Replies

If it was years long it was NOT a"coup." A coup politically speaking is a strike (coup is French for "hit" or "strike" or "smite"), a sudden action to topple the regime and take over. In modern situations it involves physically removing or killing the Leader and taking over the government radio and TV (in America's case that part would be unnecessary as the broadcast media are already in the bag) and dismissing whatever legislature there is while arresting or killing opposition legislators. Court justices would also be neutralized at the same time.

This was a takeover attempt or a revolution from the second level or something else but it was NOT a COUP. I guess it is a sexy word with we are familiar because of the numerous coups in Latin America and other third world countries. Demcracies/republics do not experience "coups" beause there are too many institutions and indiiduals to neutralize to actually take over. It has to be done by bastardizing the system and working through that system though crookedly and it is not rapid like a coup. The takeover attempted here has been bubbling through the nation for decades via takeover of the institutions gradually and the schools and entertainment industry etc.

It has got so that I get skeptical bout reports if they include the word "coup" because that indicates ignorance on the part of the writer or speaker and thus unreliability of the message.

I despize the bastardization of the language by the left and even by conservatives when they blindly accept the left's redefinitions or creat redefinitions of their own like COUP.