Good evening, dear reader, and welcome to another episode of my infamous "Musings After Midnight" during which I ruminate and cogitate over the state of the country, usually on sleepless nights well after midnight.
I invite you to participate in these exercises with me for the purpose of fostering fellowship and goodwill among like minded people who share my alarm over the state and direction of the nation. We are very much in this together, and we need to know that we are not alone in the battle.
I happen to know that there are millions of us out there who are not only deeply alarmed about what we face at this dire hour but who are contemplating what they wish to do about it.
And so, here we are -- a place where we can gather to give deep and careful consideration to these matters of extreme importance.
This is why I invite you to warm yourself by the virtual fire and avail yourself of warming beverages, virtual of course. But in this age of the Internet, virtual reality often closely mirrors real life, and indeed, what we experience online can be ultimate "real life," provided it is grounded in what's real rather than fantasy.
It has been cold here in the mountains and Piedmont of the Carolinas, and many areas have snow on the ground. So it's a good time to gather and ponder.
My subject today may come as no surprise or news to many of you. Those who regularly visit these pages tend to be the most well informed citizens in America. And thus, you know as well as I do that in spite of all of our talk of staving off a coup by forces that neither recognize nor value the final authority of the Constitution as the ultimate rule of law in this land, in a very real sense we have already been seized in a war-less, bloodless coup.
No shots were fired. No one was killed. No army tanks rolled in the streets. No one announced from loud speakers that we were being taken over by a malevolent force. Yet the coup is every bit as real as if these things had happened.
The election of Barack Obama in 2008 and his subsequent reelection in 2012 is the culmination of that coup that has been in the making for nearly 50 years. None of this happened overnight. It wasn't as if suddenly out of the blue over 50 percent of our fellow citizens decided on a whim that they were going to discard the founding principles and put into office a man who represents something our Founders detested. The forces of evil that perpetrated this coup have been working tirelessly, relentlessly behind the scenes for nearly 50 years to get the country to this point.
There is some disagreement as to when the coup actually began. But this is, in the final analysis, irrelevant. Several factors were at play from the beginning, all happening simultaneously. The nitpickers can argue over which occurred first. But the fact remains that all of these circumstances came together at roughly the same time to form the foundation of the coup that would culminate nearly 50 years later.
One of these factors is the disintegration of the American system of education, both at the primary and secondary level, and at the higher level in academia. After World War II, a distinct change began taking place in education that would forever change the thinking of generations of young Americans. No longer was the United States viewed in the classroom as a force for good but as a symbol of evil. Marxism was hailed as the ultimate force of good. Religion was no longer viewed as an essential adjunct in the development of decent, well rounded citizens. Rather, religion was held up to disdain, a force of oppression that must be eradicated through ridicule, dismissal, and neglect. And American exceptionalism was no longer taught but a subtle, sometimes overt, notion that other cultures and nations were somehow superior to our belief that America was the ultimate pinnacle of freedom and prosperity in the world took hold in the classroom that led to an outright hatred for America by the 1960s, a hatred so deep that professors such as Bill Ayers, close friend and financier of Barack Obama, was bombing federal buildings and urging teenagers to kill their parents.
Closely related to this development was the advent of what has become known as America's "collective guilt" regarding racial discrimination in the past. Somehow white people today are supposed to take on the blame for what others did centuries ago, leading to displays of such overreach as to be laughable, such as the feeling that we need to make financial "reparations" to people of minority races for what our ancestors did to their ancestors, although none of us living today had one thing to do with any of it. And I am deeply convinced that the apparent compulsion of many liberal whites to vote for Barack Obama, against their better judgment, stems directly from this "white collective guilt" that has been foisted on them by an educational system that is stacked in favor of minorities and those who hate America.
At the same time these events were occurring, an alarming fact became known to American liberals in the Democratic Party that led to a proactive change in a key area of American life. During the late 50s and into the 60s the powers that be in the liberal/progressive intelligentsia began to notice that Democrats were showing signs of weakness, even as Lyndon Johnson enjoyed skyrocketing approval numbers and Democrats practically owned both houses of Congress with overwhelming majorities. Some cracks were seen developing in the walls. And the harsh truth became clear -- unless the Democratic Party found a way to expand its base in the future it would be relegated to permanent minority party status.
Why? Because whites were abandoning the Party in droves. My own grandfather, for example, had been a lifelong Democrat, a union member. But the 60s forced him to change his thinking. He began to feel as if he no longer recognized the Party to which he had long professed unquestioned loyalty. By 1980 he told me that he was voting for Ronald Reagan. He said, "I did not change. They did. They left me behind."
Such was the thinking of millions of citizens who would come to be known as "Reagan Democrats."
Some within the Democratic Party foresaw what was coming as far back as the 1960s. Lyndon Johnson was one of them. Thus, Johnson made a major, far-reaching change in the immigration policy of the United States.
Liberals were losing whites. The already had 98 percent of the blacks in their pockets. There was no group left from which to draw, unless they could devise a strategy for producing a new minority group that could help propel them to majority status. But such a thing would mean they would have to go outside the country.
This they did. Johnson changed the formula for who was allowed to immigrate to the United States. Until the 1960s immigration and naturalization had favored Europeans. After the Johnson change, the formula would favor Hispanics and limits would be placed on the number of Europeans allowed to immigrate and become naturalized.
