Posts Tagged ‘rightwing extremists’

The Heinous Failure Of The Obama Administration Against Terrorism

December 29, 2009

This essentially is the first time that Democrats have been in charge of the war on terror.  And – contrary to Obama’s “good solid B+” that he gave himself – Democrats have flunked hideously.

According to Rasmussen, 79% of Americans believe another terrorist attack is likely within the next year.  Which is a thirty point jump from the end of August.  That’s a profound lack of confidence in Barack Obama.

“The war on terror.”  The very phrase demonstrates the unforgivable incompetence of Barrack Hussein.  Because his people refused to use the word “terrorism” and tried to replace it with “overseas contingency operation” and “man-caused disaster” to deny the reality of terrorism through politically correct re-labelling.  But with terrorist attacks occurring on US soil, what’s the deal with the word “overseas”?  It’s right here.

After days of White House officials saying they did a smashing job, even Obama is now finally calling his own administration’s handling of this terror attack “totally unacceptable.”

“There was a mix of human and systemic failures that contributed to this potential catastrophic breach of security,” Obama [FINALLY] said today.

There have been over a dozen attempted terrorist attacks against the United States on American soil in 2009, and two of them have been successful.

“Brian Jenkins, who studies terrorism for the Rand Corporation, says there were more terror incidents (12), including thwarted plots, on U.S. soil in 2009 than in any year since 2001. The jihadists don’t seem to like Americans any better because we’re closing down Guantanamo.”

And they don’t like us any better because of Barack Hussein’s naivete, incompetence, and constant apologies denouncing his own country, either.

We have only to look at the last two attacks to see the casual disregard and the blatant incompetence the Obama administration has demonstrated in the war against terrorism.

During the November Fort Hood terrorist attack that killed thirteen soldiers and wounded dozens more, the Obama administration first denied any link to terrorism, then basically suppressed the investigation after scores of details began to emerge revealing what a shocking failure of the system had taken place under Obama’s watch.  Obama himself gave an incredibly weird speech just after the attack, in which he offered a “shout out” to a man whom he incorrectly identified as having received the Medal of Honor before spending mere moments acknowledging that more than a dozen US soldiers on a secure American base inside the United States had just been murdered by a jihadist.

And we’re now beginning to see a rather frightening disconnected pattern emerging as to how Obama deals with terrorism.

In any event, we just had a situation in which a terrorist very nearly detonated a device that probably would have brought the plane down – killing 290 – and possibly would have killed many more as it crashed into Detroit’s airport.  The words “Christmas miracle” are being used to describe the luck we had in so narrowly avoiding this disaster.

And what was the Obama response?  Well, at first, nothing.  The same fawning sycophants that Obama surrounded himself with – who awakened him immediately to notify him that he “won” the Nobel price – didn’t bother to tell him that the United States had just experienced a terrorist attack for three full hours.

Obama didn’t bother to respond (and interrupt his glorious Hawaiian vacation) even after he heard about it.  But his minions began running around.  Their initial blathering was that “the system has worked very, very smoothly.”

Apparently, Obama believed that the media would give him the same adoring propaganda that they gave him during the campaign (which Bernard Goldberg dubbed “A Slobbering Love Affair“).  The narrative was that since the attack didn’t succeed, Barack Obama must be a brilliant commander-in-chief.  But fortunately, that lie was almost immediately revealed as a lie and angrily refuted even by the mainstream media.

I mean, even the New York Times is saying Obama screwed this up terribly.

The same incompetent Obama official – Department of Homeland Security administrator Janet Napolitano – who claimed how well the system worked proceeded to acknowledge that the system was a failure the very next day.  “The system did not work in this instance,” she said by way of massive understatement.

So the system that worked very, very smoothly actually didn’t work.

Mind you, this was also the same Obama official who had previously refused to call terrorists “terrorists,” but had no problem calling our very own returning veterans who had fought such terrorists “rightwing extremists” while hiring a man who turned out to be an actual terrorist to explain how our soldiers were potential terrorists.

