still be free elections. Well, guess what? Would there not still be dissent? How about differences between the candidates to represent us? In my humble opinion, we would still have division, even in the Conservative States of America.

Well, if we are going to consider all of the options, we need to keep our options open. Patrice gave us the two options of revolution or dividing our country. But I believe there is a third option that needs to be added to what we need to explore.

The third option that I would want on the table is to avoid civil war or revolution. It will also avoid dividing the country as Patrice suggests. Unfortunately, there is a slight obstacle: It may take generations in order to reverse the direction this country has taken.

I know, that is a great challenge! And, hopefully, it isn't too late! It has been a long process for progressives to get America to where we are now. Education and the media had to fall under their control. Conservatives would have to reverse-engineer the process and methods that the Progressives have used over the last century.

Is this option possible? Yes, absolutely! It can be done! But, it will take effort, and a few of us may have to make sacrifices to get the word out, especially those of us that live in progressive territories (blue states). The time is NOW to make sure that we can offer some hope. The time is NOW to make sure that enough people are armed with the information that can be passed on to our future generations!

Allow me a moment to step out of the box, please. I really didn't want to tell you this, but I guess I should. In the past few months, I've seen my blog stats "slump a bit" (there's a major understatement for you!). The month of July was a total bust. It was giving me heartburn. I took some time off in order to get away for a few days and sort things out. I was giving great consideration to the thought of finding something else to do, like spending the rest of my life playing "Angry Birds."

Why? I was becoming an "angry bird." My frustration was overwhelming. I wondered if there was a reason to persist. I began thinking that it was time to call off the relentless pursuit of uninterrupted freedom. Apparently, it was easy for me to ignore the fact that there could be that one person that read what I had to say, that would possess the ability and the passion to fire up a lot of other people; no gunpowder needed. Giving up was not an option. That would eliminate the third option that I suggested above.

Patrice may be right that dividing the country into two separate entities would be a better solution than a revolution. But, as I remember it, there was a civil war the last time the United States divided. Or, here's another thought; think: North Korea and South Korea. How's that working out? I'm just sayin'...

UPDATE Aug 02, 2011:

Alex Jones makes a statement that I believe may be too close to the truth.  If he is right, everything that I wrote in this post is moot... In other words, it may be too late.

Video provided by TheAlexJonesChannel on Aug 1, 2011

The last words that Alex spoke in the video above are rather haunting: “Spread the word, warn the people, defend the Republic, defend liberty. You have been warned.”

RELATED STORIES:

• Occupied Nation ~ By Patrice Lewis

• A house divided ~ By Patrice Lewis

• The arrogance is breathtaking ~ By Patrice Lewis

*     *     *     *

So you say you want a revolution?

PATRICE LEWIS

By Patrice Lewis

July 29, 2011 ~ 9:00 pm Eastern

© 2011

Consider these recent news headlines:

• Republican and Democratic leaders are floating the idea of a new "Super Congress" not authorized in the Constitution

• A legislative proposal in San Francisco seeks to make ex-cons and felons a protected class, along with existing categories of residents like African-Americans, people with disabilities and pregnant women.

• The Ohio appellate court handed down a critical Second Amendment-bending decision over the weekend in which a minor offense can eliminate one's right to bear arms.

• In the latest chapter of the gunrunning scandal known as Operation Fast and Furious, federal officials won't say how two suspects obtained more than 360 weapons despite criminal records that should have prevented them from buying even one gun.

Shall I go on? I located these headlines in about 30 seconds. I can list more if you like.

As these articles abundantly illustrate, our elected officials have abandoned all pretense of adhering to the Constitution and Bill of Rights. They don't even bother pretending anymore. In fact, their attitude is mockery and downright hostility whenever it is suggested that the government should limit itself to the small, streamlined entity it was meant to be.

Today, anyone who suggests our government is out of control is labeled a right-wing extremist or even a domestic terrorist. Yet all the constitutionalists and tea partiers want to do is return our nation to the governmental restraints outlined in the Constitution and Bill of Rights. We do not want a theocracy. We do not want an oligarchy. Is this too much to ask?

