Pirate Weekend Linkfest Sticky 6/6-6/8

Image hosting by Photobucket Linkfest Haven, the Blogger's Oasis

Send a trackback to this post, but don’t forget to link it.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

3 Responses to “Pirate Weekend Linkfest Sticky 6/6-6/8”

  1. darthcrUSAderworldtour2007 says:

    “Keep Hitlery Rotten Clinton away from me today at the Belmont! They may accidentally load HER into the chute….”
    – Big Brown

  2. forest hunter says:

    I tried to email this to you but it won’t go so I apologize in advance for the lengthy post below. Feel free to work some magic to suit your site requirements.

    This is one of the best op-eds I’ve seen yet describing the “Cold Civil
    War” we are currently enjoying. Definitely a worthy read.

    Elect Obama, Destroy America

    Saturday, April 12, 2008

    Elect Obama, Destroy America

    Political hyperbole? Right-wing alarmist propaganda?

    Most protest movements begin as an organized expression of a legitimate
    grievance — some perceived societal injustice, perhaps in response to
    actual governmental or judicial tyranny. If the timing is right and the
    issues resonate, successful protest movements can flourish and quickly
    grow into full-fledged revolutions, and revolutions can often degenerate
    into bloody civil wars.

    Is America presently in the midst of such a potentially explosive
    scenario? Unfortunately, the signs appear to be more and more ominous.
    Since those traumatic events of September 11, 2001, this nation has been
    resolutely dividing itself into two increasingly hostile and
    irreconcilable camps. That reasonable ‘middle ground’, traditionally
    amenable to compromise, has been steadily shrinking until it has become
    all but hypothetical. It has been argued, not unconvincingly, that not
    since those anxious years in the mid-Nineteenth Century, prior to our
    perhaps inevitable, but monstrously destructive Civil War, has this
    great country been so split asunder.

    Once again, the split is to be between Republican and Democrat, Right
    and Left, but this November’s election will not be between the
    traditional Republican Right and the traditional Democratic Left; but
    rather between an ascendant but conflicted New Left, and a beleaguered
    and conflicted New Right. This New Age Democratic Party is torn between
    the Hillary Clinton Political New Left of old-style Democratic politics
    — i.e., pro-labor, pro-big government, “One World”, Socialistic agenda
    — whose ultimate goal however appears to many to be primarily a
    personal return to political power, and the charismatic Barack Obama’s
    Cultural New Left, an idealistic social movement, which views political
    power as simply a means to an end, the end being the implementation of
    sweeping cultural changes in our American society. Each in their own way
    are ideological products of the Sixties. But, as destructive as the
    victory of either candidate would ultimately be to our cherished
    American Dream, of the two, the prospects of an Obama presidency are by
    far the most alarming.

    Despite his oft-repeated promises to “bring America together”, by his
    own words and actions and revealing personal associations — and that of
    his prospective First Lady — for all of his undeniable charismatic
    appeal, Barack Hussein Obama is simply a racist. His vision of America
    is racist, and his solutions to our problems are racist. His appeal is
    to those backward-looking, self-destructive forces of negativity and
    defeatism inherent in all cultures at all times. His song is not a new
    one, it’s that same same old seductive siren song of victimization which
    has lured countless gullible societies to their doom — ‘You deserve
    more than what you have, and you would have more than you presently
    have, had you not been victimized by Them, the Enemy, the Other — the
    colonialist, the Jews, or the Whites.’

    Thus, in Barack Obama’s skewered vision, America is to be seen as a
    battleground: it is to be Us versus Them again. The historically
    suppressed colored peoples of this world versus the ruthless and
    domineering post-colonialist Whiteys. His appeal is to the politically
    naive or the purposefully ignorant, those who willfully, for their own
    selfish motivations, deny all political and cultural progress and
    achievement, no matter how obvious. Far from the high-minded rhetoric of
    their humanistic speeches, they are simply the latest genus of that same
    old species of self-serving politicians — devious, amoral and cynical.
    They are intellectually, emotionally, and often financially invested in
    defeat. They are the dangerous products of protest movements gone awry.

    As history has repeatedly proven, once a nascent protest movement begins
    to succeed and achieve a certain level of public acceptance and
    validation, it can easily devolve into an entrenched political entity,
    virtually indistinguishable from any other entrenched political entity,
    with its own newly-acquired set of selfish goals and objectives. This
    new political entity no longer has one single clear cut societal agenda
    (i.e. the Cause); their efforts now become divided. One of their most
    important goals inevitably becomes self-perpetuation — often by even
    more ruthless means than the original tyranny against which they
    successfully battled. At some point, this political survivalist
    mentality can, and usually does, completely subsume the lofty goals of
    the original movement. Thus a new — and perhaps even more dangerous
    tyranny is born. A tyranny, like all tyrannies, whose primary mission is
    to sustain itself at all costs.

    How many times during these last few turbulent centuries have we seen
    this fateful scenario play itself out on the world’s stage — in
    Robespierre’s France, in Hitler’s Germany, Stalin’s Russia, Mao’s China,
    Castro’s Cuba — all with invariably murderous consequences?

    But what happens if the primary goals of the original protest movement
    are actually realized? Does the movement then merely melt away and
    quietly re-assimilate itself back into that society which it has
    successfully transformed? Hardly. The movement’s leaders have too much
    invested in the Cause to simply disband their troops and ride off into
    the sunset. Through the Cause these leaders have achieved power, and
    power seldom voluntarily walks off the stage.