Then the Obama administration went back to their tried and true formula, and the only thing they are actually good at: they decided to blame Bush.

From the Washington Post:

“White House officials struggled to explain the complicated system of centralized terrorist data and watch lists, stressing that they were put in place years ago by the Bush administration.”

The problem with that thesis is that the Bush system actually worked.  Here was a kid (I say “kid” because he looks like he’s about 15 years old) whose name showed up on a terrorist watch list.  It’s not George Bush’s fault that the Obama administration ignored the list.  Or that they ignored the fact that the UK had refused to issue the kid a visa a few months back after catching the kid in a lie regarding his purpose for visiting the country.  Or that the kid had spent the last couple of months in terrorist-dreamland Yemen.  Or that the kid’s father had personally gone to the UN embassy and said his son had been radicalized.  Or that the kid had no passport to go to the United States.  Or that the kid suspiciously didn’t bother to check any luggage on an international flight.  Those things were Goerge Bush’s fault exactly HOW?

Like every other time Obama has pointed a demagoguing finger of blame at Bush, there were at least three fingers pointing right at him.

Now we’re finding out that the father of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab actually met with the Central Intelligence Agency at the US embassy in Nigeria on November 19 and told them that his son was radicalized.   Basically, he couldn’t have done more without hiring a skywriter to scrawl, “Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab is a terrorist!” over the White House.

We’re now finding out that the CIA had been tracking this kid since August.

And it’s George Bush’s fault that this terrorist got through?

Realize that whenever Obama blames Bush, what he is really admitting is that he is a pathetically incompetent non-leader who will not take responsibility for his failures.

George Bush wouldn’t have said that his system was perfect.  He would have argued that it needed to be constantly updated.  But Barack Obama not only has failed to improve on the security protections put into place by George Bush; he has worked hard to tear those protections apart and leave this nation and its citizens dangerously exposed.

Stop and think about it: Shoe Bomber Richard Reid (aka Abdul Raheem and as Tariq Raja) attempted to blow up a plane with PETN back in December, 2oo1 – only a couple of months after 9/11.  Bush systematically implemented policies to keep us safe.  Obama tore those policies apart, and look what is happening.

We can blame George Bush for not recognizing that Barrack Hussein was a dangerous man, and sticking him in Gitmo before he had a chance to do more damage.  But other than that, no honest person would blame George Bush for Obama’s failure.

When Obama finally bothered to make his initial comment on the attack (in a short statement, taking no questions), he said that the attack had been committed by an “isolated extremist” (and please note the inherent contradiction within even his own statement!).  But by the time he said that, it was already obvious that the only thing “isolated” about this attack was the Obama White House.  The kid said he had been trained and sent by al Qaeda, and that there were some 25 more terrorists just like him ready to unleash hells of their own.  And it turned out that the PETN explosive had come from al Qaeda-base Yemen.  And al Qaeda acknowledged that this kid was one of theirs.

Steve Hayes called Obama’s “isolated extremist” remark “stunningly foolish.”  And even the liberal Washington Post pointed out “the disturbingly defensive reaction of the Obama administration.”

Obama also said that his administration was doing “everything in it’s power to keep you safe.”  And then he treats the terrorist who had just tried to murder hundreds and possibly thousands of Americans like a common criminal and allows him to lawyer up while doctors attend to the wounds he incurred trying to murder said Americans.  For what its worth, the Bush administration would have recognized that this terrorist wasn’t a “criminal” at all, but a perpetrator of an act of war against the United States of America, and an enemy of the state.  And the Bush administrator – rather than focusing on the kid’s “rights” – would have instead focused on the country’s right to find out who had sent this punk to murder its citizens and every detail of every aspect of leading up to the attack so that we could stomp out another nest of terrorists.

Allow me to quote Joe Wilson to respond to Barack Hussein: “You lie!”

This was a cascading leadership failure from top to bottom.  A lousy disgrace of a president picked a lousy disgrace of a Homeland Security Secretary.

Now for the idiotic and frankly immoral liberal devices to defend America in a war they won’t even acknowledge is a damn war.

