The Point of no Return

[Rebel Yell]

The point is quickly approaching, maybe not now, but soon.  The more the line blurs between Republican and Democrat, the faster we're getting there.

The Point of No Return

There is much disagreement as to who said the words in the next few paragraphs. Many people attribute them to an eighteenth century Scotsman named Alexander Tytler, but regardless of the author, when taken literally and applied to today, they are chilling to say the least.

"A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government.

A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury.

From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.

The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history has been about 200 years. During those 200 years those nations always progressed through the following sequence.

From bondage to spiritual faith
From spiritual faith to great courage
From courage to liberty
From liberty to abundance
From abundance to complacency
From complacency to apathy
From apathy to dependence
From dependence into bondage"


I have long felt there is an element among the left wing of American politics whose interest is creating a formidable voting block, a herd of sheep if you will, which neither looks at issues or international politics but at which party and candidates are going to give them the most entitlements.

Case in point, welfare. Look at what happened in New Orleans when Hurricane Katrina hit. The people in some districts of the city had become so dependent on the government they couldn't do anything for themselves. They just sat it out and waited for someone to come and get them.

While the people of the Mississippi South coast immediately started picking up the pieces and rebuilding their communities and the people of the Midwest were on the scene the day after the recent storms, salvaging what they could and making plans to get on with their lives, the unfortunate people of New Orleans were bussed to other cities where they immediately swelled the public relief rolls and the crime statistics.

Who do you think they vote for in an election?

Case in point, illegal immigration.

Fact 1: Somewhere between 11 to 22 million dollars are spent on welfare to illegal aliens by state governments every year.

Fact 2: Over 2 million dollars a year is spent on food assistance programs for illegals.

Fact 3: Two and a half billion dollars a year is spend on Medicaid for illegals

Fact 4: Twelve billion dollars a year is spent on the education of children who are here illegally and cannot speak English.

And the list goes on, but you get the idea.

Who do you think these people are going to vote for if, or I should probably say when they become eligible?

The massive health care proposals being put forth by Barack Hussein Obama are nothing more than Socialized medicine.

His tax rate-hiking proposals are nothing less than income redistribution.

If Barack Obama gets into office and is able to implement the Socialist programs he proposes, I don't know if he and his kind will ever be voted out of office again.

Because every day he is in office the number of those feeding at the public trough will grow and eventually approach critical mass until we reach the point of no return.

This bears repeating:

"A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury."

What do you think?

Pray for our troops

God Bless America

Charlie Daniels

[Chris_]

Is it time to create a new United States? If so, how?
by Douglas MacKinnon

...Over the course of the last year and a half, I’ve gotten over one-thousand emails from readers. Just in the last two months, I received emails from five war-fighters in Iraq who thanked me for writing a novel that held dear the ideals for which they were fighting in Iraq. Ideals that they felt, were waning in their very own country.

Of all the feedback I have gotten regarding the novel, none is more meaningful, sad, or telling, than those five emails. Are we losing the liberty and traditional values that these heroic soldiers are fighting for overseas?

Putting that rhetorical question aside, I’d like to stress again that this column is merely meant to create discussion. Nothing about it should be taken literally by those with the power to tap my phones or read my emails. Better to direct such resources toward the dictators and terrorists who continue to target our nation.

So, with that caveat established, let’s imagine a United States of the very near future.

A United States where:

• An ultra-liberal candidate for president has the unethical support of almost the top 100 newspapers in the country, the top three television networks, and two of the three top cable networks.

• Nancy Pelosi and other liberals would like to silence the needed and conservative voices of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, Glenn Beck, Laura Ingraham, and others.

• Some Republicans are morphing into liberal Democrats in order to keep their seats at any cost.

• Border security has become a punch-line for many elected officials on both sides of the aisle.

• God and Christianity are under constant attack from the far-left.

• Liberals -- most especially the Democratic candidate for president -- and our Supreme Court, would like to treat Jihadists as criminals and extend statutory habeas corpus to enemy combatants.

• Large segments of the entertainment community are purposefully and systematically exposing our children to the vilest forms of smut to both make money and to indoctrinate.

• Strict-constructionist judges are an endangered species.

• A number of Republicans are jumping on the “Amnesty-for-illegal-aliens” bandwagon faster than Democrats.

• Lower taxes and fiscal restraint are going the way of the Hula-Hoop, good manners, and an abiding belief in the goodness and mission of the American soldier.

Whoops. I’m sorry. Did I say “the near future?” I meant now....

SNIP

..."to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness"....

[SemiSpook]

..."to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness"....

The often ignored other three points of American Polity. Never thought we'd have to use them.

