However, it does show a clear link between Soros and the goons at the NPA. This group clearly has no respect for private property and individual privacy. How dare the NPA publish the private contact info of their opponents. How dare they show up at their opponents' private residences and actually trespass on those properties.
If anything, Soros did not denouce NPA's tactics.
"How dare the NPA publish the private contact info of their opponents. How dare they show up at their opponents' private residences and actually trespass on those properties.
I don't disagree with anything you said, but I think you need to reconsider your phraseology. "How dare they..." sounds an awful lot like a way out loon of a former VP!
Well, I agree with you on the first accusation in this article---the one about the dems running into the arms of the UN. It does not show how Soros is linked to it.
Dear Vision Thing:
You raise a good question.
What reason can I offer for evoking the name of George Soros in connection with the 161 Democrat Congressmen who voted Thursday to leave the door open for UN intervention in our election?
You rightly observe that I have no smoking gun -- no tell-tale memo, for instance, bearing Soros' signature, ordering Democrats to vote on this measure.
In all likelihood, no such memo exists. And even if it did, the mass media would explain it away as glibly as they did Senator Rockefeller's equally damning memo. How then can we assess the possibility that Mr. Soros may or may not have played a role in Thursday's outrage?
Allow me to explain. I hold Soros responsible for two reasons:
Reason #1: Soros has become de facto leader of the Democrat Party, by virtue of his lavish campaign spending. Organizational science teaches us that institutions take on the character of their leaders. Moreover, the ethics of leadership hold any leader morally and practically responsible for the actions of his subordinates. Period.
Before our eyes, the Democrat Party has acquired a markedly more radical character than it has shown in past years. This change has coincided precisely with Soros' ascension to the status of unofficial party leader.
The fact that 161 Democrat Congressmen voted in favor of UN intervention is a singular event, of enormous magnitude -- a move that Democrat lawmakers would have been unlikely to make without high-level sanction. Who in today's Democrat Party has the authority to approve such a move? Ted Kennedy? Terry McAuliffe? Harold Ickes? Tom Daschle? Hillary Clinton? I think not.
Only Soros wields such authority now. He is the boss -- the man with the plan. For that reason, it is more than reasonable to at least consider the possibility that Thursday's vote bore his stamp of approval.
Reason #2: More importantly, Soros has stated on several occasions that he intends to effect "regime change" in the USA, using similar tactics to those which have proved successful for him in other countries. I recommend that you study the methods Soros has used overseas. He seldom deviates from his playbook.
Sevry's soothing reassurances notwithstanding, the fact remains that whenever Mr. Soros engages in political struggle, he never -- I repeat, never -- limits his activity to such ineffectual gestures as purchasing airtime for candidates or underwriting talkfests such as the Democratic Convention. Mr. Soros plays hardball, and he plays for keeps.
In his arrogance, Mr. Soros has taken few pains to conceal his intentions regarding our upcoming election. Perhaps he considers discretion unnecessary among a people as trusting and unused to Machiavellian intrigue as Americans. Perhaps he believes that we are too innocent to understand him, too complacent to stop him, no matter how openly he states his intentions.
Perhaps Mr. Soros believes that we will simply freeze like the proverbial deer in the headlights when he makes his move, unable to believe or comprehend the enormity of his usurpations.
God grant that Mr. Soros is wrong. God grant that, for all our indolence and luxury, some tiny spark still burns in our bellies from the fires of 1776.