Sadly, yes. The progressives and the constitutionalists have no middle ground anymore. Listening to the arguments on both the left and the right provides abundant evidence that our nation as it currently exists is not salvageable. Freedom and slavery can never reach an accord.

I mean that in all seriousness. America as it was meant to be cannot be brought back on track. There are too many powerful people – virtually the entire government, mainstream media and populations of large urban areas – who are too addicted to spending, to entitlements, to control and to manufactured "rights." It's too late.

In an earlier column, I wrote that We the People are actually living in an occupied nation; the occupier – the enemy – is our own government. But progressives don't see the problem. That is, they don't see that an ever-growing governmental body is a bad thing – and they'd like to see more of it. They want our wealth redistributed. They want unconstitutional entitlements such as health care. They want the debt ceiling raised. They want everything they can lay their hands on when it comes to their agenda, and the Constitution be damned.

"The federal government is an out-of-control beast, no longer a body of representatives of the people but rather a house of aristocracy whose members do nothing unless it's for the good of their house," wrote a reader. "We the People have become nothing more than wage slaves to the gluttonous bloated entity our government has become. Nothing short of a military coup d'etat is capable of restoring our country back to the people, back to what was intended by the Founders."

READ MORE at WND.com

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

Why violent revolt lies in our future ~ By Larry Klayman

Of course, when Larry Klayman's column is read, most people will undoubtedly say, "That can't happen here." With all of the things going on that Larry discusses in this column, will you still be able to say, "what is there to worry about?"

And, we all know the reaction that the progressives had about the Tea Party movement. Tea partiers were criticized and called derogatory names by the leftists, with claims that tea partiers were potential domestic terrorists. Why all the leftists' lies about the tea party movement? Could it be because they are concerned that the "tipping point" could be reached soon with all of their tyrannical and socialist agenda being passed, like ObamaCare? Of the various signs of dark times to come that you will read about in this column, do you know if any of them will push this country over the edge and spark a violent revolt? Will you be prepared if it happens?

RELATED STORY:
The Golden Horde ~ By Patrice Lewis

Why violent revolt lies in our future

LARRY KLAYMAN

By Larry Klayman

December 18, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

President Ronald Reagan used to say that the scariest words in the English language are: "Hi, I'm from the government and I'm here to help." Two hundred or so years earlier, our Founding Fathers had essentially the same thoughts when they declared independence from the British Crown based on its refusal to take into account the grievances of the colonies and its peoples, and instead attempted to beat them into submission.

Today, as we observe the holidays and ready ourselves for a Republican takeover of the House of Representatives in the New Year, in the face of continued control of the Senate and White House by the Democrats and President Barack Obama, these words and thoughts ring louder than ever. Never before in the history of our sacred nation has the "State of the Union" been worse and indeed more hostile to the needs of the American people. And both Democrats and Republicans are responsible!

I have written in earlier columns that I sincerely believe that we have entered a new revolutionary period in American history. With each passing day, I become more convinced of it. And, regrettably, I believe that we are only a year of so from violent revolt if things do not radically change "on a dime."

Here are the signs of the violent revolution to come:

First, the economy continues in a tailspin, with unemployment increasing. Families do not have the financial means, even assuming they are able to bring home a salary, to pay for their children's higher education, buy a new car, much less put good wholesome food on the dinner table. Couple this with glacial growth in the economy, our dependence on foreign capital to keep the nation afloat and the continued real-estate crisis and the picture is more than bleak. And God forbid we have another large terrorist attack or an oil field or two in the Middle East blows up – the entire world economy could easily go down for the count. People get real upset when they do not have money; plain and simple. Just ask any employer who has missed or is late on a pay period for his employees. He or she is lucky not to be lynched. Our government has not only missed several pay periods, it is taxing the populace into submission and wasting these revenues on projects and graft that return nothing but more hardship.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

WikiLeaks sparks revolution ~ By Larry Klayman

Just in case you haven't yet, you need to read the two columns I have listed just below under RELATED COLUMNS. One of the things written by Klayman in the previous column, "WikiLeaks has done the world a service", is very relevant to this column and also the column by Diana West, which I will quote here:

And if Assange and WikiLeaks, who serve as media watchdogs in effect, are silenced by the "mullah in chief" Barack Hussein Obama, Czarina Hillary Clinton and the rest of their sympathetic establishment political hacks, who is next; Fox News?

