America First, D/S/Cs, disarmament, divisive arch-conservative, federalism, gun violence, joe biden, NPR, shinzo Abe, the rule of law, ultranationalist, useful idiot republicans
Last week, former Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was assassinated by a man wielding what was reportedly a homemade shotgun. So of course, President Biden had to work “gun violence” into his comments about Abe’s death.
This is a murder that happened in Japan, a country that bans private ownership of arms, a murder committed with a homemade shotgun. NPR, that paragon of professional journalism, had this to say, and other media outlets have similar sentiments.
Let’s keep in mind the media called an Islamist murderer, after his death at our military’s hands, “an austere religious scholar.”
Democrats/Socialists/Communists—D/S/Cs–are determined to establish permanent one-party rule, and like all good tyrants, they know it’s absolutely necessary to first disarm the public. Useful idiot Republicans recently helped them pass a gun control bill, but with each new instance of a lunatic killing someone—even in Japan(?!) and as long as it isn’t black people killing other black people in places like Chicago—they renew their demands for disarmament. They can never be satisfied because they are angry, miserable people whose goal is ultimate political power over the lives of the little people. They will not stop trying to disarm and rule Normal Americans until they succeed, or until they are stopped and deterred in a way that even they will understand cannot be opposed.
As regular readers know, I’ve written this series not to encourage conflict, but to try to prevent it. However, if a second civil war becomes necessary, if it is forced on us by people who refuse to honor the Constitution, refuse to obey the rule of law, and who refuse to leave Normal Americans alone, for what will Normal Americans be fighting?
I’ll provide a partial list. Please feel free, gentle readers, to add anything you think I’ve missed. Normal Americans will fight for:
*Their families in particular
*Their friends in general
*The Constitution as the supreme law of the land, including:
*Freedom of speech and religion
*The right to keep and bear arms
*Equal justice for all, under the rule of law
*A color-blind society where everyone is judged on the content of their character
*A small and strictly limited federal government
*The elimination of bureaucracies like the Department of Education
*A small and strictly limited federal administrative state—no more unaccountable bureaucrats with figurative life and death powers. They have only the powers specifically delegated by Congress
*Massive reduction of regulations
*A Congress forced to actually do its job
*The elimination of all Diversity/Inclusion/Equity policies, bureaucracies and bureaucrats in government, education, everwhere
*An apolitical federal government
*The elimination of all race/gender based preferences
*An apolitical FBI
*A society based on merit
*Public education—including publically funded colleges–focused only on teaching the heritage of western civilization, math, reading, literature, science and other traditional and useful disciplines
*Public education—including publically funded colleges–without political, sexual, racial or gender indoctrination
*Honest elections for American citizens only—one citizen, one vote
*Election day, not election month
*No votes counted after election day
*Full enforcement of immigration laws, and no immigration that does not further America’s interests
*Fully secure borders
*A military focused only on producing the most lethal fighting forces in the world
*Total elimination of the climate cult
*Full production and use of America’s national resources (with reasonable environmental standards)
*An all of the above energy production strategy
*A return of the criminal justice system to sanity
*The police are allowed to proactively pursue criminals within the law. No unlawful restrictions on stop and frisk or hot pursuit
*Bail is reinstated
*Prosecutors are forced to prosecute and their discretion is limited by law
*Judges are forced to follow the law, and their discretion is limited by law
*Judges and prosecutors refusing to follow and enforce the law will be prosecuted, including federal judges and prosecutors
*Probation and parole violations will result in immediate incarceration
*Rioters will be immediately arrested and jailed and no bond will be allowed
*Riot will everywhere be a felony
*Obstructing traffic while protesting will everywhere be a felony
*Any public official so much as suggesting the police ignore rioters will be subject to arrest and prosecution for a felony
But that’s outrageous! You can’t do that stuff! Remember, we’re talking about what happens after a second civil war is forced on Normal Americans, and they win. They will win, you know. D/S/Cs have no more idea about the realities of such a conflict than they do about from where electricity comes. These ideas, and I’m sure more, would be necessary to ensure America never again faced a civil war, and coincidently, Americans would have more, and more secure, rights than they currently sort of enjoy.
