As liberals grow increasingly shrill in their hatred and frustration over conservative attempts to thwart their power plays, America's leftists will resort to violence more frequently and in greater numbers. The rancor over the recent debt-ceiling debate will become a fond memory. Obama and his minions, not to mention a complicit media, were quick to tell us that we may never disagree with liberals – for if we do, America will be punished by foreign bankers. As the rhetoric grows hotter, the fists will fly faster. Blaming the "terrorists" in the tea party for Obama's failures of leadership will seem tame by comparison.
The mob is coming. Be ready.
It's chilling. As I mentioned from the beginning of this 8-12-11 series, there is a common theme. If you haven't figured it out yet, you will soon. So let's start with this:
The classic quote from a rioter on the street in London was this: "We hear people were getting stuff free, so why not us?"
You will notice that tea-party activists don't have a sense of entitlement. They don't ask for free stuff. They don't demand handouts. They don't ask that government take care of them. They just ask that government follow the rule of law and act responsibly.
The rioters in the streets of London and Philadelphia most certainly do have a sense of entitlement. They believe they have the right to rob and beat other people and take what they want. They believe in burning and terrorizing and attacking police and civilians.
~ Joseph Farah, on 9-AUG-11: You want to see face of 'terrorism'?
Oh, well, shucks... You're getting the point, right? Are you ready for what we will be facing very soon? You won't bother to "get ready" if you are neither aware or believe that it can happen. But look, it's going on in London, in Europe, and even here.
Those on the left love to talk about the "Tea Party rage." There's really no way to be any more disingenuous than that. The left is using that phrase, "Tea Party Rage," knowing that the tea party's "rage" has nothing to do with violence. It hasn't ever happened. No tea party has ever broke out into violence. Looting and pillaging is not part of the Tea Party Movement. Really, get serious!
However, Phil Elmore gives us a stern warning in his column. It is one thing to endure harsh and inaccurate rhetoric against the tea party. We must be prepared, because suppose for a minute that the leftist minions (union thugs and people living on entitlements) decided that only violence would get the attention of the media and politicians so that they could get their "free stuff"? Or, could it even be a ploy to intimidate and get the attention of those who would peacefully protest against the largess of government?
If you read all three of the columns that I referenced yesterday and today, you will hopefully get the point. The MOB that Nancy Pelosi accused the Tea Party of being, and the MOB that the leftists are organizing and putting into play, are two different things.
Joseph Farah sums it up perfectly when he wrote, "When you demonize the hard-working, productive middle class who organize peacefully and call for reforms, you are inviting the shiftless, unproductive class to take the opposite approach."
The Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights is the force multiplier, as Phil says. It exemplifies "Peace through strength," because deterrence of violence is our priority. I'm just sayin'....
RELATED COLUMNS:
* * * *
The mob is coming
 |
| PHIL ELMORE |
By Phil Elmore
August 10, 2011 ~ 1:44 pm Eastern
© 2011
Obama hates guns.
This is a fact. Like every lib, like every socialist would-be dictator, like every arrogant statist who views his fellow human beings' freedom of action as a threat (rather than a benefit that accrues to all the citizenry), Obama cannot stand the idea that you, armed, might be able to stand up to leftist bullying.
You see, that is what a firearm is. Before guns are "liberty teeth," before they are a tool for resisting oppression, before they are the linchpin of a free society that defends and protects the other natural rights protected by the Bill of Rights, they are a personal means of standing up for yourself. A gun, like a lever or a hammer, is a force multiplier. Firearms are a labor-magnifying technology that enables the user to apply more force to more people than that user could apply with his bare hands. That's it. That's all guns do. They possess neither volition nor morality. By themselves, they are complicated paperweights.
The fear and loathing liberals heap on firearms is largely ignorance, projection of their own weakness and irrational fear ... but deep down, it is also a recognition of the gun's utility as a force multiplier. If you're a lib desperate to control every waking moment of his fellow human beings' lives, you absolutely cannot abide the idea of force multiplication. This is because liberals adore violence. Specifically, they adore mob violence. An ideology that subordinates the individual to the collective and the citizen to the state of necessity lauds the power of the mob. Liberals are, after all, only courageous in groups. They are happy to bully any man or woman whom they outnumber and can overpower, but will scream victimization if aggressively opposed by prepared, right-thinking citizens.
Examples of liberal thuggery and hate abound and are as close as the nearest political protest. Our left-leaning media delight in furthering the mythology that conservatives, tea-party members and other libertarians are violent and threatening toward peaceful leftist activists, when of course the exact opposite is true and has been demonstrated time and again. Consider, for example, the beating of conservative Kenneth Gladney.
READ MORE at WND.com
Would that the Republicans had thrown a temper tantrum (as Democrats and the left-wing media accused them of doing) and gotten their way. If so, we'd be looking at a very panicked Barack Obama today rather than the same cool community organizer who is focused on raising a billion dollars to aid him in anesthetizing the public once again and winning what should be, based on the results of his presidency, an unwinnable election for him.