And then, in this piece, Larry Klayman brings up the possibility that this is the beginning of something that chills me to the bone, given what Glenn Beck had discussed on his radio show yesterday (Dec. 10) morning:

While I prayed that it would not get to this, it is clear that we are already in the early stages of an eventual full-scale revolution. Will the government establishment pull back, start acting in the interests of ordinary Americans rather than just itself, and avert this potential disaster? While that is the question of the day, I am not hopeful from what I have seen recently from both political parties.

In watching Fox News in the last two days, I saw what Larry may have been seeing recently, which is a lot of what Glenn Beck had been discussing on that show I mentioned above. The following video is from several segments that was on Fox News on Thursday, Dec. 9:

Video provided by TheREALjohnny2k

In the mean time, we will pray that Larry Klayman and Glenn Beck are wrong. But, ignoring these events may be at your peril.

RELATED COLUMNS:
WikiLeaks has done the world a service ~ By Larry Klayman
WikiLeaks spurs Big Brother to strike ~ By Diana West

WikiLeaks sparks revolution

LARRY KLAYMAN

By Larry Klayman

December 11, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

This week marked a milestone in our nation's history – and the American people smell a rat. "Washington, D.C.," is not only rotten to the core, it is now clear to all that the government establishment wants to destroy us. The revolution has finally begun.

Last week's column was about Julian Assange and WikiLeaks, the media watchdogs who released on the Internet over 250,000 pages of allegedly classified State Department documents exposing the rank deceit, corruption and stupidity in our foreign-policy establishment. Despite condemnation of Assange by even political commentators on the right – one incredibly calling for his assassination – conservative, libertarians and all of the other readers of my column responded in unison, agreeing that I am "right"; WikiLeaks did the world a service, and government threats to prosecute Assange are not only just another example of the establishment not liking to be exposed in the light of day but are also abhorrent.

However, the threats by Attorney General Eric Holder, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and President Barack Hussein Obama, himself, were just Round 1. This week, on what are likely to turn out to be trumped-up charges that Assange engaged in "unprotected sex" with two women who just happened to wander into his bed (no, this is regrettably not a Hollywood comedy), the Obama administration put Interpol up to arresting Assange in Great Britain – where he had been hiding – using Swedish law as the vehicle. He was taken into custody not because there was "probable cause" that he had committed any crime or even civil offense, but because he would not agree to questioning – which under American law, at least, he did not have to do thanks to our "Fifth Amendment" right against self incrimination. So the Obama administration put up British authorities to use Swedish law to arrest Assange using as a pretext his refusal to incriminate himself, since our legal system will not allow for this.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

Ray Bradbury's call for revolution ~ By Phil Elmore

In the last few weeks, I had been looking for videos that related to the columns that I have been posting in this space. There was a great video that I had found for this column that I thought would fit right in, but unfortunately, the embedding code had been disabled by user request. (You can see it by clicking on the link).  Fortunately, I was able to find the video below, that may actually fit more with what Phil Elmore is discussing in his column.

What is "Fahrenheit 451" & why should you read it?

From the description of this video:

The novel presents a future American society in which the masses are hedonistic, and critical thought through reading is outlawed. The central character, Guy Montag, is employed as a "fireman" (which, in this future, means "book burner"). The number "451" refers to the temperature (in Fahrenheit) at which a book or paper supposedly autoignites, though the actual temperature is just short of twice that. Written in the early years of the Cold War, the novel is a critique of what Bradbury saw as an increasingly dysfunctional American society.