The word “profiling” immediately comes to mind.

Mind you, it’s not that the Obama administration isn’t profiling, just that they are focusing on the wrong profile.  I mean, the terrorist in question wasn’t a returning combat veteran who’d recently come back from protecting this country from terrorists; he didn’t have any “tea bags” on him; he wasn’t an evangelical Christian; he wasn’t pro-life.  They just had the wrong profile, and need to adjust it to include actual terrorists.

Let us not forget that the terrorists are profiling us.

The Christmas terrorist attack was a naked attempt to murder as many Christians as possible during Christmas.  Obama Democrats shriek at the thought that we might profile a terrorist.  But the terrorists are sure as hell profiling us.

Then you add the fact that for the last eight years millions and millions of innocent and harmless Americans have been subjected to invasive and embarrassing procedures to make sure we’re not jihadist murderers, but this young Muslim male who attended madrases and came from Yemen and paid for his ticket in cash and didn’t have a passport gets aboard with his damned bomb?

That American grandma in the walker isn’t your terrorist, dumbasses.  And it is an affront to common sense and even sanity that you treat that Grandma the same as the 23 year old Muslim whose just come from Yemen.

A lot of liberals are now STILL saying that we don’t dare violate the civil liberties of Muslims, regardless of the fact that 99.9999999999998% of all the hundreds of thousands of terrorist attacks over the past 20 years have been committed by Muslims. They want us to use invasive and expensive scanning equipment that literally strips us naked and shows our boobies, our bottoms, and our hoo hoos, and tramples on everybody’s basic rights, rather than focus on the group that is perpetrating the terror attacks.  We need to violate the civil rights of 300 million Americans, rather than acknowledge that Muslim terrorists are all actually Muslims.

The craziest thing of all about the body scanners that liberals want might be this: Muslims apparently wouldn’t stand for submitting to such scans, and Obama liberals are such moral idiots that they would probably exempt Muslims from the scans used to detect explosives brought on planes by Muslims.

George Bush was like Winston Churchill in the war on terror; and Barack Obama is like Neville Chamberlain.  Chamberlain tried to compromise with terror, negotiate with it.  Winston Churchill, nearly alone among leaders (FDR included), realized that Nazism was so evil that it literally had to be fought to the death.

Obama Democrats believed George Bush viewed terrorism through an ideological prism, and saw nonexistent enemies everywhere.  The thing is that Obama Democrats ALSO view terrorism through an ideological prism, but see enemies NOWHERE.  And Obama’s ideology keeps biting him in the balls because both his ideology and his policies simply fail to correspond to reality.

Advertisements

Guns, Ammo, And The Only Jobs Being Created By Obama’s Politics Of Fear

May 21, 2009

People are stockpiling guns and ammunition in a way that no one has ever seen in this country.  And it’s not just conservative rightwing extremists who are bitterly clinging to their guns and religion and racist antipathies as Obama earlier mentioned, either; it’s ordinary people.  Even liberal Democrats are buying guns.

A CNN story puts it this way:

AURORA, Colorado (CNN) — Gun shops across the country are reporting a run on ammunition, a phenomenon apparently driven by fear that the Obama administration will increase taxes on bullets or enact new gun-control measures.

“Driven by fear.”  That’s probably the best way to put it.

Obama talked about “hope” during his demagogic run for the White House.  But a lot of Americans are now finding cause to be very afraid of what Obama hopes for.

I see Obama saying he has no intention of running the auto industry while he fires CEOs, picks boards of directors, converts to common shares of stock so his administration can have an inside presence to change company policies, dictates the advertising budget of an auto company, threatens hedge funds that owned secured debt in auto companies, and changes bankruptcy proceedings to favor politically connected unions.  If that’s what NOT wanting to run the auto industry looks like, I’d sure be terrified to see what Obama would do if he really wanted to run them.  And he’s doing even more to impose his will on the banking and finance industries.

I see such naked displays of fascism, and I am driven by fear.

