I wrote this after the last election and it expresses my views on the current state of our country, and why it came to pass that we are no longer the great nation we once were.
Karma
Barack Hussein Obama, a man with no record of personal accomplishment, no leadership experience, and a man with strong connections to terrorists, criminals, racists, and anti-American Communists pulled it off and was re- elected President of these United States. What does this re-election mean and what does it say about the American people? Could it be that karma will finally bestow the consequences of dishonorable behavior on the American people?
Why do I say this? In answer to my question, let me remind you of this statement and where these words took the American people:
“Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.”
John Fitzgerald Kennedy Inaugural address, Friday, January 20, 1961
With these words ringing in our ears, my generation went to Vietnam and promised the Vietnamese people we would stand shoulder to shoulder with them until their freedom was secure and the enemies of liberty were defeated. But, it is to America’s eternal shame and disgrace that the American people soon grew tired of this noble undertaking and betrayed the very people who had believed and trusted us.
The American people elected Democrats to our Congress who had rather see American soldiers killed and our country defeated than allow a Republican president to receive credit for defeating our enemies. This Democrat led Congress (the infamous 93rd) cut off funding for the Vietnam War and forced the withdrawal of American combat troops in 1973, but we departed with the hollow promise that we would return if the Republic of South Vietnam was invaded by communist North Vietnam. As everyone must remember, this, again, was a lie.
The tactic we had taught the South Vietnamese was to, when invaded by the North, fall back to a defendable position, stall the communist advance, force the communists to mass their forces before South Vietnam’s defenses, and this would allow time for American forces and air power to return to assist them as we had promised. South Vietnam did just that; for twelve days, outnumbered ten to one, the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN) held and stalled the communist’s advance outside Saigon near a little town called Xuan Loc.
Outside Xuan Loc during April 1975, in an effort as gallant as that of the Spartans at Thermopylae, the ARVN 18th Infantry Division held two North Vietnamese Army Corps at bay for twelve days. Every infantryman in the ARVN 18th Infantry Division died in that stand. None ran away and none survived. They died to a man fighting overwhelming odds and believing to the end we Americans would return as promised.
Just before the last ARVN soldier of the 18th Infantry Division died, he might have rolled over on his back and looked to the sky hoping to see the contrails of American B-52 bombers and he saw nothing. This last ARVN soldier then knew that he, along with all the Vietnamese people, had been betrayed. With his dying breath, this soldier must have then turned his gaze heavenly and beseeched God to Damn America.
Yes, there is such a thing as karma where dreadful consequences are meted out in recompense for dishonorable behavior. The American people’s just rewards for abandoning a valiant ally during their time of need could have been that the chickens came home to roost on the American people with an Obama Presidency, a Nancy Pelosi Congress, a Harry Reid Senate, a John Roberts Supreme Court, and it couldn’t have happened to a more deserving people.
The election of 2008 and re-election of 2012 was about more than just Obama, his arrogance, his empty resume, and his traitorous comrades. Just as karma provides consequences for dishonorable behavior, there are also adverse consequences for irresponsible behavior. As a people deserve the government they vote into office, they also deserve the consequences resulting from that government’s actions or inaction. The consequences of a government not securing a country’s borders is that a people will lose their country as we are now losing ours to an invasion of illegal immigrants. The consequences of not securing a country’s electoral processes to prevent voter fraud is the country will lose its Democracy to a Thugocracy as we have lost ours to a Chicago-mob run Coup d’état.
But the final insult to our Democracy is with the election of Barack Hussein Obama, an avowed Marxist Communist, a significant chapter in American History finally closed. Our sixty-odd year long Cold War with Communism is over and the Communists won the war.
These words precede those of President Kennedy, so no one can say we didn’t see this coming:
“We cannot expect the Americans to jump from Capitalism to Communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving Americans small doses of Socialism until they suddenly awake to find they have Communism.”
Nikita Khrushchev, 1959
As we Americans continue to live out the old Chinese curse, “May you live in interesting times.”
by
DJ Taylor
A Vietnam Veteran
“We cannot expect the Americans to jump from Capitalism to Communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving Americans small doses of Socialism until they suddenly awake to find they have Communism.”
--Nikita Khrushchev, 1959
This quote is controverted in some of the "truth"/"factchecker" sites. It originated with Ezra Taft Benson, Dwight Eisenhower's secretary of agriculture, who hosted Nikita Khrushchev for half a day during Khrushchev's state visit to the U.S., the first by a Communist tyrant.
Liberals bitterly criticize the "truth content" of this quotation and use lots of epithets when discussing it: "far right wing", "Birchers", "anti-communist zealot", the usual catalog of LSM abuse. They point to the fact that Benson had been interested in the views of Birchers as a young man, but they simultaneously resist any truthful assertion that the Mormon Temple did, in fact, consider, inspect, reject, and condemn Bircherism as an inadequate response to the threat posed by Communists and their sympathizers.
It remains to say that part of the liberal attack has been to claim, without shame and strongly resisting any attempt at inspection of their own record for "truthiness", falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, which is the sort of fallacy trotted out by someone who would attempt to falsify Summa Theologica if only it could be shown that Aquinas got the date wrong when he signed the foreword of the first edition. (So to speak.)
Benson quoted Khrushchev on the gradual-subversion theme twice, first as an unsourced second- or third-hand quote that he included in a 1962 book. Later, in a 1966 speech, Benson quotes Khrushchev again, this time as a first-person eyewitness. Benson says Khrushchev told him something very similar to the quote in the 1962 book, during the half-day of touring American farms and farm equipment that Benson and Khrushchev had spent together in 1959.
Liberals attack Benson as self-inconsistent because the two quotes are slightly different, and also because the quotes diverge from the standard Marxist line of that time on the crisis and collapse of capitalism and the West: Khrushchev could not have uttered Benson's quote, because it wasn't Communist orthodoxy. (And neither were Teng Hsiao-Ping's cats.)
They also complain that the 1959 visit preceded both the 1962 book and the later speech; if Khrushchev had said something in Benson's presence in 1959, why would Benson then use a third-hand quote instead of his own, slightly different, eyewitness account of what K. had said during his state visit?
Liberal commenters, including original commenter David Emery (who displays his liberal bigotry in the open for a change), deploy the fallacies ad hominem, ad ignorantiam (inverse-bandwagon fallacy, which latter is called ad populum by logicians), and falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus (aka, "Science has been wrong before"), a false dichotomy which demands perfect, total truth from the proposition or person being attacked (FIUFIO is a legal, not a logical or scientific, proposition, and reflects the adversarial, dominative, and eye-gouging nature of courtroom discourse), the alternative being the crank's preferred outcome of total rejection.
David Emery's UrbanLegends putdown and following discussion of the Khrushchev quote are here:
http://tinyurl.com/ykmrbkj