Video provided by TheConstitutionMan

As seen in the video above, a school district was considering a ban of Bradbury's literary classic, "Fahrenheit 451." For heavens' sake, the book would offer "conflicting thought!" It was way too much to handle for a student and her father. Bradbury warned about that day coming. What caused the stir was when Bradbury said, "I think our country is in need of a revolution," and going on to say, "There's too much government today. We've got to remember the government should be by the people, of the people and for the people." Have we come to the point, then, that conflicting thought should be banned? Just sayin'...

"We stand against the small tide of those who want to make everyone unhappy with conflicting theory and thought," said Montag's antagonist, ominously, before concluding an interview that was equal parts threat and admission. To Obama, Bradbury's recent statements are that conflicting thought – and you are the thinkers.

The reaction to Bradbury's public words testifies to the success of the sociopolitical movement Bradbury warned us about. Our popular culture, our media, our left-leaning technologically saturated real-time news and infotainment industry, facilitates control while it preaches passivity. Every time a news anchor interjects her biased political opinion to defend and protect her Democratic fellow travelers, you should hear, "Peace, Montag." Whenever a scripted drama contains gratuitously left-wing political commentary, you should hear, "Serenity, Montag." Whenever the incessant squawking of your radio, your television, your laptop, your smartphone, your tablet, your technologically interconnected life pummels you with Obama's opinions, you should smell the flame-throwers' liquid fire.

By Phil Elmore

Posted: August 19, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

"Colored people don't like 'Little Black Sambo.' Burn it. White people don't feel good about 'Uncle Tom's Cabin.' Burn it. Someone's written a book on tobacco and cancer of the lungs? The cigarette people are weeping? Burn the book. Serenity, Montag. Peace, Montag. Take your fight outside. Better yet, into the incinerator. Funerals are unhappy and pagan? Eliminate them, too. Five minutes after a person is dead he's on his way to the Big Flue, the Incinerators serviced by helicopters all over the country. Ten minutes after death a man's a speck of black dust. Let's not quibble over individuals with memoriams. Forget them. Burn all, burn everything. Fire is bright and fire is clean."

Years after I first read those words, "Peace, Montag ..." still echoes in my head whenever I see or hear a "progressive" politician preaching government control. Decades after I first finished Ray Bradbury's "Fahrenheit 451," "Serenity, Montag ..." flits across my consciousness whenever a Democrat speaks. When liberals attempt to silence political dissent on talk radio through re-enacting the euphemistically termed "Fairness Doctrine," I think I see the coiled and merciless mechanical hound of Bradbury's story, waiting to inject its poison into dissidents. When the Obama administration seeks to control the Internet through governmental fiat, I picture Bradbury's firemen rushing for their petrol-laden truck. When the leftists at Time magazine sneer that there is no "Internet kill switch" – even as they admit that vaguely written, sweeping, centralized, command-and-control legislation carries great potential for harm to individual liberty – I see the nozzles of the flame-throwers glow orange.

Earlier this week, Ray Bradbury – now 90 – said, "I think our country is in need of a revolution." As you can imagine, his comments caused quite a stir. He didn't stop at calls to revolution, either. He went on to say, "There's too much government today. We've got to remember the government should be by the people, of the people and for the people." He also complained that we have "too many cell phones" and "too many Internets." We need to rid ourselves of some of these machines, he declared.

To any right-thinking American who holds his or her civil liberties dear, these are not earth-shattering revelations. (Bradbury also groused that we need to return to the moon and then colonize Mars; I have written in support of the space program in Technocracy.) The fact that a brilliant 90-year-old writer happens to share these opinions is not surprising so much as it is refreshing. What was truly interesting about Bradbury's comments, however, was reaction to them.

