Skip to comments.Raise your right hand...
Posted on 05/21/2006 6:20:36 PM PDT by pickrell
Moods swing, as moods have, since man first lost hope. The elation of completing a bridge over a dangerous river, that is accomplished through a lifetime of study, training and work, stems not from the expection of gain for yourself, but rather from the certainty that life will be easier for those who follow you. It is an intangible that cannot be held up at a campaign rally to crassly bargain for votes.
It is the concept of duty... the idea that the way we honor the sacrifices and the work of those who came before us, to make things better for us, is to do the same for those who come after us. It can be called many things- willing embrace and respect for the local values and culture, adherence to the principles others have given their lives to defend, or just putting the safety and security of your family and community ahead of your own.
It really doesn't matter how the current fad in prose labels it- many if not most men instinctively feel it as they glance at youngsters innocently at play. It is, quite simply, that visceral determination to protect; which displaces, but never really obliterates, the competing visceral need of self preservation. The ones who choose law enforcement admire the ones who choose military service, risking their lives in the field. The ones who choose military service admire the ones who choose law enforcement, risking their lives in the neighborhoods. And both admire the father taking on the liberal school board, and trouncing it.
Throughout it all, the individual gives way to the mission. When someone falters and fails, the mission suffers. To avoid this, those who choose service to others train hard, condition themselves relentlessly, and grow support within the comradery of their fellows. No one drones on about their personal fears and their weaknesses, but rather promises through their good-natured boasting that when the time of testing comes, that they will not fail their fellows and the mission. As the journeyman soldier molts into the master warrior, thoughts of retreat and failure become a distant memory. It doesn't follow that success will always occur effortlessly, or that losses and heartbreaking setbacks will not occur.
It simply means that those who harken, "Semper Fi!", fiercely mean it.
It also follows that men like this have a terrible time understanding others who are entrusted to similarly critical undertakings, but who have not prepared themselves for what the job requires. If you crush gravel in your teeth to be a Seal, a Ranger or a Delta team member, you wouldn't dream that an associate would simply be "administratively" promoted unprepared onto your team. The places on the teams are earned through acceptance of punishing conditioning, just as the undertaking of immense tasks confers immense responsibility to be as prepared for the challenge as is humanly possible.
Those who have demanded and extracted so much from themselves, so as to harden themselves to unknowable tasks ahead, certainly earn the right to expect at least some similar preparation among others. The more awesome the task, the more awesome the responsibility to be ready for it.
In a word- if you want to run with the big dogs, you'd better be ready to bite.
Yet in what some consider to be every bit the most critical of tasks- the literal defense of the Constitution and the country itself in the arena of politics- the Republican party seems to be commissioning the Generals directly from some high school homecoming dancefloor. Fresh and flashy in their tuxedoes... and utterly unprepared for "meeting engagements"- those worst case, suddenly-in-your-face firefights against an equally unwarned adversary. The best trained, instinctively reactive combatant usually prevails. The same occurs in the street fighting of national politics, and public opinion. Those unprepared to go toe-to-toe with Democratic political hacks need to step aside and go back for more training.
Is there any reason why the conservative party of most powerful nation on earth should select leaders who are not committed and shaped by a lifelong "hellweek" of preparation? Is there any excuse for our culture, and our bulwark of freedom for all men of the world, to collapse under the forces of corruption, tyranny and despair... simply because our 'theatre commanders'- our Senators and Congressmen, yes and even our President- ... are not prepared to defend conservative American values at every hedgerow, in every attack, in every field of battle that modern journalism throws at them, and in every battle on the House and Senate floors? The defense of family, community and sovereignty must be instinctive to those entrusted to protect it. Anything less smacks of dilettantism, and should outrage the average American as much as the Brie and Cheese mentality of the liberal elitists.
Should it come as a 'Nancy Pelosi' moment of startled, deer-in-the-headlights astonishment when old threats are finally forced to be taken seriously by an aroused populace... who then turn to our Senators to demand action?
In a world of competing pressures, it is at least understandable that a problem may occasionally be wrongly consigned to the back burner. The war in the Pacific in 1942 was relegated to a holding action while our leaders first committed the bulk of our re-emerging military assets to the European theatre. And that decision was necessitated by the result of a previous back-burner approach, since the reasons we were forced into such a holding action in the first place were the choices previously made by the Roosevelt Administration to put the military into financial life-support, stripped down to a hollow shadow of a defensive force, in order to advance the 'New Deal' of social necessities.
But news that shooting was occuring on Wake Island certainly did not come as a surprise to our Senators in 1942, months later over tea. That they would further fail to understand who the adversaries even were would be mindlessly delinquent. And the mindlessly delinquent are soon thrown overboard by the ship of voters, when being pursued by the U-boat of national disaster.
