Monday, 31 March 2014

Walking A Fine Line - Mach II

Never say die…

1) from TeaPartyC.C.: 'Obama Supporter: Impeachment may be best for Obama and US' -  Nat'l Dir. Dee - Mar. 30 (orig. posted at - by Junior Campbell - Mar. 29)

Reply by Triptolemus 18 hours ago  (early Mar. 31)

At this point, impeaching chalaque obama [N.B. A great word to describe him!    Look it up - Ed.] will only reunite his disenchanted followers, solidify his support and his high place in history; it will fan the flames of racism to the point we will have continued riots. Since congress is not willing to oppose him now, after the damage he has done already, it's clear they will never remove him from office. If they won't remove him, or oppose his policies, why impeach him? This will turn him into a glorified martyr.
The truth is all of the democrats and all of rove's rinos want what obama is doing.

  • Reply

Sorry, I just can't agree with you.
Because you answered your own question, "Why impeach him": Not only because he deserves it, but also because all the citizens-in-name-only in government see the great advantages of his remaining in power for them personally -- they can hide their corruption behind his and he surely has promised them he will be loyal as long as they serve his purposes (yes they are that stupid) and their basic agenda is the same. To defeat him and them, impeachment (even w/o removal) is a crushing loss of political capital and much less influence to sell. They cannot destroy America unless we let them.
Obeying the law alone is a serious threat to their kind. Fear, from top to bottom, is their main tool.
If you are afraid of race-riots or the military, etc. -- it only means you've eaten their tripe.
As far as martyrdom is concerned, that may only be one of our terms; those without a true faith cannot remember the name of even one martyr outside of the provocateur's AgitProp, because of the chaos of 'the cause' and so many bodies already under the bus. We will not see 30 million lumps of canon fodder gleefully going down for Obama, if it comes to that.
We are looking at weak 18th Century style thinkers, who see their blitzkrieg crapping out from depending upon people with a short attention span and not much more than a worse short term memory. None do too well in a live, novel, situation, i.e. - the real world.
Impeach him? the real question is   Why the hell not?
That is the most respectful and respectable thing to do. Just moaning and groaning while riding this pony into the volcano makes no sense at all. 

       ▶ Reply 

Permalink Reply by Stan Stanfield 17 seconds ago  (Mar. 31)

Impeachment is not the way to go with the Usurper, The Great Pretender, the Imposter-in-Chief.  That is reserved for those LEGITIMATELY in the office who have gone wayward IN the office.  Obama is not a "natural born" citizen; therefore he is in the office ILLEGALLY.  
The way to deal with this fraud is- after fair warning to him (which could be given at the Operation American Spring rally on May 16th) - to have the Oathkeepers in the nation - the military, present and past - with a sizable representation of The People behind them, remove him from the office, by nonviolent means if at all possible (since violence just begets violence).  And that way, all the legislation that he has signed into law illegally (including ObamaCare), and all the Executive Orders and Presidential Directives that he has issued illegally, and all the appointments that he has made illegally (including to the Supreme Court), GO WITH HIM.  
The Vice President goes with him, too; since the Democrat Party as an entity signed off on his illegal candidacy.  And the Republican Party is up for legal censure as well, for obviously having perfidiously colluded in that caper, in both the 2008 and the 2012 elections.  Which are, perforce, NULL AND VOID.  And the U.S. military can support an Officer of The People in the Commander-in-Chief's office until new elections can be held, including for ALL of Congress.  Which Officer can wield a mean broom in cleaning out the executive branch of the federal government, of all those who are there to subvert the law of the land - the Constitution.  

Still hanging in there.  If only by a thread.  


Don't they understand?! If patriots don't stand up for the Constitution in this (possibly thinking, in a juvenile way, that 'two wrongs make a  right'), then the Constitution is a dead letter from the past; and all we have left to go by is the rule of men.  Which is simply the rule of the jungle.  To the victor goes the spoils. 

Damn.  It's so obvious……… 


…and more on America En Garde:

2) from Tea Party C.C.: 'Rand Paul: America Partly To Blame For Pearl Harbor, World War II' -  posted by Asst. Nat'l Dir. Melony B. DeFord - Mar. 31 (orig. posted at -  Caleb Howe - Mar. 31)   

Reply by JohnnyAnt 49 minutes ago (Mar. 31)

You are exactly correct, any history buff would agree that Japan during their expansion did not have the resources to fuel their war machine and needed to import resources. Our president Roosevelt, ceased US trade (oil) with the Japanese in response to Japans expansion policy, as a result the Japanese feared the US 7th fleet would take further action and blockade their foreign ocean  trade routes . The Japanese decided to take our 7th fleet out with a surprise attack knowing full well we were involved in a war with Germany and would not be able to respond decisively. By the time we were able to respond Japan would by then own the far east and as far south as Australia. The Japanese new full well they could not win a war with the US but figured a treaty would be signed with the war weary US thus allowing Japan to keep their foreign conquests.
 Ron Paul is entirely correct and for those who do not know history hope this helps you to see your distorted WWII views

  • Reply
Permalink Reply by AZRanger 24 minutes ago

You are right. People don't kill people, gun do, right? So, the fact that we were not willing to financially and materially support Japan's aggression and atrocities in China, forced them to attack  the US! In other words, our unwillingness to assist the playground bully to beat up the weaker kids, means that it is our fault that he decided to sucker punch us, while he was telling us how glad he was to be our friend. But that was our fault that he decided to hit us, right?
What an "Frickin'"Moron!

  • Reply
Permalink Reply [to JohnnyAnt] by Stan Stanfield 1 second ago (Mar. 31)_

To clarify: 
1) We were not "involved in a war with Germany" at that point.  We were giving (Lend-Lease) aid to Great Britain, but the European war didn't blow open into a World War until Pearl Harbor (much to Churchill's delight).   As to that:
2) One of FDR's Cabinet members was even quoted long after from his diaries that they hoped that Japan would take the bait.  Got that?  Our fleet was 'bait,' or to be likened to sitting ducks.
The need to stop Japanese imperialism is another subject.  Americans need to understand that they have been used for a very long time by a Cabal of very powerful people bent on controlling the world; and the more we know about that, then the better we can understand global events FOR a very long time.
A good read: Gen. Smedley Butler's 'War Is A Racket'.   

No comments: