I am disgusted with the events of today. I know that it is politically correct to be all excited by the carefully crafted symbolism, and what it “says about America” that the unaborted child of an underage school girl, statutorily raped by an irresponsible college playboy with a wife back home in Africa, actually conned the sheeple into electing him as POTUS; when he wasn’t even Constitutionally qualified as a natural born citizen of our country. I am in no mood to forgive that fraud perpetrated on us, today or ever. The man is an usurper, is not my President, and Constitutionally never could be; period.
Among all the feel good hoopla today, I can’t count the references to our history of slavery; yet not once did anyone point out that the Obamessiah has no slaves in his ancestry. I also heard damn little about what his election means policy wise for liberty and capitalism. Having read his books, and after studying his background as much as his carefully concealed history permits, it doesn’t look good.
Then, there was his revealing speech at Philadelphia the other day, which was brilliantly parsed over at the E3Gazzette:
“It was these ideals that led us to declare independence, and craft our constitution, producing documents that were imperfect but had within them, like our nation itself, the capacity to be made more perfect.”
MuscleDaddy didn’t cotton to the notion of changing these documents, and neither do I; and yes, MD, I remember my oath – and it never expired.
The best commentary I have seen today came from Robert Ringer. In a piece entitled, “The World’s Silliest Question,” he rightly asks what is meant by everyone wishing Obama a “successful” presidency:
So, before you decide whether or not you want Barack Obama to succeed, you would be wise to define what, exactly, it is that you want him to succeed at. Don’t be intimidated by today’s feel-good, “patriotic” mantra: “We all have to come together as Americans.”
Keep your head when those around you are losing theirs, and recognize that such Orwellian doublespeak is but a euphemism for: “You hard cases who still believe in capitalism and individual liberty are morally obliged to join us in moving our socialist agenda forward. And if you don’t, you’re unpatriotic.
”Why, none other than Shepherd Smith told me just a short time ago (through my TV screen, of course) that “Today is a great day for democracy.” Sorry, Shep, but I’m not buying into that one — even though I’m sure that John “Reach Across the Aisle” McCain must have been smiling and bobbing his head up and down when you said it.
I prefer to fight on for the real thing, and I hope you feel the same way. If we’re lucky enough to have free elections in 2012, perhaps another person of color — one who believes in small government and the sanctity of the individual — will win the presidency. Now that would be a man or woman I would want to see succeed.
But to get there, millions of people are going to set aside their emotionally based delusions and to be rational enough and strong enough not to buy into the massive, ongoing brainwashing campaign that is about to begin. Be prepared!
Then, a new commenter named “Victoria,” who states that she is black herself, offered a voice of reason among some untoward emotion even on the the Secular Right blog today. On this thread, she made several good comments. One was:
I must admit to being a tad bit horrified.
The important move is to have gotten rid of those monsters who hijacked the government for eight years and have caused who knows how much damage to the country’s attempt at maintaining a constitutional system. Okay, that’s done. I must admit to harboring a dream of seeing Ron Paul strolling down Pennsylvania Avenue today. Okay, that’s over.
But how could any thinking person get caught up in wanting “symbols” to rule over them? Do we go through this emotional routine again, if a woman is elected President next go-round? What difference would it make if the new President were Romney, or Biden, or Edwards? Wouldn’t we be concerned, in their cases, about their prospective policies? What difference would it make if Anglo-Euros were to serve as Presidents throughout the rest of this country’s history — a country founded by Anglo-Euros — if they were individuals we felt were worthy of the office? I can understand The Mob buying anything, but how does a rational, thinking person fall for the notion that even the Presidency is somehow “owed” to blacks? Or to Hispanics? Or to women? And that every ethnic group must get its turn. (When do the Hmong get theirs?)
Since Hispanics/Latinos are the largest minority group, should we all work to make them the next symbolic gesture? This is not regard for an individual. This is sheer nuttiness. I expect little flower-hatted church ladies to be enthralled by the “symbolism” of the moment and to get all teary-eyed. But not thinking people.
We’ve just been through some truly critical stuff that’s not over yet. The only thing that should have been on voters’ minds this past year is electing the most sensible person, not patting themselves on the back for voting in some symbol — or for “making history.”
Well said, Victoria.
Finally, another commenter, Lionell Griffith, back at E3Gazette summed it up:
I have not left my country, my country has left me. I have absolutely no obligation to follow where it is going. I have no responsibility to respect the result of this election nor the people it put in office. The ONLY thing I owe to my fellow man is to respect his individual rights exactly as long as he respects mine. Beyond that point, may he be damned to the hell he has chosen.
Let the resistance begin.
I couldn’t have said it better myself. ◄Dave►