Posted on 01/06/2007 8:31:55 AM PST by joanie-f
Ever since the crisis at our southern border was recognized as one, there have been countless meaningless rumblings, and one actual piece of ‘legislation’ (not suprisingly, still unsupported by the funds to back it up) from congress -- all aimed at suppressing citizen outrage regarding our open borders -- none of which is destined to see realization.
When it comes to genuinely and resolutely addressing the crisis occurring across the border, everything that emanates from Washington is simply window dressing. To the majority of opportunistic traitors in our government, the invasion that is destroying our national identity, making a mockery of the rule of law, rewarding insidious parasitic behavior, and putting every American citizen in danger, is secondary in importance to the desire to increase their voting base, the lure of cheap labor, or the vision of a one-world borderless utopia. And don’t tell me the fundamental nature of the above does not fall under the definition of treason (common synonyms: betrayal, disloyalty, duplicity).
Tom Tancredo, in his book In Mortal Danger, writes:
We have the necessary technology, combined with human resources, to secure our borders tomorrow. It is a canard for politicians to say that it is impossible and that we must figure out a different way to defend America rather than defending our borders. What they are really saying is, ‘I choose not to defend and secure our borders because there are political ramifications that I fear.’ It is those fears that put the life of every American citizen in mortal danger.
Every day that our borders remain porous physically endangers every one of us, as a result of the increase in violent crime that invariably accompanies the influx of the criminals, and it drains our economy and our education and healthcare systems because many of the parasites demand and receive the same services that the rest of us have earned. But, much worse, it increases the likelihood (becoming more of a certainty with the passage of time and the inaction of those whose charge it is to ensure our safety and sovereignty) that there is an ever-increasing number of terrorists among us, some of whom have brought with them the means for our destruction.
Jerome Corsi, author of Unfit for Command, discusses the threat that both nuclear suitcase bombs, and dirty bombs, pose in his more recent book, Atomic Iran: How the Terrorist Regime Bought the Bomb and American Politicians:
... the threat of dirty bombs is real, though we should not assume that a dirty bomb would be the weapon of choice, especially not for a group of skilled terrorists who would have the backing of a nuclear-armed rogue state such as Iran. The mad mullahs and their terrorist associates would, if possible, opt for a much more deadly scenario, one that could truly bring the civilized world to its knees in the space of one day. If serious terrorists are going to spend their time devising attacks, the terror masters directing them will move to the most feasible attack that can cause the maximum amount of damage. Why bother with anything less?
Whatever their eventual modus operandi may be -- future attacks of a nuclear, chemical, biological, or other sort -- the facts are clear: there are already countless islamic cells within our borders. They are proselytizing and recruiting in mosques, schools, and prisons. And we continue to allowing more of them, and additional 'equipment', to enter this country virtually unfettered.
With such an unprecedented, deadly threat staring us in the face, and virtually nothing keeping islamic operatives from simply strolling across our southern border ... suitcase in hand ... with what are the president and congress occupying themselves?
The piously declared ‘new era’ in Washington is being ushered in with significant fanfare and air of self-importance. Will the much-touted ‘new Iraq policy’, an increase in the minimum wage, expansion of embryonic stem-cell research, a tightening of ethics rules (where have we heard that before, and which of the ‘fool-me-once’-challenged among us continues to believe such pap?), and the inexhaustible fountain of nonsense posing as issues of importance, have any relevance when one of more of our cities are reduced to rubble, and our countrymen are suffering in debilitating ways that our minds cannot even begin to comprehend?
Not only is our government reneging on its promise to build a physical barrier to prevent the continuing flood of illegals of all stripes (islamic terrorists surely among them). Our fearless leaders are also stationing our countrymen at the border, putting their lives in extreme danger, and forbidding them to do what needs to be done to fulfill their duties.
Yesterday National Guard troops stationed along the Arizona border were forced to retreat when confronted by hostile criminals intent on crossing. Unable to engage the enemy because their role is bureaucratically defined as not to extend beyond an administrative capacity, members of the greatest fighting force in the history of the world had no choice but to retreat at their own border, when confronted by armed criminals seeking to cross (story).
Every informed American knows that the goal of islamic terrorists is to bring America to her knees, in as brutal and violent a manner as possible. We also know that we have it entirely within our power to at least dramatically reduce the probability that they will succeed. Yet our own leadership is forbidding us to do so, when the single most vital responsibility of our government is to defend our territorial integrity.
When the next, and much more deadly and virulent, terrorist attack occurs here on American soil, upon whom do we lay the blame for the torment and suffering that will befall thousands, if not millions, of our innocent countrymen? Do we hate the madmen who have made no secret of their desire to destroy us? Or do we reserve a more potent brand of hatred for those calculating pretenders among us who claim to be our protectors, while at the same time placing their insatiable thirst for personal power above the very lives and liberties of those whose trust and commission they consistently debase, and deliberately betray?
The American government is as much an enemy of the American people as is any Middle Eastern terrorist organization. And, if wolf-in-sheep’s-clothing deceit contributes to degree of malevolence, then the wickedness of those who claim to represent us, and who claim to have our best interests at heart, is beyond measure.
The American Crisis is worsening by the day, while our leadership continues to turn a convenient blind eye, polishing their primping and posturing skills, and offering up meaningless, toothless, mirage ‘solutions’ to a cancer that threatens to eventually render our individual liberty and sovereignty extinct.