The Obama administration uses the Department of Homeland Security to contact every police agency in the nation to inform them that returning combat veterans, pro-lifers, and opponents of illegal immigration are not citizens who can be trusted, but should be categorized as “rightwing extremists.”

I see such clearly ideological-driven partisan political branding, and I am driven by fear.

Barack Obama and key members of his administration have repeatedly demagogued guns and the U.S. gun industry by falsely claiming that “90 percent of the guns going into Mexico come from the United Stats.”  If this isn’t demagoguery and propaganda, what is it?

I see such demagogic and dishonest behavior coming out of an administration, and I am driven by fear.

And so we see movements by states to say, “We shouldn’t have to be afraid of our own federal government.”  We see unprecedented movements of states to assert their rights under the 10th Amendment.  And so Montana passes an in-your-face gun law intended to directly challenge the Obama administration.  Utah and Texas began to follow with their own versions of a firearms freedom act.  And the floodgates are opening, as Minnesota and South Carolina are also entering the revolt.  And numerous states are beginning to sponsor state sovereignty resolutions.

States, too, are clearly being driven by fear.

Obama could largely end this fear by simply clearly stating what his until-now twisted and contradictory stance on guns actually is.  The fact that he will not do so only stimulates MORE being driven by fear.

Well, there’s a single good thing coming out of Obama’s politics of fear.  To cite Vice President Joe Biden, all of Obama’s fearmongering is creating “a three letter word”: “J-O-B-S.” In the gun and ammunition industry.

The Obama administration has to make up numbers to justify how its stimulus program has failed.  They have to ignore the 2.6 million jobs they’ve lost and point to 150,000 jobs they can’t show they’ve created.

I think Obama is looking in the wrong place for his “jobs.”  He should point to the jobs in the gun and ammunition industry that he has inspired.

There’s no question that these industries owe their success to Obama and the fear he has created in millions of American hearts and minds.  Obama should take credit for it.

More stockpiling ammunition: Fear of potential Obama laws causing mass sales
By PERRY BACKUS Ravalli Republic

FLORENCE – Every day, Darren Newsom’s three Bitterroot Valley Ammunition facilities crank out 300,000 rounds of ammunition.

It’s not nearly enough.

“I’m going about 100,000 rounds in the wrong direction every day,” Newsom said. “We probably have about six months of back orders right now.”

Newsom has been in the ammunition manufacturing business for more than 20 years and he’s never seen demand this high.

Fearful of the Obama administration’s potential to tighten gun control laws, people from all over the country are stocking up on guns and ammunition.

“I went through the Clinton years and there was a bit of a scare then,” Newsom said. “This is like the Clinton years on steroids.  On the day of the election, our phones started going nuts. It hasn’t stopped since.”

As a master distributor for ATK – the world’s largest ammunition business – Bitterroot Valley Ammunition supplies other ammunition manufacturers around the country with the components needed to make bullets.

“I get a million primers in every other day and most are shipped out the very next day,” he said. “I have 100 million primers on back order right now. We just can’t get enough of them.”

At a recent gun show in Salt Lake City, Newsom sold somewhere between 300,000 and 400,000 rounds in the first two hours.

“It’s just unreal,” he said. “Somewhere in lots of basements around the country, there are millions of rounds of ammunition being stored.”

Local businesses have felt the ammunition shortage.

At Bob Ward’s in Hamilton, Mike Matteson said there has been quite a run on ammunition and reloading supplies like bullets and powder since the election.

“We are especially low right now with pistol ammunition,” Matteson said. “There are four or five calibers that we don’t even have on our shelves.”

Matteson said he didn’t believe manufacturers were prepared for the panic buying that’s occurred since the election.

“They tell us that they’re months behind on some calibers – .22 ammo is really tough to come by,” he said. “Our gun sales are up somewhere between 30 (percent) to 35 percent or better. A good percentage of those sales are pistols.”

Firearm and ammo sales aren’t the only place where concerns about gun control are cropping up.

Ravalli County Sheriff Chris Hoffman has seen a marked increase in the number of people applying for concealed weapons permits since November.