Susan King murmured diplomatically that Bradbury's comments were the result of "his imagination" taking him "to some dark places when it comes to contemporary politics." Scott Thill was less professional; in Underwire he wrote, "Some mornings you wake up and realize your sci-fi heroes might have lost the plot." He characterized Bradbury's comments as the author's "latest political rant," one filled with "diaphanous criticism" – before stating that the problems Bradbury decried cannot be solved without "too much government." Graeme McMillan, writing in Techland, called Bradbury's comments "depressing." He said, "Maybe I'm expecting too much of Ray Bradbury. ... But there's really something dispiriting about the curmudgeonly portrait of the 'Fahrenheit 451' author from the L.A. Times. ... When did Bradbury become such ... well, such an old man?" Reason magazine, contributing to "Before It's News," called Bradbury's statements "hysterical theater," condemning Bradbury's as a "Luddite old fart" whose comments delved "into the Grandpa Simpson zone of Larry King-esque observational complaints."

It should bother us that so many people across the Web were so quick to condemn Bradbury as an old man – to make fun of him for standing on the front lawn of the Internet and yelling at you kids to get off it. Yes, there is a streak of the Luddite in anyone who complains that we have too many cell phones and Internets, amusingly using the plural of the latter and the slightly antiquated terminology for the former. But is Bradbury so wrong? Is he so outrageous? Are his words those of a curmudgeon ... or are they the opinions of the majority of Americans, suffering under the yoke of Glorious Leader Obama's increasingly socialist, increasingly totalitarian and increasingly indifferent rule? Should not Bradbury be lauded as a hero for saying as much?

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

The Dr. Zhivago Option ~ By Robert Ringer

I am going to start this one out a little differently today. I was 12 years old when I saw the movie, Dr. Zhivago, and I don't really remember much of the movie. I do have two distinct memories about it, though. One was that I had to sit by some old lady with horribly putrid perfume on, and had apparently used the whole bottle at once... Thank God there was an intermission so I could go out and get fresh air... I'll never forget that. It was an unfortunately memory I can't get out of my head. But the other memory was a good one. I loved the music!

Doctor Zhivago - Lara's Theme

Video provided by Muirmaiden

By the way, I remember now that I had bought the 45 record of this theme song.

I hadn't thought about this for awhile, but Robert reminded me that I have wanted to see Dr. Zhivago again someday. I am sure it will make a lot more sense to me now than it did when I was 12 years old. And now I really want to see it, being that what it is about to an extent parallels what this country could be going through someday soon. Just sayin'...

Worst of all, the Republican Party itself has a whole army of Viktor Komarovskys in its ranks, ready to support the Obamaviks at the drop of a vote. Names like Mitt Romney (the de facto architect of Obamacare), John McCain ("I was in favor of illegal immigration before I was against it."), Lindsey Graham (an unabashed hard-core progressive), Mike Huckabee (the slickest politician in America), Orrin Hatch (a deeply entrenched member of the go-along-to-get-along club) and Mitch McConnell (another deeply entrenched member of the same club) come quickly to mind.

These men have conclusively demonstrated that they are more than willing to support the progressives' notion of "social justice" if that's what it takes to get elected and re-elected. Their greatest threat comes from people with names like Bachmann, Ryan, DeMint, Rubio, and Paul & Paul.

Over the next five months, you can be sure that a lot of Republican blood will be spilled in the war between the Viktor Komarovskys of the Republican Party and those who refuse to go along with the business-as-usual Dr. Zhivago Option. And you can guess which side the socialists in the Democratic People's Party will be cheering for.

By Robert Ringer

Posted: June 11, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

The other day, one of my son's friends, who had just come home from college for the summer, stopped over to say hello. We chatted briefly, and I asked him if he was still planning on becoming an entrepreneur/businessman after he graduated from school next spring.

To my surprise, he said that because of the economy, he had changed his mind about pursuing a business career. He told me that he now planned to apply for a job with the CIA. Surprised, I asked, "What in the world made you decide to go to work for the CIA?"

Without pause, he responded, "It's so tough to get a job nowadays that I figured I'd just go to work for the government, because there's much more security in a government job." I immediately thought to myself that standing right in front of me was a new Barack Obama voter!