Maybe the tea-party people do need to get violent, given that the left will continue to accuse them of doing so regardless of how civil they act. Even if they throw out of office enough RINOs who still don't get the tea-party message and bring in a whole new group of Republicans who are willing to take a chainsaw to the budget (rather than just getting excited about "changing the terms of the debate" in Washington), the violence that Messrs. Bashir and Peele so worry about is sure to happen anyway.
However, violence that results from real (as opposed to imaginary) spending cuts won't come from the tea-party folks. It will come from those who are unwilling to give up the good life they've become so accustomed to as a result of the government's redistribution-of-wealth policies.
But let's see the spending cuts first. We can worry about the violence later.
I've been having a productivity decline this summer. There have been so many columns that I wanted to bring to your attention, but just haven't had the time to get them all in. I've been spending a large portion of time digesting and discussing a small number of columns. So, today, I'm dividing my blog post for the day into three parts. This will be the first of the three that I chose to discuss. There was a common theme that I found in several articles on WND.com.
I've been wanting to do something different in this venue for quite awhile. Today, I saw an opportunity which came from three great columns that were published on August 10, 2011. A column written and published on August 9, 2011 by the founder, editor and CEO of WND, Joseph Farah, set the stage. This is going to be fun doing these three columns, and I think you are going to like these posts! It's going to be fresh, and it will be easy to understand what the theme is and why it is so very important to be aware of. It's going to be an "AMEN!" moment for you when you read these three posts and the corresponding columns!
So, let's get started. We'll begin by stating just who is actually delusional in order to answer Robert's question posed in the title to his column:
People who characterize the tea-party movement as terrorists are clearly incapable of rationally processing information.
They don't know right from wrong.
They have no appreciation for American history and constitutional guarantees for freedom of speech and petitioning for redress of grievances.
~ Joseph Farah, on 9-AUG-11: You want to see face of 'terrorism'?
I just wonder if the rules are changing on us, gang. You're probably going to need an appointment with a chiropractor soon, folks, because I warn you, it's possible that you may suffer from a neck injury caused by the whiplash you'll receive when reading this.
First of all, do you know why some of those on the left, specifically the ones that Robert mentions in this column, are so delusional? It is so obvious, but yet, they actually do not believe that you are aware that the much of the violence is coming from the left, and the racist subgroups that fall on that side of the political spectrum. That's right. The problem with violence is NOT coming from tea party groups. Not even a spec of evidence exists that would suggest that it is tea partiers whom resort to violence. So, for leftists to make that assertion, it's truly delusional!
But, a thought that crossed my mind: Is it any less delusional for those of us in the tea party and on the Conservative side to believe that at some point, society's decay will not require us to defend ourselves? I'm just sayin'....
RELATED COLUMNS:
* * * *
Just who, exactly, is delusional?
 |
| ROBERT RINGER |
By Robert Ringer
August 10, 2011 ~ 1:26 pm Eastern
© 2011
Isn't it remarkable how the left is railing on and on about how the tea-party members of Congress held the debt-ceiling talks hostage by demanding that there be no tax hikes? They've even referred to them as terrorists and suicide bombers, malcontents who ignored the heartfelt pleas of that paragon of unity, Barack Obama, to tone down the rhetoric after the Tucson shootings.
But something doesn't quite ring true here. If the tea-party contingency sabotaged the debt-ceiling talks, why would a majority of Republicans be so mad at them?
Democratic feigned anger aside, the truth is that what the Republicans actually accomplished was to 1) raise the debt ceiling enough to take the pressure off Obama until after the 2012 elections, 2) fail to make certain that there will be no tax hikes in the near future (trust me, there will be), and 3) rather than cut spending, merely slow the growth of spending (as Republicans have been doing for decades) from an Obama baseline that would have been unheard of even in the George W. Bush years.
Nevertheless, along comes a real radical, CNBC's Martin Bashir, and conducts an anti-tea-party interview with a left-wing shrink by the name of Stanton Peele. Peele told Bashir (with the utmost objectivity, of course) that tea-party conservatives are "delusional," "could become a very angry movement" and "could potentially become a violent movement."
Really? Funny, but in all the tea-party events I've been to, I haven't seen anyone who looks like he has the "potential" to become violent. On the other hand, I've seen a lot of union thugs who are violent, but, for some reason, neither Bashir nor Peele mentioned any of those guys. Hmm, that's weird … I wonder why? Must have just slipped their minds.
At one point, Bashir asked Peele: "So you're saying that they [the tea-party people] are delusional about the past and adamant about the future?" To which Peele responded, with an air of professional pomposity, "They are adamant about achieving something that's unachievable, which reminds us of a couple of things: It reminds us of delusion and psychosis. It reminds us of addiction because addicts are seeking something that they can't have."
Something they can't have? Hmm … and here I thought the tea-party candidates won the mid-term elections in a landslide, so gaining control of the House and increasing the number of Republicans in the Senate turned out to be something they could have.
Could it be that Martin Bashir, Dr. Peele and angry Democrats are the ones who are delusional? Do they not understand that history has repeatedly shown that radicalism and violence are overwhelmingly traits of the far (and sometimes not so far) left?
READ MORE at WND.com
Posts