Montana is a “will-issue” state for concealed weapons permits. Any law-abiding citizen who fills out the application and can show they’ve completed some form of firearm safety course can obtain a permit.

The county is averaging about 38 requests for renewals or new permits a month. Last year, the requests averaged about 25.

“It’s definitely a noticeable increase,” Hoffman said.

The sheriff said he’s hearing from people who are concerned about what might happen over the next four years with the gun control issue.

“We are being asked what would be the stance of local law enforcement if the federal government calls for the confiscation of firearms,” Hoffman said. “That’s a very real concern for people.”

Gary Marbut, the longtime president of the Montana Shooting Sports Association in Missoula, said the seeds of the current ammunition shortage can be traced back almost a decade to the Y2K scare.

“Many people became concerned about their ability to get ammunition back then and they stocked up quite a bit,” Marbut said.

In the intervening years, China blossomed and bought up world copper supplies. Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan used up warehouses full of U.S. ammunition that needed to be replenished. That forced higher prices for civilian ammunition and people started using some of the bullets they had squirreled away after Y2K, Marbut said.

And now, with the current economic and political uncertainty, people are looking to restock their supplies at a time when most ammunition manufacturers aren’t willing to expand their operations.

“The whole demand side of this is so flexible and the supply side is not,” he said.

The ammunition shortage is creating a bit of an economic boon for Ravalli County.

Newsom plans to open a fourth manufacturing facility in Stevensville sometime in September. He employs about 50 people right now and could add up to another 100.

“There are a lot of people out of work right now,” he said. “Two years ago, I probably couldn’t find 10 people to go to work for us. Now I have 10 people a day coming in here looking for a job.”

Newsom believes the need for ammunition won’t go away. This scare is creating a whole new group of ammunition customers for the future, he said.

Need proof?

Take the .380 caliber pistol. A year ago, Newsom said there was hardly a demand for the ammunition. Since then, the .380 auto pistol has become very popular with women.

“One year ago, it wasn’t in demand and now it’s some of the most sought ammunition in the U.S.,” he said. “There are more people getting into shooting and that’s one thing about ammunition – you can only shoot it once.”

People need to understand that the Obamamania fear that is creating such an incredibly high demand for guns and ammunition is not merely fear of Obama gun laws; it is fear of the future that Obama’s out-of-control spending will have on our economy.

We may very well have a short-term recovery (which is what happened during the Great Depression following the stock market crash of Black Friday in October 1929); but that recovery will be devoured by the sheer massive weight of trillions and trillions of dollars in debt.  Obama will spend $9.3 trillion and nearly DOUBLE the national debt.  The administration has spent, loaned, or committed more than $12.8 trillion .  This year Obama is spending more than four times as much as George Bush did in 2008.  Obama is creating more debt than every single president from George Washington to George W. Bush – COMBINED.  And the Congressional Budget Office says that by 2019 a whopping 82 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product (GDP) will be going to pay down the national debt.

That mind-boggling spending and that mind-boggling debt is a disaster weighting to happen.  It is only a matter of time before a ten trillion ton anvil falls on the American economy.

Trends Research Institute CEO Gerald Celente is on record predicting food riots by 2012 as massive spending creates massive inflation and devaluing of the currency.  If Celente is a nutjob, he is a nutjob that CNN, The Economist, USA Today, CNBC, The Wall Street Journal, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, The New York Times, CBS News, The Detroit News, the Chicago Tribune, The Los Angeles Times, and the New York Post have all gone on public record to praise for his incredible predictive accuracy.

People are scared, and judging by the continuing massive purchases of people stockpiling guns and ammo, they’re not clearly not getting any less scared.

So you get your gun.  And lock and load.  Because the beast is coming.

Obama Backlash Beginning: Montana Defies Administration With In-Your-Face Gun Law

May 7, 2009

The state of Montana has drawn a line in the sand by passing a new gun law that virtually thumbs its nose at the federal government’s encroachment on state and individual rights.  If the tea parties were the first shot across the bow of liberal fascism, this is surely the second – and it’s being done with heavy artillery.