It's simple: Get as many people as possible working for the government – which can always meet its payroll by taking money from entrepreneurs and small businesspeople who create private-sector jobs – and thereby assure winning a majority of votes in every election.

It reminded me of a conversation I had many years ago with a brilliant, ultra-pragmatic, narcissistic acquaintance who had a hugely successful economic consulting business. One day we were having a discussion about the United States' relentless move toward collectivism, and I asked him, "Given how you're addicted to the material things in life, what would you do if the United States ever became a full-fledged communist country?"

Without so much as a pause, he answered, in a matter-of-fact tone, "That wouldn't be a problem. I'd just become a member of the Communist Party and work my way into the inner circle." His response evoked a nervous chuckle from me, but the chuckle quickly faded as I realized he was deadly serious. His answer bothered me then, and it bothers me even more today.

The first thing that went through my mind after that conversation was the movie "Dr. Zhivago" and Rod Steiger's character, Viktor Komarovsky. Komarovsky was a member of Russia's elite class that dined on caviar and expensive vodka while the masses lived on the edge of starvation in abject poverty.

But when it became clear that the Bolshevik Revolution would succeed, Viktor Komarovsky simply cozied up to the revolutionary hierarchy and proclaimed himself to be a communist. He was well aware that revolutionary rhetoric was a fantasy, and that in every revolution, it's the toughest and wiliest thugs who emerge as the new royalty.

For the masses, of course, things stay pretty much the same, though under communism they usually end up even worse off than they were before the revolution (as was certainly the case in Russia following the Bolshevik Revolution).

Today, the Komarovsky mindset is a serious problem in the United States. I keep saying that Obama and Co. know they are going down to massive defeats if there are elections in 2010, but maybe I'm wrong. Perhaps I've underestimated their determination to get enough people on the government dole and government payroll to mathematically assure victory.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

Profits derived from your purchases
will help me to attend tea party rallies,
(especially the one in Las Vegas, on July 15-17)!

Totalitarians in our midst ~ By Erik Rush

Tonight, it was Erik's turn to scare the heck out of us. He was on fire when he wrote this one!

In the last week or two, I have read several columns by various well-known writers, along with hearing what Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck have talking about. Is is just me? Does anyone else hear what I am hearing? Heaven forbid, if the assorted pundits are correct, it sounds to me like we have a government that is so out of control, that the possibility of having a tyrannical government is on our doorstep... and there really doesn't seem to be much we can do about it. Sure, we can write, and we can talk about it, but even those rights seem to be dwindling away - at least if certain people in the government do what they seem to be threatening to do.

Erik concludes this column by saying, "I'll leave it to the reader to determine why they desire all that power..." Well, as you can see from this intro, I think that I am well on my way to determining what is going on. I have been for awhile, and I am not seeing anything that is going to relieve my anxiety.

In a free society, citizens can criticize the government, but the radicals who are currently executing a quiet coup in our nation's capital don't believe in a free society. So, Congress and the Obama administration need to shut us up.

By Erik Rush

Posted: April 22, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

But if you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao, you ain't going to make it with anyone anyhow.

– The Beatles, "Revolution," 1968

Even John Lennon, primary author of the Beatles' "Revolution," lefty though he was, knew that China's Chairman Mao Zedong was not someone to be lionized. After all, he had murdered millions of his own people.

That, as they say, was then; now, it is no longer objectionable for an American – say, the president – as well as his colleagues and hirelings, to embrace such villains. In fact, whether it is objectionable or not has become academic; we're not even supposed to talk about it.

Are you reminded of anything in particular by our current government's practice of ruthlessly assailing any and all who criticize it, resulting in people's reluctance to speak out against same? If so, does this alarm or even frighten you?

It damn well should …

Recently, progressive operatives (members of Congress, activists, the establishment press and other far-left elites) have cautioned that those who oppose the Obama administration's policies (the tea-party activists foremost among them) are creating a climate that has the potential to give rise to violence and even domestic terrorism. The admonitions are patently absurd, but these parties are banking on believers in their cause and less-informed Americans who can't or won't investigate the accusations to determine their veracity. They have charged talk radio and other conservative media similarly, and have even floated the concept of regulating the Internet.