I distinctly remember when the change took place even as a school boy. When I came through elementary school the foreign language everyone was required to learn was French. But by the time I reached junior high and high school, the preferred second language had shifted to Spanish.
When I inquired as to the reason for the change, I was told by an educator that students were encouraged to learn Spanish because of "all of the new Hispanic immigrants coming into the country."
Now, I have no problem whatsoever with Hispanics, or Latinos, or others from the Spanish speaking world. But at the time U.S. policy shifted toward them, the reason was purely political. They were being used as pawns for someone's ulterior political motives, namely, liberals and Democrats. At the time, such persons were impoverished, much more so than Europeans. And thus, they were tailor made for American politicians who pandered to such persons, promising them everything from low cost housing, free medical care, free public education for their children, all at taxpayer expense.
In short, the Democrats figured out that they could buy the votes, bribe Hispanics into being Democrats for life.
In time, this proved invaluable. The Democrats put together a coalition of minority groups -- blacks, Hispanics, radical feminists, anti-capitalists, pro-union Marxists, dependents who are addicted to big government programs, etc., enough to beat Republicans who still rely on whites to win elections.
Liberal Democrat demagogue Sam Donaldson, who masquerades as a journalist, told Chris Matthews last week that he got angry over Tea Party assertions that they "wished to take their country back." "Well," he said, "It is not your country any more. It is our country." He then went on to recount how the Democrats put together a coalition of minorities, denoting major "changes" in America over the past 20 years.
Everyone who sat on Matthews' panel at MSNBC that day nodded their heads approvingly of Donaldson's remarks.
Now, to a degree he is right. But not entirely. Things have, indeed, changed to the point to where a politician can demagogue his way to office by pandering to a half dozen or so minority groups--just enough to squeak out a win. But what Donaldson curiously failed to say was that it is only when Democrats succeed in getting all minorities on the same page can they win.
Had only 2 percent or so of the Hispanic vote gone the other way to Romney, for example, then the outcome of the presidential election would have been very different. That is a razor thin margin and points to the fragility of the minority coalition the liberals have managed to put together.
Many pundits have mused that had Romney simply gone directly to the Hispanic community and noted how their values and ours are one and the same, and pointed out the reasons why American taxpayers do not support endless giveaway programs but wish to help the poor become self-sufficient, he could have won enough Hispanic votes to put him over the top. George W. Bush was able to do so, for example. And contrary to conventional wisdom, it is not the immigration issue that turns Hispanics against Republicans and conservatives. Legitimate Hispanic citizens who came here legally and went through the lawful process of being naturalized have just as much resentment toward lawbreakers from Mexico who seek to get ahead of the line illegally as do American taxpayers.
Thus, there are ways to get Hispanics on board with us.
But as it stands now, Hispanic citizens who voted for Obama have been duped by political opportunists who do not care about them at all but see them only as pawns in a political game. And they have inadvertently participated in a coup, a takeover of the American system of government that has rendered our Constitution meaningless.
I do not believe most Hispanics want that kind of society. But in order to change it, they must be made of aware of what has happened and how they played a role. Many whites also played a role.
And now that the coup has been completed, the real agenda of the progressive minions has come to the forefront. It is not gun control they want but gun CONFISCATION. It is not "reasonable restrictions" they want but outright gun BANS. They do not want to leave law abiding citizens alone but wish to fingerprint and register us if we want to own certain types of firearms.
What part of "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" do they not get? The fact is, they get it, and they are going to violate it. And this is my whole point. These people have a deep, abiding disdain for the Constitution and the rights guaranteed therein. And they WILL disregard our rights.
This is lawless, bloodthirsty tyranny of the worst sort, my friends. Our Founders would not be shooting right now. The shooting would be long over and done. And Jefferson, Madison, Henry, Franklin, and Adams would either have the perpetrators in prison, or they would have them swinging from the nearest trees.
What we are facing right now in America is the proverbial line in the sand. Are we going to let them confiscate firearms as they did in Nazi Germany, Communist Russia, or Communist China? Are we going to allow ourselves to be fingerprinted and registered?
I say no.
So what are they doing to do? Arrest us all?
And if they send army tanks down the middle of the streets to quell an uprising of citizens, are they going to blow the heads off of the lone citizens who, as did the courageous anti-Communist Chinese students in Tienanmen Square, stand in front of the tanks and dare them to shoot?
And if you happen to be a anti-gun bigot, a gun control nut, reading this right now, let me be as clear as I can possibly be to you. We will never disarm. You are not getting our guns, period. We will resist. We will fight you to the death. You will have to kill us before you get one single concession of liberty guaranteed to us by our Founders.
Are you willing to do that? Are you ready for the fallout? If you and your jackbooted government hit squads fire on us first, it is "Katy, bar the door." All bets are off, and it will be war in the streets. Are you ready for such blood shed all because you want our guns?
We are not going to start a war. We have vowed that many times. We will never fire first. But if you fire on us, we will finish what you start. You had better be ready before you start down that path.
This is about much more than guns. This is about Constitutional rights as a whole. We will not stop until we take back what you have robbed from us. We WILL restore Constitutional law in this nation one way or another. THAT is a promise.
And woe be unto you who defy our Constitution. You are a traitor and a tyrant. And that Constitution spells out in no uncertain terms the legal recourse that is to be carried out against all of those who defy that Constitution.
You had best think through your position and come to a more reasonable conclusion.