It's in the Declaration. I say we consider some alternative means of persuasion to the Socialists.

[rich_t]

..."to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness"....

The often ignored other three points of American Polity. Never thought we'd have to use them.

It's in the Declaration. I say we consider some alternative means of persuasion to the Socialists.

There ain't nothing wrong with dusting off the DoI and reusing it.

I do think our FF would approve.

[Chris_]

..."to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness"....

The often ignored other three points of American Polity. Never thought we'd have to use them.

It's in the Declaration. I say we consider some alternative means of persuasion to the Socialists.

Well, you seem to be more of an optimist than Thomas Jefferson was.  He believed we'd be using them every 20 years or so.

Maybe if'n we had, we wouldn't be in the National mess we're in now.

[rich_t]

..."to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness"....

The often ignored other three points of American Polity. Never thought we'd have to use them.

It's in the Declaration. I say we consider some alternative means of persuasion to the Socialists.

Well, you seem to be more of an optimist than Thomas Jefferson was.  He believed we'd be using them every 20 years or so.

Maybe if'n we had, we wouldn't be in the National mess we're in now.

I'll bet that Thomas Jefferson would have been a firm believer of term limits.

[Chris_]

..."to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness"....

The often ignored other three points of American Polity. Never thought we'd have to use them.

It's in the Declaration. I say we consider some alternative means of persuasion to the Socialists.

Well, you seem to be more of an optimist than Thomas Jefferson was.  He believed we'd be using them every 20 years or so.

Maybe if'n we had, we wouldn't be in the National mess we're in now.

I'll bet that Thomas Jefferson would have been a firm believer of term limits.

You would be wrong.  TJ understood we have term limits -- they are called "elections."  He very strongly believed the people deserved the government they asked for.  If people are stupid enough to re-elect the same idiots time after time then that is what they deserve.

If people are too intellectually lazy to not vote the incumbent then they are too intellectually lazy to get anything better (like Mass.).

[Splashdown]

Well, you seem to be more of an optimist than Thomas Jefferson was.  He believed we'd be using them every 20 years or so.

Maybe if'n we had, we wouldn't be in the National mess we're in now.

What you say might be true.

But let's be careful what you wish for. The last time the DOI was "dusted off," 618,000 Americans paid a a pretty hefty price between Sumpter and Appomatox.

[Chris_]

Well, you seem to be more of an optimist than Thomas Jefferson was.  He believed we'd be using them every 20 years or so.

Maybe if'n we had, we wouldn't be in the National mess we're in now.

What you say might be true.

But let's be careful what you wish for. The last time the DOI was "dusted off," 618,000 Americans paid a a pretty hefty price between Sumpter and Appomatox.

The biggest difference between then and now is the Damn Yankees of today believe in their heart of hearts that guns, principles like courage and honor and violence to uphold those principles are the worst of all evils, and they wouldn't deign to be associated with such things in their flocks of sheeple.

[Rebel Yell]

Well, you seem to be more of an optimist than Thomas Jefferson was.  He believed we'd be using them every 20 years or so.

Maybe if'n we had, we wouldn't be in the National mess we're in now.

What you say might be true.

But let's be careful what you wish for. The last time the DOI was "dusted off," 618,000 Americans paid a a pretty hefty price between Sumpter and Appomatox.

And if the good guys had won, we wouldn't be having this problem today.  At least not where I sit.  If states rights had been left intact, you could just move to the state that best fit your needs and ideologies.

[Splashdown]

And if the good guys had won, we wouldn't be having this problem today.  At least not where I sit.  If states rights had been left intact, you could just move to the state that best fit your needs and ideologies.

I'll save the re-fighting of the Civil War to gator and TOS, but, there were plenty of good guys on both sides.

[Chris_]

And if the good guys had won, we wouldn't be having this problem today.  At least not where I sit.  If states rights had been left intact, you could just move to the state that best fit your needs and ideologies.

I'll save the re-fighting of the Civil War to gator and TOS, but, there were plenty of good guys on both sides.

Agreed, however the next Civil War, if it comes to that point (God forbid), will be over competing ideologies, not geography....and without specific tactical boundaries, the bloodshed would make the last one look like a church social......

doc

[Rebel Yell]

And if the good guys had won, we wouldn't be having this problem today.  At least not where I sit.  If states rights had been left intact, you could just move to the state that best fit your needs and ideologies.

I'll save the re-fighting of the Civil War to gator and TOS, but, there were plenty of good guys on both sides.

