Some of the comments that we got yesterday after the Community Organiser from Chicago was elected were wonderful. Here is my personal favourite:
First, demonize him and ascribe his motives to evil and malfeasance, not just policy differences. We should proclaim often and loudly that he is not our president, that he stole the election and he has no mandate. We should repeat false stories about him, no matter how crazy or wrong, until they are accepted as common wisdom. We should create lies and urban legends to smear him and demean him. We should ridicule any verbal slips or gaffes, and ascribe them to his native stupidity and intellectual vapidity. We should accuse him of every sin and crime under the sun and attempt to have him impeached for policy differences, which we should call crimes. We should undermine any programs he wants to pass by misstating their goals and content. We should take quotes out of context to make him seem ridiculous and to make him seem mean-spirited. We should repeat often that he doesn’t care about people who aren’t the same race as he is, and that he is only out for his own kind. We should claim that he is going to try to force a coup and take over the country by force. We should claim he’s going to lock up any dissenters. We should loudly scream about losing our rights and interfere with his speechs and disrupt any gatherings of his party. Our politicians should cynically misstate his policies to make him look bad.
Update: one or two commenters are outraged by this and the words “native stupidity” have prompted at least one commenter to accuse me of being a racist in putting this paragraph on the blog. For goodness sake: the whole point of the comment was that it was written by a very bitter man who understandably feels that it is time that Obama should be attacked in exactly the same way as was Bush, who after all has been constantly attacked for being stupid, for his Texan drawl, whatever. What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
I don’t normally respond to comments by adding to my original posts, but in this case I think it is necessary to lay down a marker to all those Obama supporters out there who might get twitchy when their hero gets any flak: criticism of Mr Obama is not some form of disguised racism. If the Democrats and their cheerleaders in the MSM spend the next four years trying to ward off all criticism of their man as racist, they will demean the genuine examples of racism that still exist. Further, they will, either unwittingly or not, harm racial harmony in the US and elsewhere. They will also deserve our contempt.
I couldn’t agree more with the commenter. And why shouldn’t we do all that? Remember, dissent is patriotism!
And why shouldn’t we do all that?
Because we don’t support blue state values?
Well, the “all obama, all the time’ media would NOT run with it, in case you forget, this is historic; the first time an out and out soicalist/commie. has been elected to the ….
“highist office in the land”
I FEAR for my Nation…USA, we hardly knew you. RIP
Didn’t they already do all that during the election campaign (except, given the know-nothing constituency it aimed at he was accused of being an elitist rather than denigrated)? It is standard political procedure is it not?
I read that as sarcastic criticism of a spin-dominated campaign by the Democrats (and possibly of the left in general).
A little while ago, Johnathan took one of my comments, intended sarcastically, and played it with a straight bat. I struggled to understand whether that was really a straight bat, or deeper sarcasm.
Life is so difficult.
Best regards
Sarcasm is indeed difficult to spot in these times, Nigel.
Best regards!
>> And why shouldn’t we do all that?
> Because we don’t support blue state values?
Well, sure. There’s always impeachment, right? (← sarcasm)
Not to sound like a moral relativist or anything, but maybe tactics depend on how dangerous you perceive a problem to be. If you’re a squeamish and deeply-commited vegan – but the jailers aren’t feeding you enough – might you not eat rats?
Remember the guy who said this?
— Thomas Jefferson
I mean, just as a reminder of someone who wouldn’t take extreme sorts of action in day-to-day affairs. Probably not even in the course of most years. But sometimes….
its worth a try – after all smearing him as a terrorist sympathising, anti-semitic, anti-American, communist, elitist baby killer obviously has not worked.
The only positive aspect of an Obama administration is the possibility that conservatives will rediscover the ability to say, “No, I won’t. What are you going to do about it?”
But I’m not holding my breath.
The acid test is when the “comedians” who richly entertained us all with anything trite (and even unfunny) about Bush, McCain and Palin will trot out an Obama joke.
Get your ‘Impeach Obama’ Stickers, Shirts, Hats, Buttons, and More NOW at:
ImpeachObama.MyShirtSucks.com
Oh, so you mean treat Obama the same as Bush? What a wonderfully fair idea!
Buy Guns…
…while you can.
“And why shouldn’t we do all that?” – Rob?