People may debate choices, but they have little tolerance for cluelessness, in officials entrusted with the lives of succeeding generations. Imagine how much less even that they should tolerate ill-preparedness by their leaders to confront threats to our national survival.
Today the debate rages about whether the current harvest of illegals in this country should be driven out, or else simply encouraged to "pay a fine" to make up for their 'crime'.
I wonder sometimes, if Washington has a clue as to what the "crime"- the threat- actually is?
I will posit five "invaders". Let's shift the microscope to each in turn.
One man swims the river, scales the fence, and pays the 'coyote' to bring him to the new land, the United States. He works several jobs in fear, saves enough to bring his family over in much the same manner, and slowly regards himself as an American. He stands up to the criminals in the neighborhood, insists that his sons treasure what they may someday lose- that great gift, however fleeting- of living in a land of law and stability, where families may grow. He honors those who have protected it, pledges allegiance to it proudly, and bristles with rage at those native-born who ignorantly slander it in their teaching jobs, since they have no clue as to what it all cost. Above all, he works to become what he values... an American citizen. There are a few others like him.
The second man swims the river, scales the fence, and pays the "coyote"- etc, etc. He looks for opportunites to leverage his way into a better lifestyle. Every social program he can counterfeit his way into, every advantage he can extract from the gringos, he seizes as "found money". His secretly sneers at those Norte Americano teachers who aid him in progressively eliminating such relics as the Pledge of Allegiance, and waits until numbers embolden him to carry the Mexican flag openly in our streets. 'Reconquista' promises what the Palestinians crave- ... the opportunity to loot farms like Zimbabweans, with no thought of next season's plantings. Above all, he works to becomes what he considers his meal ticket... a Democratic voter, until such time as the demographic shift allows "further action". Recent national events have alerted unsuspecting Americans that there are vast numbers of invaders like him.
The third man jets in from northern Iraq. He has witnessed the cost of Islamic brutality and wishes for his daughters to grow up in a culture that mandates all men to act decently towards one another... and towards his daughters. He will not abide his daughters being turned into cattle, property of the ignorant, and victims of their extended clans. His outrage when the evil that he fled makes its way to his United States in a despicable attack which kills thousands, causes him to rage to his neighbors. But he finds a disconcerting quiet from them, and an unholy acceptance of 'destiny' at the mosque he then ceases to attend. He feels isolated, and justifiably so. There aren't many like him
The fourth man also jetted in from the Middle East. He is the son of an elderly, wealthy, middle-management government official, who can afford to send him to America. Here, the man meets quietly with very young men whom he hopes to recruit for 'God's work'. Like French Arabs, he despises those who in their ignorance run interference for him- the useful idiots of liberalism. The most satisfying part of the eventual "cleansing" of the world, is the delightful employment of some of the infidels to act as their own mops. By their actions, there seem to be- in contrast to our third invader- quite a few like our fourth man, if not an overwhelming majority. They disdain joining the national culture, prefering to wait instead for its prophesied annihilation.
And the fifth man... he was born here. His father died in Korea trying to stave off the ravages of collectivism, yet he is ignorant of this. His life has been spent as a dutiful acolyte of "causes". He disdains 'patriotism', considering even the word to be distasteful. He works to strip the undeserving of their ill-gotten gains, while accepting his state-paid stipend as "just wages". He honors those who work to defeat the tyrannical government which protects him from the mob. Though he has a native birth certificate, there are many invaders like him.
Now the average conservative has no problem seeing a difference between the five men in terms other than of race. Race baiting is left to the moral blind men in the Democratic Party.
The average conservative sees the desirability to enrich the national repository of damn fine men with those who commit to adopt, embrace and thereby defend our American culture. While we cannot admit everyone due to space limitations, we usually cheer on those who value American citizenship enough to endure great hardship to achieve it, and are willing to abide by our cultural rules to assimilate into it.
But the average conservative bristles at the thought of foreign sponsored invasion by those who are actually coached by their governments as to the best methods of taking advantage of flaws in the American defenses. The sight of illegal immigrants flexing their political muscle to begin demanding rights and priveleges, with the enthusiastic assistance of a despicable media broadcasting the sea of Mexican flags to viewers around the world, is not as difficult a threat to grasp as it seems to be for those in Washington.
The supposed champions of conservative Republican Party, seem almost paralyzed when rabid Democrats threaten to resist and to filibuster. Why were they not prepared for resistance? What, then, have they spent their hours and days in preparation for?
It is one thing to watch liberals who have long demanded an absolute wall of separation between Church and State... suddenly fall into fits at the thought of a wall of separation between Citizens and Non-citizens. When criminals can perpetrate violent acts against U.S. citizens, and then retreat to the protective embrace of crossing back into Mexico, what is that if not a reversed wall of protection for those who prey on American citizens?