Liberals have been employing “sanctuary cities” across the nation that flouted federal immigration laws.  Now conservatives are taking that same idea to have “sanctuary states” to protect their citizens’ 2nd Amendment rights against liberal tyranny.  And Montana, Utah, and Texas are leading the nation in standing up to the federal government’s unconstitutional laws in direct violation of states’ rights.

Montana Governor Brian D. Schweitzer, for what it’s worth, is a Democrat.

Montana fires a warning shot over states’ rights
State is trying to trigger a battle over gun control — and make a point

updated 4:54 p.m. ET April 29, 2009

HELENA, Mont. – Montana is trying to trigger a battle over gun control — and perhaps make a larger point about what many folks in this ruggedly independent state regard as a meddlesome federal government.

In a bill passed by the Legislature earlier this month, the state is asserting that guns manufactured in Montana and sold in Montana to people who intend to keep their weapons in Montana are exempt from federal gun registration, background check and dealer-licensing rules because no state lines are crossed.

That notion is all but certain to be tested in court.

The immediate effect of the law could be limited, since Montana is home to just a few specialty gun makers, known for high-end hunting rifles and replicas of Old West weapons, and because their out-of-state sales would automatically trigger federal control.

Legal showdown
Still, much bigger prey lies in Montana’s sights: a legal showdown over how far the federal government’s regulatory authority extends.

“It’s a gun bill, but it’s another way of demonstrating the sovereignty of the state of Montana,” said Democratic Gov. Brian Schweitzer, who signed the bill.

Carrie DiPirro, a spokeswoman for the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, had no comment on the legislation. But the federal government has generally argued that it has authority under the interstate commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution to regulate guns because they can so easily be transported across state lines.

Guns and states’ rights both play well in Montana, the birthplace of the right-wing Freemen militia and a participant in the Sagebrush Rebellion of the 1970s and ’80s, during which Western states clashed with Washington over grazing and mineral extraction on federal land.

Montana’s leading gun rights organization, more hardcore than the National Rifle Association, boasts it has moved 50 bills through the Legislature over the past 25 years. And lawmakers in the Big Sky State have rebelled against federal control of everything from wetland protection to the national Real ID system.

‘Made in Montana’
Under the new law, guns intended only for Montana would be stamped “Made in Montana.” The drafters of the law hope to set off a legal battle with a simple Montana-made youth-model single-shot, bolt-action .22 rifle. They plan to find a “squeaky clean” Montanan who wants to send a note to the ATF threatening to build and sell about 20 such rifles without federal dealership licensing.

If the ATF tells them it’s illegal, they will sue and take the case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, if they can.

Similar measures have also been introduced in Texas and Alaska.

“I think states have got to stand up or else most of their rights are going to be buffaloed by the administration and by Congress,” said Texas state Rep. Leo Berman.

Critics say exempting guns from federal laws anywhere would undermine efforts to stem gun violence everywhere.

Hot Air has the text of the law, titled:

AN ACT EXEMPTING FROM FEDERAL REGULATION UNDER THE COMMERCE CLAUSE OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES A FIREARM, A FIREARM ACCESSORY, OR AMMUNITION MANUFACTURED AND RETAINED IN MONTANA; AND PROVIDING AN APPLICABILITY DATE. BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MONTANA:

This is defiance as a thing of art:

defiance_mouse_eagle

It is a determination to keep fighting for one’s freedom no matter how hopeless things might look:

defiance_frog_stork2

And why is this level of defiance necessary? An image worth a thousand curses suffices by way of explanation:

obama_yes-we-can_1st-amendment

Don’t think this isn’t a direct response to Barack Hussein.

Gun and ammunition sales have soared out of naked fear of Obama.

And for good reason: Obama is pushing a treaty to ban reloading. Liberals are trying to regulate the components of ammunition as explosives and thus restrict ammunition. Liberals in California are nakedly attempting to circumvent the 2nd Amendment by regulating ammunition, hence making guns useless.

