POWIP Piece of Work In Progress – Former Abode of Dan Collins

1. 

   Diondrum
   April 29th, 2011 - 23:48

   There isn’t much that sums it up better than that Banzai7 Time cover.

   Let’s see a “Lean Forward” MSNBC pic with apparatchiks. Really. MSNBC has a slogan “Lean Forward” Such is the state of our union that no one wonders why a whole network models itself on Chairman Mao’s “Great Leap Forward.” When do we get our little red books?

   Even if we manage to kick that two-bit Marxist grifter out of office, we still have the “Lean Forward” crowd. They no longer feel the need to lie about their intentions. “Lean Forward?” When do we get the gulags and execution squads?

   Never mind, Nobel Peace price winners will pull the trigger.

   Like or Dislike: 0  0

   ( REPLY )
   • 

     Bob Reed
     April 30th, 2011 - 12:08

     You know Diondrum, the one good thing about the Obama presidency is that all of the communists, and their fellow travelers who prefer the more furtive appelations such as “socialist” or “progressive”, feel like they don’t have to mask their intentions any longer.

     I mean, witness the much ballyhood book peddled during the last election; “Obamanomics-trickle up prosperity”, or something like that. Pretty close to the Obamunist version of the little red book if you ask me. In it they were openly advocating a society where, through redistribution, everyone had access to great incomes; the assertion being that it would somehow be the cause of great prosperity in our consumer oriented society.

     Smoke and mirrors, and much of the same hooey that the Soviet system was supposed to produce; I always ask them how it worked out for the Soviets!

     The way I look at it, at least we know who to “go after” now, and have evidence of their statist/collectivist intent. Now the only hurdle left is to remind folks that, 1) The economy is not a zero-sum game, and 2) Statist Socialism is fundamentally incongruent with the principles our nation was founded on.

     My regards

     Like or Dislike: 0  0

     ( REPLY )
2. 

   guinsPen
   April 30th, 2011 - 13:03

   Chez Obama

   Like or Dislike: 0  0

   ( REPLY )
   • 

     Bob Reed
     April 30th, 2011 - 14:29

     The only difference being Duclos was the brains behind the machinations of the French communists, while ObaMao is the frontman for the American commies.

     Would Soros be our modern Duclos? That is, if he doesn’t decide to cut his losses and stop funding the lefties?

     Like or Dislike: 0  0

     ( REPLY )
     • 

       guinsPen
       April 30th, 2011 - 14:53

       Whatever shade of red, it’s duclos for comfort.

       Like or Dislike: 0  0

       ( REPLY )
       • 

         Bob Reed
         April 30th, 2011 - 17:23

         Hah!

         Pretty pithy, and the laconic style enhances the quip.

         Well played sir.

         Like or Dislike: 0  0
3. 

   jefferson101
   April 30th, 2011 - 20:56

   Given the level to which this thread has already ascended (or descended, depending on your taste in puns….) I’m almost hesitant to go back to the topic. But I will.

   If y’all don’t think that there are folks out there on the far Right who are fully prepared to start the tumbrils rolling again, you don’t hang out in the places that I do.

   Some of them get outed as neo-Nazis, or some such, in which case they can be dealt with accordingly. We modify the typical laws somewhat at my usual hangout. Bringing up the Nazis first doesn’t mean you lose, necessarily, but screaming “Seig Heil” and putting a string of 888888888′s in you signature line will get you tossed out.

   The problem being, what do you do with the hardcore militia types? I’ve managed to get a couple of them to work their way up to expulsion by discussing their objective of hanging people who “Disrespect the Constitution” by quoting themselves back at them relative to a couple of discussions of Federalism. They had made it clear that they didn’t think that we should have ever departed from the Articles of Confederation in the first place.

   So? Who is “Disrespecting the Constitution”? My offer to bring the rope while they climbed up on the horse were met with enough imprecation to cause their removal.

   But, be it noted, they are out there. If I thought they’d confine themselves to Van Jones and his ilk, I might be more sympathetic, but they seemed to feel that I was an obstruction to proper Governance, in Militiaworld.

   They don’t have anywhere near the traction on the right that Van Jones and company do on the left, but they are out there.

   FWIW.

   Like or Dislike: 0  0

   ( REPLY )
   • 

     Bob Reed
     April 30th, 2011 - 21:43

     You see Jefferson101, the way I look at it, and deal with such folks, is to point out to them that they too are advocating the rule of men, and not laws, as our society is intended to be.

     While a strong second amendment guy myself, there can be no room for vigilantism. There’s a fine line between self defense of one’s property, liberty, and Constitutional rights and an anarchic confederation of essentially heavily armed gangs.