Agreed, however the next Civil War, if it comes to that point (God forbid), will be over competing ideologies, not geography....and without specific tactical boundaries, the bloodshed would make the last one look like a church social......

doc

Yep, conservatives with guns versus liberals who are afraid of guns.  That would be a bloodbath.  Only problem, I'm afraid the government would be on the side of the libs in the fight against "Christian extremists".

[Chris_]

And if the good guys had won, we wouldn't be having this problem today.  At least not where I sit.  If states rights had been left intact, you could just move to the state that best fit your needs and ideologies.

I'll save the re-fighting of the Civil War to gator and TOS, but, there were plenty of good guys on both sides.

Agreed, however the next Civil War, if it comes to that point (God forbid), will be over competing ideologies, not geography....and without specific tactical boundaries, the bloodshed would make the last one look like a church social......

doc

Yep, conservatives with guns versus liberals who are afraid of guns.  That would be a bloodbath.  Only problem, I'm afraid the government would be on the side of the libs in the fight against "Christian extremists".

Well....we've seen a glimpse of what it might look like in Iraq and Afganistan.......having the "government" on a side will not guarantee a victory without a tremendous price to be paid.....

doc

[Rebel Yell]

And if the good guys had won, we wouldn't be having this problem today.  At least not where I sit.  If states rights had been left intact, you could just move to the state that best fit your needs and ideologies.

I'll save the re-fighting of the Civil War to gator and TOS, but, there were plenty of good guys on both sides.

Agreed, however the next Civil War, if it comes to that point (God forbid), will be over competing ideologies, not geography....and without specific tactical boundaries, the bloodshed would make the last one look like a church social......

doc

Yep, conservatives with guns versus liberals who are afraid of guns.  That would be a bloodbath.  Only problem, I'm afraid the government would be on the side of the libs in the fight against "Christian extremists".

Well....we've seen a glimpse of what it might look like in Iraq and Afganistan.......having the "government" on a side will not guarantee a victory without a tremendous price to be paid.....

doc

Honestly, if the government is the bad guy, it makes a revolution even more worth fightning.

[Chris_]

Honestly, if the government is the bad guy, it makes a revolution even more worth fightning.

Exactly what the founders had in mind.....

Paraphrasing......."The tree of liberty must occasionally be nourished by the blood of patriots, and tyrants......"

doc

[Chris_]

And if the good guys had won, we wouldn't be having this problem today.  At least not where I sit.  If states rights had been left intact, you could just move to the state that best fit your needs and ideologies.

I'll save the re-fighting of the Civil War to gator and TOS, but, there were plenty of good guys on both sides.

Agreed, however the next Civil War, if it comes to that point (God forbid), will be over competing ideologies, not geography....and without specific tactical boundaries, the bloodshed would make the last one look like a church social......

doc

Yep, conservatives with guns versus liberals who are afraid of guns.  That would be a bloodbath.  Only problem, I'm afraid the government would be on the side of the libs in the fight against "Christian extremists".

Well....we've seen a glimpse of what it might look like in Iraq and Afganistan.......having the "government" on a side will not guarantee a victory without a tremendous price to be paid.....

doc

Honestly, if the government is the bad guy, it makes a revolution even more worth fightning.

Far as I'm concerned, when the shit hits the fan, and the country decends into Chaos, my primary targets are gonna be bureaucrats, politicians and lawyers.

I'm not too worried about the government being on the side of the Socialists.  I keep being reminded of the study that the Clintoons commissioned leading into the whole Y2K hoopla.  They wanted to know if the military could be relied upon if they declared martial law.  Seems only about 30% of all officers and 15% or so of all NCOs (less than 20% of Combat Arms officers and 10% of combat arms NCOs) would execute an order for martial law.

I just hope the country wakes the **** up before it gets that far.

[SemiSpook]

15-20% of enlisted actually willing to execute martial law.

Sounds to me like the officer class is screwed. I guess this coup de etat might actually happen after all.

And I'll have a front row seat. 

[Rebel]

I would think it would be the Officer corps that would be less-likely to turn on the civilian populace.

[SemiSpook]

I would think it would be the Officer corps that would be less-likely to turn on the civilian populace.

It depends. Even though they're in the uniform, there are some moonbat officers in the bunch. I sure as hell wouldn't mess with the E1-E3 class, because they're all full of piss and vinegar and liable to shoot anything that moves. The E4-E6 class, NCOs and the passed over officers (O4-O6) are probably the best bet to maintain order for the civilians, as well as the best trained to protect them.

No offense, but anyone with stars can't be trusted, unless they're willing to stand with their CSMs/CMSgts/MCPOs.

[dutch508]

I would think it would be the Officer corps that would be less-likely to turn on the civilian populace.

