"When democracy becomes tyranny, I STILL get to vote."
A new addition to the Three Percent Creed: No free stolen elections."Stroke of the pen. Law of the land. Kinda cool." -- Clinton advisor Paul Begala.
A cautionary tale from a place that used to be called Hagood's Crossroads.
Back in the middle of the 19th century, before the War Between the States, there was a little village down near where Alabama Routes 75 and 79 now intersect called Hagood's Crossroads. It had grown up around Mr. Hagood's store, just down the road from David Hanby's iron forge and mill. Folks had been born, lived a long life and died at Hagood's Crossroads and they thought it was a pretty good name for their home town.
Then a bunch of horse traders from Mount Pinson, Tennessee, moved into the area and after they'd been here a while, decided that Hagood's Crossroads wasn't spit for a name. They wanted to call it, yeah, you guessed it, "Mount Pinson." Now the locals didn't much care for that at all, as you might imagine, but the Tennesseans persisted in their campaign and finally persuaded the townsfolk to have an election to choose the rightful name to the place. "What could be fairer," the Tennesseans asked, "than an election?" Well, the locals looked around, counted heads, and concluded that they outnumbered the horse traders about three to one, so they (no doubt with a smug smile) agreed. "Sure, let's vote on it."
Now the Tennesseans, being Tennesseans AND horse traders, were less than scrupulously honest folks. They just sent word up to Mount Pinson, Tennessee, that all the cousins and brothers and uncles twice removed needed to get their butts down to Alabama so's they could all vote in this "fair election."
And that is exactly and precisely what happened.
The name changed to "Mount Pinson," was recognized by the U.S. Post Office, and although sometime in the early 20th Century they dropped the "Mount" (which made sense because the place is actually in a valley) the town has been known as Pinson ever since.
The locals of course refused to recognize the new name, continuing to refer to it as Hagood's Crossroads. But eventually those who did so died out while the name didn't, and their grandsons and granddaughters eventually grew up with no memory of what the name of the place had been.
Flip forward a century and a half or two, to a larger stage and an issue of much greater importance than the name of a town.
"Comprehensive immigration reform" has always been about naturalizing illegals for the purpose of political power. But getting amnesty through Congress has been problematic for the Dems and their GOP "useful idiot" allies.
Now, it seems, we may have an end run in progress around that troublesome barrier.
According to NumbersUSA, here is the text of the letter signed by Sens. Grassley, Hatch (R-Utah), Vitter (R-La.), Bunning (R-Ky.), Chambliss (R-Ga.), Isakson (R-Ga.), Inhofe (R-Okla.), and Cochran (R-Miss.).
Dear President Obama:
We understand that there’s a push for your Administration to develop a plan to unilaterally extend either deferred action or parole to millions of illegal aliens in the United States. We understand that the Administration may include aliens who have willfully overstayed their visas or filed for benefits knowing that they will not be eligible for a status for years to come. We understand that deferred action and parole are discretionary actions reserved for individual cases that present unusual, emergent or humanitarian circumstances. Deferred action and parole were not intended to be used to confer a status or offer protection to large groups of illegal aliens, even if the agency claims that they look at each case on a “case-by-case” basis.
While we agree our immigration laws need to be fixed, we are deeply concerned about the potential expansion of deferred action or parole for a large illegal alien population. While deferred action and parole are Executive Branch authorities, they should not be used to circumvent Congress’ constitutional authority to legislate immigration policy, particularly as it relates to the illegal population in the United States.
The Administration would be wise to abandon any plans for deferred action or parole for the illegal population. Such a move would further erode the American public’s confidence in the federal government and its commitment to securing the borders and enforcing the laws already on the books.
We would appreciate receiving a commitment that the Administration has no plans to use either authority to change the current position of a large group of illegal aliens already in the United States, and ask that you respond to us about this matter as soon as possible.
Now, if the Obamanoids do try to steal future federal elections by importing voters by presidential diktat (and remember this is not merely one election, but for as far out as the eye can see) it will inflame passions in this country as nothing ever has in modern memory.
Election fraud on a grand scale is not only a felony, it is treason.
Traitors who fail in their treason, in case anyone has been paying attention to history, get shot.
Traitors who succeed in their treason become tyrants of the people they betrayed. Ergo, they can also be shot.
We must add one more dictum to the Three Percenters creed:
"No more free Wacos," yes.
"No more free Katrinas," certainly.
But also, "No free stolen elections."
Mike
III
25 comments:
Why WOULDN'T Obama do this?