     There’s nothing wrong with a citizen’s militia, especially in places on the SW border where the drug gangs are going wild and the fed’s are failing the citizenry by protecting our border and indeed, their lives! But they can’t arbitrarily and capriciously decide to, for instance, innocent combat law enforcement personnel nor federal officials at random. Nor can they be allowed to selectively engage in law enforcement without the proper deputization. Their role is a last line of defense in the event of societal disintegration, and not hastening or commencing such an apocalyptic event…

     There are far less of these folks that the looney left. And, while out there, and with all due respect to any of your acquaintances, they couldn’t hope to tangle with actual armed forces units; who would, make no mistake, be called in to deal with any rogue militias or seccesion minded paramilitary types.

     We all know these folks are out there, and it’s up to the rest of us to keep them in check; by social methods, discussions like you’ve related, or if necessary by bringing in law enforcement types.

     Thanks for your candor, and your commentary
     My Regards

     Like or Dislike: 0  0

     ( REPLY )
4. 

   jefferson101
   April 30th, 2011 - 22:41

   Trust me, Sir. There are, in some circles, serious discussions going on regarding exactly what measures civilian “self-defense” groups may take, in the absence of the Rule of Law.

   A lot, of course, depends on how long the Rule of Law is going to be absent for. For the sake of argument, assume that you live in far Southwestern Texas or Arizona, in a place where the .Gov has withdrawn, and are pretty much on your own. What are your obligations to “the Law”? Are you allowed to defend yourself? Preemptively? Can you get some of your friends with guns to come and help?

   Suppose that the same thing happens in your State/County/Municipality/Neighborhood, or wherever……

   Be it noted, I’m not a Militia type. I have no time for those nitwits, because they aren’t doing a flipping thing that’s constructive. But it could be noted that if one was being proactive, one should consider forming a local Disaster Team.

   You know where the heavy equipment is located. You know who has which skills, if needed. Medical? Yeah, we know who does that. Chainsaws, Winches, and whatnot? Got that, too. Graders, Dozers, Backhoes, ect? We got that, too.

   Along with all of that, if you know who can hit the broad side of a barn and has the means to do it, it’s all good. But no flipping playing cowboy out in the woods. That’s right out.

   And one consensus that we have reached is that it is very wise not to take any prisoners. You could wind up being charged with kidnapping when and if the Rule of Law comes back. If they run away, you let them. If not?

   That’s when you want to know who can shoot straight.

   But you have to deal with all the other stuff, too. Keep the priorities in order.

   Like or Dislike: 0  0

   ( REPLY )
5. 

   Bob Reed
   April 30th, 2011 - 23:13

   What are your obligations to “the Law”? Are you allowed to defend yourself?

   Of course; you are always allowed to defend yourself-individually or with a group of citizen allies…

   Preemptively? Can you get some of your friends with guns to come and help?

   That’s a good question. There’s no question that the best defense is a good offense-so to speak. But it really depends on the situation. Is there a troop of “raiders”/gangs terrorizing the area? And do you and your pals know where they are? Do you have a reasonable tactical plan to assault their lair? Will you be expending your entire reserve to do so, such that if you fail your families will be completely vunerable? These are important strategic considerations. And if the answer to either of the last 2 questions is “no”, then perhaps it’s best to concentrate on reconnaisance, to keep track of their movements, and defense/counter-attack…

   But, that’s all a hypothetical…

   You are indeed correct in at least considering hypotheticals if you think that you may be in an area where it’s warranted. And as you say, within your circle of acquaintances, you should be aware of where the people and materials are that may need to be brought together in case of an extreme emergency.

   But really, the rules of the land should be enforced, whether as usual by law enforcement, or in extremis by a citizen’s brigade. We need to remain a nation of laws, not men, because that’s the secrect to American exceptionalism and an essential element of our national character.

   You might consider contacting Dan and writing a guest essay on this subject, if you were so inclined.

   As always, your humble scribe…

   Like or Dislike: 0  0

   ( REPLY )
6. 

   guinsPen
   April 30th, 2011 - 23:48

   Che Obama

   Obamuni$m Work$

   Ben Bernanke’s picture is deftly inserted onto communist propaganda posters

   Hank Paulson’s [garbled] as Nikita Kruschev

   Also, speaking of May day and communism

   [Harry Alford] unloads on Obama, calling him and his people “Marxists”

   …I’m almost hesitant to go back to the topic. But I will.

   Drop me a line when you get there.

   Like or Dislike: 0  0

   ( REPLY )
   • 

     Bob Reed
     May 1st, 2011 - 00:15

     Well played again; indeed, we’ve managed to wander far afield…

     Like or Dislike: 0  0

     ( REPLY )

Leave a comment Cancel reply