And the liberal campaign to deprive Americans of their 2nd Amendment guarantees (even as they discover “penumbras and emanations” in the Constitution that let them kill babies) is only a distant side issue in the massive government takeover of American society. Obama’s massive spending – more than every president from George Washington to George W. Bush COMBINED – will leave this country with an insurmountable national debt that would exceed 82 percent of the overall economy by 2019 and threaten this country’s very survival. We are now on the hook for $12.8 TRILLION dollars in government spending and commitments in the brave new world of the Obama economy.

We’ve got a president who is firing CEOs, stacking boards of directors, changing the rules for the auto manufacturers’ bankruptcy filings in order to favor the unions that supported him over the secured creditors. And if they don’t like it, they are met with frightening threats from the administration and death threats from union members. If that isn’t bad enough, we’ve also got card check on the horizon, which would allow union thugs to intimidate workers into unionizing with the union allowed to know exactly how each worker voted.

We’ve got a president who won’t let banks repay bailout loans (which in many cases were literally forced on them in the first place) so he can continue to impose onerous terms and conditions on them and control what they do and how they do it.

We’ve got a president who is planning to nationalize health care – and the one-sixth of our economy that it represents – even as he moves to impose costly and burdensome cap-and-trade regulations that would (in Obama’s own words) necessarily cause energy prices to soar.

And we’ve got a president who is attempting to nationalize student loans such that private lenders are phased out altogether. If Obama gets his way, the government will loan directly to families and students, making them directly indebted to the federal government. The government will necessarily get to decide which students, which schools, and which academic programs get loans.  An option for students is to repay their loans by means of “national service,” which already precludes any type of religious service whatsoever. The potential of liberal big government harnessing student labor to staff liberal organizations such as ACORN is becoming all-too real.

We have a new administration that moved to criminalize political differences by targeting Bush officials as war criminals, even as returning veterans and pro-life Americans are labeled as “rightwing extremists” in a DHS report sent out to the nation’s law enforcement agencies and police departments.

not-fascism-when-we-do-it3

I’ve been saying something over and over in different ways. What the liberals are doing now will ultimately result in a “rightwing” backlash. What is true in physics is true in politics: for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Liberals are pushing and pushing and pushing through one new massive spending program and one new policy after another that will change and undermine this country forever afterward.

Under Obama, terrorism is now called an “overseas contingency operation” and terror attacks are now nothing more than “man-caused disasters.”  In attacking the CIA as a means to attack Bush, Obama has created a depressed, sullen, and angry morale which promises to transfer into “cover your ass” caution and bureaucratic gamesmanship.  He has undermined our security to a shocking degree.  If we are attacked, this country will swing so far to the right so fast it will be absolutely unreal.

But even if we are not attacked, our country will likely implode under its own weight: trillions of dollars of reckless spending will have that effect as our dollar devalues and our interest payments on the debt begin to soar when inflation begins to take its toll.  Ultimately our taxes will skyrocket due to all of this spending.  CBS News has an article from March entitled, “If China Stops Lending Us Money, Look Out.”  Well, guess what?  They’re doing exactly that.  They’re canceling our credit card.

In a poll of chief executive officers taken prior to the election, 74 percent of the executives said they feared “that an Obama presidency would be disastrous for the country.”  And some of the CEOs predicted that “some of his programs would bankrupt the country within three years, if implemented.”  And with the Congress in nearly total Democratic control, they ARE being implemented.

When Obama and the Democrats bankrupt the country and undermine our entire social structure with massive spending programs and massive bureaucracies that cannot be undone, which direction will the country turn?  And how complete will that turnaround be?

Liberals are ignoring one ominous warning of popular outrage after another, claiming that conservatism and the Republican Party are dead.  And they will likely ignore what is going on in Montana – which is led by a Democrat governor – as well.  They are doing so to both their party’s and their country’s peril.

Montana, you’ve done a great thing for liberty, which is freedom from the growing tyranny of the smiley-face-fascist nanny state.

The backlash against big government liberal tyranny is beginning.  And it will become larger and hotter as Obama’s policies take their toll.  Let us hope that the spark turns into a fire before – rather than after – Obama has done too much damage to recover from.