After all, the EPA (an agency of the Executive Branch) is moving ahead with establishing the framework for a command-and-control economy via the "regulation" of greenhouse gases. More to the point, they are doing so with the full support of the Senate, which abdicated its constitutional responsibility by voting down the Mukorwski Amendment (which would have stripped the EPA of any usurped authority to regulate CO2). Mukorwski, among others, argued that such a drastic policy step ought to be debated, and voted on, by the people's representatives. 56senators disagreed: laws (i.e., "regulations" with the force of law) will henceforth be issued by unelected, unaccountable, unappealable bureaucracies within the Executive Branch.
In the UK, the people vote for Members of Parliament; the laws, in the guise of "directives", are made by faceless bureaucrats in Brussels.
So, why shouldn't Obama issue an EO to legalize millions? The Senate has already made it clear that it doesn't want the responsibilities of high Office, only the rewards thereof. While the Congress plays, an unknown bureaucrat in one of the myriad agencies of the FEDGOV, will put the final nail in our national coffin.
This Nation is in serious trouble. We, as a free people, have let down our guard. With the stroke of a pen, this President will forever change America. I was raised in Alabama and Florida where our values and hard work brought many blessings and prosperity. Only to have a traitor in the White House give our nations wealth away. My Grandparents are now deceased, they would be appalled at the fact that we have sunk this low. God Bless America, from the Free State of Winston.
Logic says first we secure the border then we figure out what to do with the illegals now in country. Lately I have been hearing speculation that the real reason we have not completed a physical and electronic border fence is that the Obama administration fears that a secure border weakens their ability to push through an amnesty bill.
I was born in Illinois and lived there for 33 years. I know how Chicago politics works, sweet talk and bribes followed with guns, knives, and beatings in the alley if you don't go along with their plan. The leader learned well in his time in Chitown.
He's probably going to go through with it regardless of the risks.
I don't know about the rest of y'all, but an Executive Order granting amnesty to illegals would once and for all answer the question of what would it take to make me shoot first.
Very well put, Mike!
Hell Ya! And at the same time cancel votes of the collectives.
Obumer is gonna push till he falls right over that clif.
Dennis
III
Texas
...nice addition,i say it stays in the creed...(.02)
Ask the residents of Antelope, OR, how they liked their town being renamed Rajneesh by a guru with a fondness for Rolls Royces.
I've been concerned for some time that if folks see themselves permanently marginalized by the abuse of immigration law, they're going to view this, rightly, as cheating, and in many cases act to reestablish the balance. That action will be neither legal, ethical, or bloodless. I've already advised my (quite legal) Mexican brother-in-law that Michigan's upper peninsula might be a pleasant place to move his family.
If you thought the beatings of Sikh store clerks after 9/11 were ugly, wait until the Wetback Safaris start.
Excellent piece. You forgot to mention, however, that traitors may be shot only after conviction for Treason.
"...traitors may be shot only after conviction for Treason." Remember ol' Judge Roy Bean - give 'em a fair trial, and then hang 'em! Or shoot 'em. I'd prefer to do the latter.
This is an "Overton Window" effect....like "deem and pass" it's designed to shock you with how radical it is and then when they pass it within the normal legislative process, you'll accept it b/c it's not as bad as it could have been.
I'm betting this is posturing and diversion until the real 'comprehensive immigration reform' law can be passed.
Ahhh, the list of whom to shoot gets longer and longer and longer. Good thing we stocked up on all that ammo, I think. We're going to need it to effect the cleansing that is needed to bring this country back from the brink.
Remember the statement by Admiral Yamamoto about sleeping giants? These people have no clue the rage they're inspiring. It isn't going to be some whack-o that begins the cleansing, either; but, an American people, en masse, that have finally awakened who begin exacting justice upon the treasonous.
It's worse than that, and it's happening elsewhere, too - if the natives won't accept Communism, the powers that be will import people who will.
From a post at Gates of Vienna:
"Ms Morgan recounts a conversation with a left-wing friend who was slowly becoming aware of the results of Socialisms warped multicultural ideology:
- - - - - - - - -
When one of my old Labour Party acquaintances expressed anxiety over Islamic terrorism, I asked him why he had always been so keen on getting as many immigrants here as possible. He told me that he had been ‘trying to make the revolution‘. So, while it had not been possible to storm Buckingham Palace and set up Soviets in Westminster, you could still change the population and supplant the hated ‘other’."