It would appear that the future of our republic rests on the shoulders of the American patriot. We are walking down a path ... certainly not well-lit, nor well-traveled ... that has not existed in our lifetimes, or those of our parents or grandparents. We must continue to keep the Founders’ vision primary in our focus, and always look to Him for guidance.
I believe I hear them weeping, and imploring us to reflect on the glorious history of this republic, the monumental sacrifices that were required to make it so, and the need to assure her future (‘to provide new guards for [her] future security’) ... before the time and opportunity to do so has passed.
~ joanie
Allegiance and Duty Betrayed
The party cultists simply cannot come to grips with the reality they are not, and likely never will be, true conservatives. They cannot understand that those who are have had enough and that we are through gritting our teeth and pulling that "least worse" lever. The accumulated GOP heresy has become too wide and too deep to any longer ignore.
Hmmm…..All of you wrote excellent responses to MNJohnnie’s garbage, but all we hear from him now is *silence*. He must be hiding in a corner somewhere or gone running to his handlers for a "talking points refresher." :)
"I, (NAME)(SSAN), having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of MAJOR do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God."This is a public statement.
--(DA Form 71, 1 August 1959, for officers.)
FBI definition of terrorism: the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.
Not once the Social Security system [40% of the US budget] collapses. You don't think the Republicans and Democrats plan on taking the blame, do you?
I am completely out of patience with the GOP party-above-principle cultists and their shameless attempts to blame the midterm election disaster on conservatives. If what they seek is someone to blame--and it is--these dupes need to look in the mirror. Casting their votes year in and year out for worthless RINOs, always pulling that "least worse" lever, they actually encouraged the RINOs to keep doing what they were doing (emulating the Rats). And why wouldn't they? They knew they could count on the dupes to keep voting for them, no matter what, just as long as they had that "(R)" after their name.
I agree. And what better way to explain the fact that among current set of "front runners" there's not a real conservative to be found. Conservatives have been holding their noses and voting for middle-of-the-roaders for so long that the "moderates" have risen to the top---and they're certainly not the cream.
Notice that one of the three Presidential front-runners made the cut (and the other two should have too). It doesn’t leave any real conservative any choice in 2008, at least from the looks of it now.
1. Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R.I.) Once approached by Democratic Leader Harry Reid to switch parties, Chafee has long supported liberal policies. He backs legal abortion, gay rights, federal-funded health care, strict environmental protections and a higher minimum wage. Opposes ANWR drilling. Also was the only Republican in Congress not to endorse the President’s reelection and one of three who tried to gut Bush’s tax cuts.
2. Sen. Olympia Snowe (Maine) A self-described “centrist,” Snowe scored a 100% pro-choice voting record as scored by NARAL and consistently votes with Democrats on social issues.
3. Sen. Arlen Specter (Pa.) “Snarlin’ Arlen” warned Bush not to nominate judges who might overturn Roe v. Wade, joined Chaffee reducing tax cuts and supported Democrats on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, HMO and overtime regulation. Also opposed school choice in Washington, D.C.
4. Sen. Susan Collins (Maine) Voted with liberals on the 1999 tax cut, campaign finance reform and the partial-birth abortion ban. Also advocated “pay-as-you-go” tax cuts with spending increases in 2004, leading to a budget never agreed upon between the House and Senate.
5. Rep. Christopher Shays (Conn.) He led the House fight for McCain-Feingold campaign finance “reform.” He’s also prone to back environmental causes, gun control and abortion rights. He had no GOP challenger in 2004, but narrowly escaped defeat, 52% to 48%, by a Democratic opponent in the general election.
6. Gov. George Pataki (N.Y.) Helped unions raise pay and unionize Indian casinos. Has said, “I believe in a limited government, low taxes, a tough approach to crime. ... But I also believe in an activist government. I’m not one of those laissez-faire types.”
7. Rep. Sherwood Boehlert (N.Y.) Over the course of his 23-year career, he’s gained considerable power (chairman of the Science Committee), despite amassing one of the most liberal voting records of any House Republican. Fought back conservative challengers in 2000 and 2002 and could face a GOP challenge in ’06.
8. Gov. Mitt Romney (Mass.) Has said, “I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country.” Supports civil unions and stringent gun laws. After visiting Houston, he criticized the city’s aesthetics, saying, “This is what happens when you don’t have zoning.”
9. Rep. Michael Castle (Del.) As president of the moderate Republican Main Street Partnership and key player in the so-called Tuesday Group lunches, he is a ring-leader of RINOs. He’s teamed with Democrats to make federal funding of embryonic stem cell research one of his top priorities.
10. Rep. Jim Leach (Iowa) One of only six House Republicans to vote against the Iraq War resolution in 2002, he was also the only Republican to vote against President Bush’s 2003 tax cuts. His support for environmental causes and abortion rights has won him liberal fans.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1547711/posts
With one, perhaps two, exceptions, the entire pack of candidates is a list of RINO losers who cannot and will not motivate the conservative base. Unless a real conservative emerges from the dung piles of Washington, 2008 will merely be a rerun of the 2006 midterms.
I see no indication that the so called GOP "leadership" has yet learned its lesson. Until it does, it will never again be the majority party.
Human Events is right on the mark. A collection of useless liberals who have done nothing to promote the conservative agenda. Instead, they often busy themselves doing everything possible to torpedo that agenda. They may as well re-register as Rats since they vote that way much of the time anyway.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