All of this is calculated to silence those who disagree with them – nothing less. From the baseless allegations of hostile tendencies and designs, to their reflexive, non sequitur accusations of racism and homophobia, these tactics are the stuff of totalitarian regimes, not representative republics.

Last week, at a symposium commemorating the 15th anniversary of the Oklahoma City bombing, former President Bill Clinton presaged that the anger and resentment evidenced by members of the tea-party movement might foment the kind of right-wing extremism that resulted in the 1995 bombing. His statements might be called grossly irresponsible were he simply ignorant, but that's not the case; Clinton deliberately engaged in propaganda, capitalizing upon his dubious credibility to legitimize the above claims.

If those on the right who would advocate violence and those who support Congress' and the Obama administration's policies are on opposing political fringes (a fair assessment, if you ask me), then the tea-party activists are, if anything, the voice of reason. Yet, these peaceful and (ideologically) well-grounded citizens are being demonized like the Ku Klux Klan, neo-Nazis and violent militias.

So, why are progressives intimating that the opposition might resort to violence?

• Because the left are masters of projection (accusing enemies of engaging in nefarious activities in which oneself is engaged). It is they who are inherently belligerent. It bears mentioning that the left is the side that advocated for the violent overthrow of our government 40 years ago; Obama's pal Bill Ayers even bombed some buildings toward that end, and Obama himself has proposed forming "a civilian national-security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded" as our military.  

• Those on the left realize, relative to the spirit of America's founding values, that their actions to date might arguably merit an armed uprising. Were the tea-party activists as committed as Revolutionary War–era Minutemen, they would have laid siege to the Capitol and the White House months ago, rather than holding peaceful rallies.

In this climate of progressives leveling these wild accusations and extrapolating others' statements to their most bizarre conclusions, I find it prudent at this time to assert that I am not advocating armed rebellion against our current government.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

Profits derived from your purchases
will help me to attend tea party rallies!

The secret weapon in America's revolution ~ By Chuck Norris

From WorldNetDaily

By Chuck Norris Posted: September 28, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 On Sept. 28, 1781, Gen. George Washington led a combined force of 17,000 French and Continental troops upon Yorktown (Virginia) and encircled British Gen. Lord Cornwallis and his regiment of 9,000 British troops. Washington bombarded Cornwallis and crew day and night for three weeks with artillery and cannon fire, until Cornwallis surrendered on Oct. 17, 1781. Negotiations for peace began in 1782, with the Treaty of Paris being eventually signed on Sept. 3, 1783, formally ending the eight years of war and securing America's independence. The key to victory at Yorktown came when, at the mouth of the Chesapeake, the French navy helped to corner Cornwallis and his crew from fleeing by sea, while Marquis de Lafayette, who under Washington led 5,000 American soldiers, blocked Cornwallis' escape by land. Lafayette was only 23 years old at the time. Lafayette was only 16 years old when he joined the Black Musketeers back in France, an elite unit of royal troops that rode black horses. He started fighting in the Revolution in 1777 at only 19, at which time Congress gave him the rank of major general. Two months after the British surrender at Yorktown, Lafayette returned home as a "hero of two worlds." Marquis de Lafayette was one of Gen. George Washington's secret weapons in the American Revolution. Youth are often the key to victory in many revolutions. That's because people often underestimate their potential or perceived contributions. I believe young people will play a critical role in reawakening and returning America again to its founders' vision, ways and principles. It's amazing for us today to think about how much a young Lafayette sacrificed and accomplished for our country as well as his own. We are still inspired by his example of youthful courage and heroism. Many adults would say that type of valor rarely exists anymore. But as I meet and hear from young Americans here and around the world, I beg to differ. Though our society often denigrates the teen years and expects very little from our young people, I believe there exists a latent power in this particular generation that waits to be awakened and reveal its full potential. If we're going to win America's culture wars, we need the younger generations to do it. There is no way around it. We need to reengage with our young people and plug them into America's glorious past so they can build a brighter future. I'm not talking about selling them on a partisan platform but a patriot one (like our founders had). I'm convinced that this is why Ron Paul's candidacy for president grew into a mighty grassroots swell – it tapped into the technologically and socially based Millennials, who possess a strong anti-imperialism and lets-take-care-of-home mentality and passion. [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