Full article here http://tinyurl.com/2uaqpzt
Re Anon @ June 24, 2010 11:07 AM:
With all respect, to say that traitors can only be punished after being convicted, presumably by our broken legal system, is like saying that a disaster victim must only be given first aid by a licensed medical professional. When the normal systems for dealing with problems no longer work, sometimes people have to take responsibilities beyond their officially authorized role. Treason on a massive, institutional scale, involving many members of the regime in in power, is such a situation. When and how to respond is a strategic and tactical question, not a legal or moral one. The legal and moral questions were settled when the perpetrators committed their first act of treason.
Regards,
Dave
III
Mike, I couldn't agree more.
Regarding "cleansing" and "shoot first" comments, however, we need to take a step back. I admire your passion and your willingness to use such sharp terms here on a comment thread, but remember that we only win a victory worth having if we retain the moral high ground. Brief semantics lesson... morals are determined by popular decree. Ethics are eternal. So what we need to really strive for is the ethical high ground. That means rule of law to the hilt. That means, as much as possible with as much of the majority as possible we start with articles of impeachment or making a formal charge of treason.
If we fail to play by the rules, we'll be no better than this schmo of a president and his power hungry lackeys. They are making the rules as they go and ignoring them where suitable to their own means. Are we not better? I say we are a damn sight better and that we have more nerve than this rookie who gets puckered when someone dares to disparage his qualifications.
If our elected officials fail to bring treason or impeachment when sufficient numbers of the public cry out for it, well they can be impeached as well for complicity to treason. Work through the process TO THE BONE or any victory we have will be as hollow as any run of the mill leftist revolution the world over. Our founders made a righteous revolution by keeping their principles. That doesn't mean that once the battle is joined that we don't employ every bit of cunning guile at our disposal... but even then, if we let it turn into a "purge" or a "cleansing", we are no better than those we despise. Put them in their place, knock their support out from under them and they'll scurry back into the corners.
That's all I have in the way of lecture at this point. I hope you guys are understanding where the line is. If you want to cross it and give up the ethically justified high ground, do so at your own peril... but be aware that it represents a loss of nerve and a failure. Hold firm and accept the blows of the enemy until our every last recourse is exhausted. Patrick Henry's speech came at the END of a long line of attempts to work through the system. Eventually it got so bad, all we had to do was hold our ground and the enemy provided all the moral and ethical justification we needed to open fire. So those few of you who are getting an itchy trigger finger, stand your ground and check your nerve. Some of us have to be prepared to take a bullet so the rest of us can act with righteous justification. Don't cede the moral and ethical ground to the enemy because that is precisely what they are agitating so feverishly for right at this moment.
Impeachment bills are brought in the House and tried in the Senate.
How would such a thing occur in the current or a reasonably foreseeable future Congress?
Please explain....
Christian Patriot:
I actually agree with you nearly 100%
One serious question, though - one which has been keeping me awake nights of late...
I have no doubt that a seriously ugly time is coming - and sooner rather than later. This bunch is going to continue shoving their agenda down our throats, and their deliberate worsening of the gulf-disaster proves there is NOTHING they won't do.
When they finally, irrevocably cross the line, and the masses start getting restless, I also have no doubt they'll institute a major crackdown - a crackdown on *US*!
How do we ensure we've made every possible attempt to work within the system, yet still maintain the ability to fight if (God Forbid!) we're left with no other choice?
G*d knows every one of us is already on "the list" - probably multiple lists -- how do we rectify the need to "do things right" with the even stronger need to maintain our ability to revolt?
Hard to fight if you're already locked up...
DD
Christian Patriot -
RE the 'moral high ground' - the mass graves of those slaughtered under Stalin, Uncle Adolph, Chairman Mousey Dung, "Papa" Idi Amin, Pol Pot and others, are filled with the rotting remains of those who waited for someone to take the "moral high ground". In war, AFAIC, there is no moral high ground. There is right and there is wrong. Right must prevail at all costs.
There is nothing praiseworthy about people slowly lining up for the gas chambers, saying, "Well at least WE were in the right!"
People who reason, "If we do 'A' or 'B', then we will be as bad as *them*!" are wrong. We will never be as bad as *them*, because our motives, actions and goals are not intrinsically evil, based on the satanic subjugation or genocide of peoples and nations.
BY all means, follow your own path. But if a man ever points a .45 at your face, or at your wife or child, or if a rapist is holding your teenaged daughter with a knife to her throat, take my advice, please. Don't wait to see if he will REALLY pull the trigger, or really slide the knife, just so you can claim the moral high ground. Shoot the bastard to the ground. Your family will thank you.