    But with their original goals accomplished and their real or theoretical
    enemies defeated, what possible purpose can be served by their
    continuing existence? They have now essentially become Rebels Without a
    Cause. How, then, can they perpetuate their own legitimacy?

    The answer of course is to ignore the reality of their victories and
    create new enemies — or to somehow skillfully resurrect the old ones.

    Virtually every successful revolutionary movement which has morphed into
    a tyranny has sustained itself in this manner. The once fanatical
    revolutionaries are now battling counter-revolutionaries. Their entire
    raison d’etre has now become to prosecute this never-ending battle to
    purportedly protect the achievements of the Glorious Revolution from its
    innumerable reactionary enemies. This is an unalterable prerequisite to
    their survival; there can be no successful tyranny without enemies. Thus
    the Revolution becomes a perpetual ‘work-in-progress’, a never-ending
    war. Now, ironically, to admit success would be to admit defeat. They
    must continuously convince their followers, or subjects, that they are
    constantly under siege from these relentless counter revolutionary
    forces. The leaders are now to be viewed as society’s protectors,
    protecting the helpless vulnerables from the predatory Enemy. And if
    perchance there is no viable predatory enemy, then they must create one.

    The American — and eventually, world-wide — protest movements of the
    1960s provide us with a perfect example of this ultimately
    self-destructive paradigm, which — due in large part to America finding
    itself in the midst of yet another contentious and unpopular war — is
    drawing us once again into its deadly vortex. The protest movements of
    the Sixties produced some truly remarkable changes for the better in our
    American society. But there was also a dark side. Part of the message of
    the Sixties was the message of helplessness. It is “attempting to cure
    the alcoholic by convincing him that he has good reason to drink”. Its
    well-intentioned but deadly condescension has brought us the bleak
    realities of inner city despair. The self-perpetuating crime-ridden,
    drug-infested, inter-generational poverty and hopelessness of the
    Seventies. And now, they are bringing us this devastating message once
    again.

    Does it matter that Barack Hussein Obama is at least partially black?
    Yes, tremendously. Not to us, but to Barack Hussein Obama. It is the
    very essence of his being, the banner of his Crusade. Without the ‘race
    issue’, Barack Obama would be just another politician. It is his focus
    and his justification. And, if we are not careful it will become ours:
    there are many among us who have unwittingly bought into the false
    premise that all of the existential threats we face in this turbulent
    world are of our own making. They are not evidence of our real enemies
    evil intentions, but rather the results of our own inherent racism and
    prejudice. And they will proudly cast their vote for Barack Hussein
    Obama merely to prove to themselves and to the world that they are not
    racists.

    However, it is certainly fair to ask, if race or color are still truly
    overriding factors with the American public, then how is it that we
    exhibited no such national hang-ups when coping with Colin Powell or
    Condoleezza Rice? And if race and gender are still the salient issues
    they were in the Furious Sixties, then how does one explain the current
    makeup of our Democratic Presidential Candidates? One a woman, one a
    black? It’s a pretty difficult argument to sustain.

    To all but the most blind and biased liberals, the surprising victories
    of the Feminist and Civil Rights movements of the Sixties have been
    nothing short of astonishing. How anyone in today’s America can watch
    television, go to a movie, listen to popular music, or read a national
    newspaper and come away feeling that either blacks or women are
    underrepresented is incomprehensible. Today there are women and blacks
    — and, yes, lesbians and homosexuals and transgenders — in every
    conceivable facet of American life — in the military, the media, the
    business world, sports, entertainment, politics. Only those deeply
    invested in a contrarian agenda would be cynical enough to deny it.

    We, the United States of America, have come closer in this Twenty-First
    Century to achieving a pure meritocracy than any other civilization in
    history. But will this undeniable fact impress those self-doomed
    generational victims and their professional enablers? Hardly. For these
    aging warriors of the Sixties and their current ideological offspring
    the very concept of victory is an unpleasant, perhaps even a deadly
    admission. For without a battle, what use are warriors? If gender-based
    and racial parity have actually been achieved, then what possible use do
    we have for a Gloria Steinem or an Al Sharpton ? What, then, can these
    poor dispossessed Bands of Brothers — or, more often, Sororities of
    Sisters — do with their disbanded warriors ? What roles can there be in
    today’s meritocracy for a NOW or an NAACP? Those roles which would
    actually benefit man — or womankind, they have, to their everlasting
    dishonor, steadfastly refused to even consider. These disenfranchised
    organizations could help to change the world, but they cannot get past
    their own deflated and bruised egos. The feminists could be rising as
    one powerful voice in support of their oppressed sisters in Islam; and
    the black activists could be wooing their brothers and sisters away from
    the devastating consequences of a life lived as a victim. But they
    don’t. They won’t. To keep themselves in power, to preserve their
    personal tyrannies, they choose rather to perpetuate the myth, and seal
    the plight of the true victims of this world.

    To vote for Barrack Hussein Obama and his dark vision of America is to
    vote for defeatism and negativity. It is willfully turning your back on
    the hope and promise of this wondrous meritocracy we call America. It is
    buying into the outrageous lie that America itself is the problem, and
    that only by changing the whole concept of Americanism can we hope to
    cure the evils of this world.

    Would electing Barack Obama mean the destruction of America?

    Only you can decide.

  3. darthcrUSAderworldtour2007 says:

    “…and a partridge in a pear tree!” The looney left actually think that our blessings aren’t from GOD, and that our freedoms are actually….free! Imagine that?

Bad Behavior has blocked 4577 access attempts in the last 7 days.