RELATED VIDEO: Jonathan Krohn schools Karl Rove; We need character in America

The revolution: Get onboard or get out of the way ~ By Henry Lamb

From WorldNetDaily

By Henry Lamb

Posted: September 19, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2009

One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.

– Greek philosopher Plato (c. 428-348 B.C.)

America is witnessing an awakening unlike any seen since the king tried to ram his agenda down the throat of unwilling colonials. Americans said, "No!" Then, "Hell no!" And next, the king had to go.

A modern king-in-his-own-eyes now commands an army of liberal lemmings who are trying to ram their power-grabbing agenda down the throat of unwilling Americans. On April 15, nationwide tea parties said, "No!" Then, on Sept. 12, tea parties in Washington and across the nation said, "Hell no!"

And next, the king and his liberal lemmings must go.

American colonials knew that it would take more than tea parties to rid the nation of the king and his agenda. They worked without the benefit of a bully pulpit, and organized their volunteers into troops of soldiers determined to claim the independence they declared and earn the freedom they craved.

Contemporary Americans know that it will take more than tea parties to rid Washington of the king-in-his-own-eyes and his liberal lemming army. For every American visible at a tea party there are another 50 unseen Americans organizing into troops of soldiers determined to defend the U.S. Constitution and reclaim the freedom won by the nation's founders.

The king-in-his-own-eyes and his liberal lemmings are in denial. They see the tea parties as nothing more than crude expressions from the unwashed masses, who couldn't possibly know what is best for the nation.

News flash for the king: The revolution is under way! [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

So when's the revolution? ~ By Patrice Lewis

By Patrice Lewis Posted: June 13, 2009 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 In last week's column, I wrote, "Conservatives are walking a fine line. We need to maintain our gun rights, our justified anger, our vigilance. But we can't lose it, folks. We can't abandon legal and legitimate avenues of change in favor of gunning down abortion doctors or blowing up government buildings. That does nothing but make people furious – with good reason." This was interpreted by many readers to mean the conservative side of our nation should wimpily lay down our arms and accept whatever atrocities the left wants to impose. Some e-mails implied we should start shooting now, before things get any worse. Time to clarify. Let's look at history since, as Patrick Henry said, "I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past." The Revolutionary War, as many people forget, was not a rebellion against a foreign government. It was a declaration of independence from our own government. Chaos, discontent and seething frustration built up and tipped the colonists over the edge. Into this fray stepped a few good men: Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Patrick Henry, George Washington … the list goes on. Now let's look at today. In Flyover Country, there is chaos and discontent and seething frustration. We have tea parties; citizens arming themselves; and literally millions of people protesting government education, interference in private business and of course massive taxation without true representation. We have a myriad of eerie similarities with the events of the late 1700s. So what's missing? Well, how about a few good men? [Continue reading]

Please digg this story

Is it time for revolt? - By Joseph Farah

It's very dangerous to advocate this position. It's very risky. But someone has to stand up and start talking about it. Is it time for people of the light to start denying the U.S. government the money to practice this kind of evil? Is it time to be out on the streets protesting against all this new regime is doing to undermine the Constitution? read more | digg story

Which revolution is this? - By Barbara Simpson

It all sounds familiar, just like when Marie Antoinette said, "Let them eat cake!" The president and his cohorts feast on the best while millions of his countrymen lose their homes, their jobs, their savings and their retirement, and now eat cold cuts. But Americans have too much history of freedom. We must speak out now, while we still can.

read more | digg story