This is known as a good thing.
That’s a basic list, gentle readers, and I’m sure you can see all of this flows from honoring the Constitution and obeying the rule of law. Those who would force war on Normal Americans would fight for pretty much the opposite, for far less liberty and the destruction of all America has accomplished. If you have any other suggestions, have at it!
Well, that list is wonderful there, Mike… all worth fighting for. Now.. let’s get real. Who you gonna fight.. and in the event you and the others who have chosen to fight for the same reasons “win”… how would you define that win, and in the end what would you have won? I mean, if you are literally fighting then there must be associated with that some measure of death and destruction. With that follows the collapse of society, government, and the result is pretty much an apocalypse of starvation, rampant death (not from the actual fighting), and complete misery, in which your list will soon not stay a priority after Day Three of your noble crusade. What’s the rest of your story?
I am sure you remember the “lesson” themed in the movie, “War Games”.
I would fight for God, family and the Constitution. And for the right for Doug to make the comments he makes here. As usual Doug misses the point. We are not the ones pushing this confrontation. We are not the ones that have been pushing this confrontation since at least the 1960’s. We just want the right to worship as we please, work as we please, raise our families as we please and be left the hell alone. But the Left is never capable of leaving anyone one alone.
Mike McDaniel said:
What you said.
As “we” please or as YOU please? Government (in general, the democratic forms) exists for ALL citizens, for the betterment of ALL citizens.
While I appreciate your willingness to fight for my rights in here.. in fact, the Constitution does not protect that at all. The Constitution freedom of speech is strictly to contain government from making laws that infringe on it. Outside of that, freedom of speech does not extend beyond containing government.. as in a blog setting. Tolerance of expression in a blog setting is completely determined by the blogmeister.
The struggle for equality is a bitch because everyone’s definition of it is different… and generally speaking it’s because there are those who want to be more equal at the other’s expense.
~Term limits for congressmen and women
~ Exile after imprisonment for legislators
who are convicted of using their office to
financially benefit themselves or family.
~ Voting age moved to 25
~ Voting restricted to married couples who
have birthed or adopted at least one child.
~A soapbox for Doug’s very own (just kidding)
Mike McDaniel said:
How about voting restricted to citizens, and only once per election? I’d settle for that. We might deal with the voting age issue by requiring 2 years of mandatory military service for full citizenship. If they can’t carry a rifle, there are other things they can do, but learning discipline and focus in a military concerned with national defense rather than climate change and pronouns would likely make even people under 21 fit to vote.
Oh, and Doug has his own soapbox, and here too!
Voting in our republic is serious business and
citizens (yes) need to be prepared as best
possible for that responsibility. The voting
age was dropped to 18 on the pretext of the
military draft, but we have and should have
a voluntary military except in times of war.
That system, until recently, had created the
most lethal military in history.
Also, education should prepare citizens to
vote wisely, but our education system fails
miserably in that respect. The emotional
force of youth is not countered by the
development of reason–which is what the
Democratic party needs from the youth vote-
emotions based on ignorance. Experience can
more probably bring wisdom: hence, vote at 25.
Citizens should vote with a tangible sense of
concern with the future; children most likely
give that sense. Childless individuals are
more likely to be self-centered; healthy and
enduring republics are not characterized by
Sorry for those who are thus unable to vote,
but they can still participate in other ways.
I would be in favor of requiring a term of public service (not necessarily the military, although that would be one of the options), or even just working in a job for a few years, before being allowed to vote or to run for public office.
Experience, IMHO, is more important than age or formal education. A 23-year-old gas station attendant (and Air Force veteran), or a 19-year-old busboy, is probably a better citizen than a 25-year-old Harvard graduate who has moved back in with his rich parents and who has never had a job of any kind. And a childless plumber (cop, firefighter, nurse, electrician, farmer, trucker, mechanic, whatever) is likely a better voter than some welfare recipient who has five illegitimate children by four different boyfriends.
I agree with what you say, but it is not practical.
It would be impossible to make such individual
distinctions on a national scale