It depends. Even though they're in the uniform, there are some moonbat officers in the bunch. I sure as hell wouldn't mess with the E1-E3 class, because they're all full of piss and vinegar and liable to shoot anything that moves. The E4-E6 class, NCOs and the passed over officers (O4-O6) are probably the best bet to maintain order for the civilians, as well as the best trained to protect them.

No offense, but anyone with stars can't be trusted, unless they're willing to stand with their CSMs/CMSgts/MCPOs.

agreed.

[rich_t]

I would think it would be the Officer corps that would be less-likely to turn on the civilian populace.

It depends. Even though they're in the uniform, there are some moonbat officers in the bunch. I sure as hell wouldn't mess with the E1-E3 class, because they're all full of piss and vinegar and liable to shoot anything that moves. The E4-E6 class, NCOs and the passed over officers (O4-O6) are probably the best bet to maintain order for the civilians, as well as the best trained to protect them.

No offense, but anyone with stars can't be trusted, unless they're willing to stand with their CSMs/CMSgts/MCPOs.

Unfortunately, far too many young E1 - E3 troops don't even know what Constitution even says much less what it really means, therefore might be the ones most inclined to support martial law.

[docstew]

I would think it would be the Officer corps that would be less-likely to turn on the civilian populace.

It depends. Even though they're in the uniform, there are some moonbat officers in the bunch. I sure as hell wouldn't mess with the E1-E3 class, because they're all full of piss and vinegar and liable to shoot anything that moves. The E4-E6 class, NCOs and the passed over officers (O4-O6) are probably the best bet to maintain order for the civilians, as well as the best trained to protect them.

No offense, but anyone with stars can't be trusted, unless they're willing to stand with their CSMs/CMSgts/MCPOs.

Unfortunately, far too many young E1 - E3 troops don't even know what Constitution even says much less what it really means, therefore might be the ones most inclined to support martial law.

they don't have to... they don't have keys to the armsroom for the most part

[Chris_]

I would think it would be the Officer corps that would be less-likely to turn on the civilian populace.

It depends. Even though they're in the uniform, there are some moonbat officers in the bunch. I sure as hell wouldn't mess with the E1-E3 class, because they're all full of piss and vinegar and liable to shoot anything that moves. The E4-E6 class, NCOs and the passed over officers (O4-O6) are probably the best bet to maintain order for the civilians, as well as the best trained to protect them.

No offense, but anyone with stars can't be trusted, unless they're willing to stand with their CSMs/CMSgts/MCPOs.

Unfortunately, far too many young E1 - E3 troops don't even know what Constitution even says much less what it really means, therefore might be the ones most inclined to support martial law.

The E1 - E3 enlisted may not know what the Constitution says, what it means, or what their obligations are in relation to it, but I'm willing to bet that their NCOs do - and when in doubt, the E1 - E3 is more likely to follow the lead of his Sergeant.  That's why seeing that the NCOs that would enforce Martial Law - or any similar decree from "on high", are at about half the number of Officers that would gives me heart.

As a side note, how much you want to bet that this is exactly the reason that President Bush rammed through that treaty with the Canadians and Mexicans, allowing mutual aid in the form of Military personnel in the event of a "national emergency" in any of those three countries?  Can't depend on your own military to enforce martial law, so get the military of a neighboring country to "help you".

[SemiSpook]

I would think it would be the Officer corps that would be less-likely to turn on the civilian populace.

It depends. Even though they're in the uniform, there are some moonbat officers in the bunch. I sure as hell wouldn't mess with the E1-E3 class, because they're all full of piss and vinegar and liable to shoot anything that moves. The E4-E6 class, NCOs and the passed over officers (O4-O6) are probably the best bet to maintain order for the civilians, as well as the best trained to protect them.

No offense, but anyone with stars can't be trusted, unless they're willing to stand with their CSMs/CMSgts/MCPOs.

Unfortunately, far too many young E1 - E3 troops don't even know what Constitution even says much less what it really means, therefore might be the ones most inclined to support martial law.

The E1 - E3 enlisted may not know what the Constitution says, what it means, or what their obligations are in relation to it, but I'm willing to bet that their NCOs do - and when in doubt, the E1 - E3 is more likely to follow the lead of his Sergeant.  That's why seeing that the NCOs that would enforce Martial Law - or any similar decree from "on high", are at about half the number of Officers that would gives me heart.

As a side note, how much you want to bet that this is exactly the reason that President Bush rammed through that treaty with the Canadians and Mexicans, allowing mutual aid in the form of Military personnel in the event of a "national emergency" in any of those three countries?  Can't depend on your own military to enforce martial law, so get the military of a neighboring country to "help you".

Sad part is the Canadians can't fight worth a damn, and half the Mexican army's here already.