Semper Fi.
It can proceed only so far before people, groups, counties and states decide that they no longer have votes, hope or any change left to further their political action through financial support of their representatives in congress.
At that point, I expect people to make a mental ascent to the idea that no representation equates to no obligation. This will grow. And it will grow as large as is needed for states to go rogue, maybe even secede.
If and when that occurs, there will be confrontation. Be ready to de-ass your AO to some place more in line with your own beliefs, and take a stand to defend them.
Do the right thing.
I figure it would take one good amnesty, say 12-20 million illegals, and we'll have crossed a threshold where we quite simply couldn't vote our way back to a republic even if we wanted to. Mexicans will consistently vote for whoever gives them the most expensive gifts from the public coffers.
So, amnesty will either lead to revolution or slow death for those whose forebears created this country.
The so-called "president" is so arrogant and so sure of himself and his beliefs (aren't most communists?) that he probably won't think twice and will just do it.
In my ever so humble opinion, such an act on his part would be a declaration of war against the people of the United States.
The tactics of our current federal officials appears to be to promise the world but deliver little or nothing using the beaurocracy to impede any real action. Look at the two most visible issues today, immigration and the Gulf oil spill. Arizona, frustrated at the complete inaction of the fed, proposes to simply enforce existing federal law at the state level. The Obama team's response, sue them, make them stop, they might actually accomplish something instead of waiting like good little peons for daddy to make it all better. How dare they try to take care of themselves. And with the gulf mess, every time the states try some new idea to make things better here comes the EPA or the Coasties to shut it down.
I have to believe that the Obama administration desires the people to be as helpless and fearful as possible so they can offer us a carrot of fake safety and security in exchange for giving away our freedoms and surrendering control over our lives to their oh so competent care.
Spake Ahab: "It isn't going to be some whack-o that begins the cleansing, either; but, an American people, en masse, that have finally awakened who begin exacting justice upon the treasonous. "
I disagree.
It will start with some wacko. And another wacko, and so forth. The first several will be people almost all of us will be able to agree are legitimate nutcases. The critical point will creep up the bell curve, though, and the media will find themselves having to exaggerate more and more to be able to maintain the level of public condemnation needed to keep these sentiments on the fringe.
That is, if things keep going on their current course.
First, he isn't contemplating a full amnesty by exec order, but rather a mass pardon/parole. That means about 5 million visa overstayers and persons who ahve applied for legal admittance would be able to stay indefinitely. Under this, they could apply for eventual citizenship, but wouldn't immediately have the right o vote. I guess their status would be resident alien more or less. At least, that's how I understand what he's thinking of doing. Amenesty by EO wouldn't stand up in court (most likely) as the Exec can perform some minor policy-related tasks by EO but cannot enact legislation. Congress has the authority over naturalization so the courts probably couldnt' come up with any way to finagle out of overturning it.
That said and understanding that this would A) enrage the already angry populous ahead of midterms and B) not accomplish his goal of restocking the vote plantation, I don't know that Obama will go through with this...but the lame-duck Congress after November certainly will pass a full amnesty.
RE: Christian Patriot III: Who determines who has the high ground? How do we convince people of the rightness of our cause within the boundaries of the massive spin machine working against us? How will we know when the first shot has been fired? How long did it take before the truth of Waco was known, even to a few? How many now believe David Koresh was a child molester and Randy Weaver a white-supremacist with an arsenal? You get my point...which is that unless we win, the rightness of our cause will never be known because the winner of a conflict writes the history of it.
RE: 1Lt. Taylor Holmes, ret.: One state is already going rogue, and working toward establishing the moral high ground, in fact. Arizona.
RE: Anonymous @ 1:29 pm: But will they really be wackos or just painted that way? Face it folks: makes no difference what the facts are, anyone opposing this administration will be cast as the evil, right-wing, neo-nazi, racist, homophobic, home-grown terrorist regardless.
I find the sudden surge in "neo-nazi" activity and groups interesting. Are there that many of them? Really? Or are a lot of good people being tarred with that brush to discredit them? Seems the "nazi" boogeyman is being used now since the race card is a bit dogeared lately. Too bad the same stigma isn't attached to "communist." Especially when Sam Webb of the Communist Party USA is openly stating how pleased they are that they helped Obama get elected and have these large Democratic majorities in Congress that are enacting the CPUSA's agenda.
azcIII
Post a Comment