“Because we don’t support blue state values?” – Countingcats
It’s not a “value”, CC, it’s a tool. The Big Lie works; we all know that. Now that we’re the Loyal Opposition we should use all the tools available. That’s the reason I’m planning to buy[1] a copy of Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals.”
If we’re going to have to suffer through an extended period of turmoil and anguish as the socialists complete their destruction of the country, at least we should have a little fun!
[1] In the spirit of the book I would steal it, but can’t find a copy anywhere other than on-line. At least I can buy a used copy (it’s out of print), so Alinsky’s heirs won’t get any royalties.
I remember when the Republican Party was an opposition party. I liked it then. Except for their obsession with my genitals, which I thought I could perhaps deter by smearing them with something offensive — the body parts in question, not the party — I thought it was pretty good as an opposition party.
They opposed Clinton’s nation building.
They opposed Clinton’s draconian law enforcement tactics, especially at Waco and Ruby Ridge.
They opposed Clinton’s big government programs.
They opposed Clinton’s interventions into the economy.
But then they got power. And then they betrayed every principal they claimed to held dear. On all of the excesses of the Clinton administration, they made Clinton look like the voice of reason, as they exceeded his wildest fever dreams in government growth.
In short, in this election, the Republican scum got exactly what they deserved after they exposed themselves as frauds on every single issue.
I, for one, think that Obama will be slightly less disasterous for freedom in America then McCain would have been. That is not to say he won’t be a disaster — he will — but at least he will not be claiming to be a free marketer as he castrates the market and imposes poverty on those who would prefer to produce.
As for the morons who still think that the Republicans had some interest in Liberty, they need to reexamine the Bush fiasco, once they can criticize the government without being, in their own minds, unpatriotic.
I’ll be working to build the Libertarian Party, so there will be a remaining voice for freedom in America, if the Republican Traitors ever regain power.
The end justifies the means? How about stealing…oh, you’ve already thought of that. OK, how about killing? Can be a very effective tool, which, if I understand correctly, makes it ‘not a value’?
Mr. Pearce:
Shame on you for your hateful, pathetic words.
Your an idiot! Might I suggest you think about hopping on that “bridge to no-where” in Alaska…then jumping off! ?
Your words are a menice to society as a whole and regardless of political opinions your words shame ALL Americans.
The end justifies the means? How about stealing…oh, you’ve already thought of that. OK, how about killing? Can be a very effective tool, which, if I understand correctly, makes it ‘not a value’?
Alisa, sadly I’m pretty sure that “very effective tool” is going to be used in our poor country in the near future, by both sides. There is a very “1860” feel in the air, and April 12, 1861 is not that far away.
Subotai: sure. The big question is, who will start, and under what circumstances. Make no mistake, I am by no means a pacifist.
Alisa,
Nor I. It is not possible to know what the precise casus belli will be. It is only possible to be as prepared as you can, with a calm heart and resolved mind. Reactions can be triggered by the most unexpected actions. It could be an act of monumental stupidity along the line of Concord/Lexington, it could be rumor run amok along the line of the Bastille. Clausewitz, though, was right.
The world is full of trigger points, and our ability to absorb a shock is lessened by the ongoing economic collapse. I have minimal confidence in our ability to halt the economic slide. After several weeks of a gradual rise in the wake of the appalling ‘bailout’; the day after the election the stock market slumped, and is still slumping. Down 5% a day. Investors are making rational decisions about the announced policies of the Obama administration, which means they are going to move assets as far from the reach of the IRS as possible.
There is no reason for any short term optimism, as liberty does not flourish times of privation.
“Be Thou then firmly Resolved; Duty is as heavy as a Mountain, and Death is as light as a Feather.”
Alisa, it started a long time ago. We’re just now beginning to figure it out.
Whatever the rules of engagement might be, if they aren’t followed by both sides someone is at a disadvantage. I’m perfectly happy to let the other side define the rules, but I refuse to handcuff myself by adhering to a “higher” standard (whatever that means) than my opponent. High road or low: you choose one and we’ll both follow it. The left long ago selected the road (read Johnathon’s quote again), and it’s long past time we started using their own tactics against them. Hence my reference to Alinsky’s book (the radicals’ bible for the last 40 years).