Are walls only permissible for liberals when they perform the same function as the Laotian and Cambodian borders in the Vietnam War?
That liberal thought embraces such madness should come as no surprise after so much history has passed. But that our Republican elected leaders seem utterly unprepared to go to the canvas to defeat such madness at all costs is beyond maddening. Perhaps we need to send a news bulletin.
** Dateline Washington, Flash Message Traffic. **.
Information addressees: Government Representatives
Message priority; Urgent
Cluemeter set to 'ON' position.
There Are Two Categories Of Persons Now Within Our Borders... and they are spread among every race..
One category accepts the responsibilities to defend our existence, preserve our values, protect BOTH genders from abuse, defeat and destroy the evil threatening the entire globe, and leave the United States to our progeny in as good or better of a shape as we inherited it.
The other category is actively working to dismantle those institutions which made the United States the most successful, the most wealthy, and the most free society in the history of the planet.
Extracting a small fine from those in the second category is not why we sent you to Washington. Apparently, you don't yet understand the 'crime', in spite of the exalted positions you hold. Somehow you misread that the only thing important to the conservative community was that you trim the marginal tax rate. But you did not advertise yourself as a one-trick pony when you campaigned.
The crime.... is not a technical violation of passports. The crime... is not a question of collecting back taxes for you to spend.
The crime.... is that of Perjury. The crime is that of purporting to wish to join this society of free persons while secretly, and in increasing boldness openly, working to end this society of free persons.
Don't focus on seniority. Sleeper cells are usually assembled within a target country years or even decades before they are called upon for their treachery. The length of time a person has been in the country is no free pass. Certain clues should be automatic and axiomatic in filling up the bus to the border.
Anyone who declines to pledge allegiance to our society, by declining to Pledge Allegiance to the Flag which symbolizes our freedoms and our values...should be deported.
Anyone who works to defeat the values of our society, to consign a certain gender to the status of property, to enforce submission to any particular religion, to undermine and slander the men who risk their lives to protect this country... should be deported.
Anyone who actively supports, finances, conceals, or provides communications for, the enemies of this society... should be deported.
It doesn't matter if there are millions of them. If we have to commandeer every bus that Greyhound owns, and mass convoy all of them over to Hollywood, in order to provide free transportation to our southern, northern, western or eastern borders, for all of those dissipated reprobates who fund NAMBLA and the other "organizations of love", then we must do so.
If we have to temporarily nationalize the services of our railroads to gather unto Mecca, those persons who dance on rooftops at attacks upon United States citizens, then we must do so.
If we are forced to impress into service every last airline, - up to and including the Hooters girls, - then that is what we must do.
If we must federalize the services of marshalls, militia and military in order to return those Mexicans to the land that they 'stole' from the Spaniards, who 'stole' it form the Indians, who 'stole' it from the Aztecs, who "stole' it from the Pueblo people, who stole it from ancient, unnamed, indigenous inhabitants before the invention of flags, etc, etc; through conquest spanning not 2 centuries, but rather 100 centuries or more, then we must do so.
The crime is the perjury of those who came not to join our culture, but rather to harvest it, to bleed it, and then to destroy it. Their 'immigration' into our country is a lie, as much as the 'immigration' of the German Army into Poland in the late 1930's.
No one should ever extend a statute of limitations to perjury nor to invasion. No one should move to the head of the line to re-conquer America.
And no one who supports such people should retain the privelege of paying property taxes to their community. Their property should be as forfeit as should their fraudulent stay in this culture that we have built.
If you are unwilling to help us continue to plant, cultivate and defend the liberty of our land, you have no claim to the harvest. The fruits of our civilization belong to those who embrace and protect the orchard, not to raiders in the night.
But if you are came here illegally to embrace our values, encourage your sons to join the military and help us fight to preserve this culture, and risk your reputation in immigrant circles to fiercely defend this experiment in freedom, then we should have a very difficult time in ever asking you to leave.
In fact, we should offer you some soon-to-be-vacated homes in Hollywood, available soon at bargain basement prices...
Nice writing, if yours. You`ll get the readers it deserves if the opening paragraph hooks `em harder.
This truly causes me to wonder why there is such a disproportionate number of unconditioned fatsos on my local police force, while understanding I'll never have the luxury of speaking out about it without fear of negative repercussions from the end of their bureaucratic batons.
I would have to agree with you about the first paragraph. I could have intro'd it better. I was free associating and typing at the same time, trying to picture in my head and address the mood swings of winning and losing as a conservative, and the dark anger that comes from being let down by those you counted on to make the conservative case.
What leaves me curious is your first sentence, i.e. "nice writing if yours". Don't take this as an attack, but...who else's would it be?
" ... if yours."
Nothing at all meant by that. Just wasn't sure if this was reprinted from a journal. Wasn't comparing you to Joe "The Plagiarist" Biden!