Melonie, two observations: First, those aren’t Mr. Pearce’s words; he was merely quoting another blogger, as a device to begin a discussion. (Obviously, he succeeded.) Second, if they are truly “hateful, pathetic words” you’d better consider their true source. An honest person would recognize them as being a pretty fair description of how the radical left has treated George Bush for these last 8 years. “What’s sauce for the goose . . .”
“native stupidity” says it all really. Alltogether a witless stew of thinly disguised racist hate cliches. Still freedom eh………..thats what were here for.
Laird, no argument there. What bothers me is your distinction between tools and values, which is false. Tools have value too.
Subotai, it’s interesting that you mention economy there, and it made me think about Waco and Ruby Ridge. Do you think that if those happened during a major depression, rather than the happy Clinton years, they would have different wider consequences? If we try to find the answer in the FDR years, maybe it is ‘no’, but then maybe he was saved by the war? Just thinking aloud here…
Quite possibly, it would have been more explosive. When basic survival is a primary concern, government interference and government violations of not only statute but also what is considered the proper/moral way of doing their jobs rouses more ire. I know that even amongst peace officers, the assault on Waco infuriated us. I had just gotten out of a training class and was talking with one of our hostage negotiators when the news came on. We were not happy campers.
Similarly, I assume locally during Ruby Ridge. And in Florida when Elian Gonzales’ family was target of a Federal assault. One thing to consider though; if things are getting tense domestically, neither the government nor Big Media would let word get out officially. The problem for the government with that is that it would inevitably spread by word of mouth and other sources, and with each telling become even more horrific, rousing an even more violent reaction. Incidentally, part of being prepared for whatever may come should include a willingness to pass on news that is the equivalent of “anti-Soviet activities”. SAMIZDAT anyone?
Yep Subotai.
That’s us. 🙂
Damn, why did you have to bring up Gonzales, while we were agreeing so nicely on everything:-)
Bod: not yet.
That doesn’t mean they wont.
Hey, Obama didn’t steal the election. He bought it fair and square, unless you count the millions intentionally accepted in illegal donations, or perhaps votes from illegal aliens registered using Obama’s money, or various shades of lies. But you can’t blame Obama for what clearly was a management oversight, the experience of which will serve him well as President. And as fellow citizens of the Global Gulag, illegal aliens have the right to vote, too. Finally, the truth is relative; cousins, aunts, you name it.
Alisa,
While we may disagree on the Elian Gonzales affair [Cuba is not a party to the treaty over child custody and does not meet the terms to join it]; my comment was over the reaction. Federal assault troops acting in violation of a court order storming a private house with automatic weapons to snatch a terrified child from the arms of his family. As an image in tough economic times, when the government is not trusted, is feared, and certainly is despised; yeah, that could be one hell of a trigger point. The fury amongst conservatives and in the Cuban-American community was quite palpable. And that was with a media spinning madly to cover the Slickster’s generous fundament. Now imagine it if the media and government was actively [and perforce clumsily, because that is what they do] trying to conceal the event, and what word of mouth and the modern American equivalent of the Soviet -era Samizdats would make it. One of the best tools that insurgents have, is the actions of the government they oppose. What I am expecting as a possibility, is for some of the Obama-proposed “Civilian National Defense Force” that is outside military control to go all Horst Wessel/OGPU/Ton Ton Macoutes/Fingerman on someone. [that should be a wide enough political spectrum to avoid Godwin’s Law] May they then get an object lesson in Federalist Paper #28, paragraph 6.
Subotai:
This is irrelevant from a moral standpoint. This is:
and this is also where I agree with you. The boy should have been reunited with his father (BTW, those people were not his ‘family’, in the sense that he has only known them for a very short time and – literally – by accident), but not at any price or by any means.
As to the rest: I find it very difficult to believe any of that is likely to happen. Problem is, I cannot come up with any solid logical argument to support my disbelief, which makes your scenario all the more scary. Interesting times:-|
THREE HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS of the Comrade Obama campaign can not be traced to specific donors.
This is because the Obama campaign did not have the ways of linking a credit card donation to a specific person and address that the McCain campaign had.
Or even that a corner shop has.
“But the media did not expose this during the campaign”.
Of course they did not – and they will not now either.
The minority of the media that did expose such things are now in danger of Obama “Truth Unit” style tactics.