All Three Branches of Government Plan to Dismantle the Second Amendment

By Al Benson Jr.

Infowars.com put up an article on July 29th that I had not yet seen anywhere else. Upon checking it out I did find it on several other Internet sites, but you can be sure the average American gun owner will miss it because it will probably not show up anywhere in your morning or evening “news” paper.

According to the so-called “most conservative” member of the Supreme Court (I am wondering if there are any real conservatives in that body) Antonin Scalia, “the Second Amendment allows government to regulate firearms.” You read that right. That’s the sum of what he said. According to the Infowars article Scalia claimed “…there are legal precedents from the days of the Founding Fathers that outlaw “frightening weapons” that must be recognized.” Interestingly enough, almost no one mentioned or described what these “frightening” weapons might have been. I did find a site or two that mentioned a certain kind of axe. Interesting, but an axe hardly qualifies as a firearm.

Couching his comments in no doubt purposeful vagueness, during the time of the founders there were “some limitations on the nature of arms that could be borne.”

The article closes out with “Scalia’s remarks arrive as the government gears up an intense propaganda campaign to reimpose the assault weapons ban that expired in 2004.”

So, we can see why Scalia has put forth his comments about the limitations of the Second Amendment at this time. As “conservative’ as he is supposed to be, he is willing to help the Marxist Obama regime impose more gun control on American citizens. With “conservatives” like Scalia one wonders what we would do with raving liberals! As conservative as he may have been in the past, on this issue he is siding with the Marxists. They want gun control. So did Hitler.

I have read the Second Amendment and I fail to see Mr. Scalia’s “limitations” as to what kind of weapons could be possessed by Americans. What I am afraid of, especially after the ruling on Obamacare, is that this Supreme Court is now signaling that it is willing to compromise with the current Marxist agenda on the rights of American citizens.

I have no doubt that Mr. Scalia can, at some point in the future, deliver a report, couched in enough legalize that it will appear to tell us the Founders had in mind a form of gun control that limited citizens strictly to the ownership of squirrel rifles for Saturday morning plinking. That’s not what I ever got out of the Amendment but I am sure when Scalia presents his “revision” that’s what it will come out sounding like.

What we have at this point is an unprecedented assault on the Second Amendment by all three branches of government. It must be critical for those people to get the Second Amendment so watered down in the next few months that all branches of government are now coordinating their attacks on it. Once the Second Amendment is so ineffectual it will no longer guarantee our rights to gun ownership, what will those people do? Licensing? Confiscation? At least that, but then what? The FEMA “re-education” camps for some as an object lesson to the rest to stay in line or else?

I have said this before and will say it again—once your Second Amendment rights are gone you will have no possible way to protect your First Amendment rights or your Tenth Amendment rights or any of the rest. Think about that.

If the Second Amendment goes whatever rights you still have left will be gutted. I would advise as many people as possible to join groups like the Gun Owners of America, 8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, Virginia 22151 and to seek direction as to how we deal with this problem.

Liberal “Love” (It’s Really Hate)

By Al Benson Jr.

Adam Zamoyski wrote a book in 1999 called Holy Madness in which he dealt with the revolutionary mindset in the last part of the 18th century. The roots of this revolutionary mindset are not often discussed, and for good reason. Often those who glorify revolutionaries really don’t want you to know where they are coming from, but Zamoyski has told us quite plainly—if we have eyes to see.

He particularly deals with the French Revolution, which has scarred France even to this day as our War of Northern Aggression has scarred us. Both revolutions had something in common—the destruction of Christian culture.

The revolutionaries were opposed to Christianity and the teachings of Scripture. Zamoyski noted that: “The element of Christian teaching that aroused the particular ire of the eighteenth-century clerisy was the doctrine of original sin—that all men are born with the taint of Adam and need to redeem themselves..What man needed, in their view, was not salvation but education, which would liberate him from all the superstitions born of ignorance. They heaped ridicule on the Christian belief in an afterlife and attacked the concept of abnegation and sacrifice leading to sanctity…and stridently condemned ‘fanaticism’ by which they meant faith.” In their “education rather than saving faith” mindset they were rather like the Unitarians in this country that helped to found the modern public school system in the 1830s. They rejected the truth of Christ’s salvation, did not look to God’s Kingdom, but rather to the state for man’s hope.

The mindset of the 18th century revolutionaries has evolved in recent years into what we today refer to as liberalism, socialism and communism. There is not all that much difference between these three except in degree. Many hard-core liberals will eventually embrace some form of communism and they will refer to it as “compassion.” Does this fool a lot of people? Of course it does and that is the intention.

Many liberals, socialists, and communists in our day refer to themselves as loving, compassionate, wanting to spread the concepts of “diversity,” tolerance, and multiculturalism. They portray themselves as embracing all these supposedly noble traits.

However, even a superficial look will reveal that these people are anything but what they claim to be.

Chick-fil-A is a fast food franchise with hundreds of restaurants across the country. You can tell from the name that they specialize in chicken. Recently, the head of the company, Dan Cathy, made a statement to the effect that he believed in the biblical definition of marriage being between one man and one woman and that this country risked God’s judgment if we continued to promote the concept of “gay” marriage (sodomite and lesbian marriage).

From the reaction of the “news” media you would have thought that Mr. Cathy had spearheaded a drive to round up all the sodomites in this country and ship them to  Africa the day after tomorrow the same way Abraham Lincoln wanted to do to the slaves once they had been freed.  All he did was to make one statement that was consistent with biblical truth. However, any statement consistent with biblical truth enrages the liberal/socialist/communist mindset. When biblical truth is put forth these people display the full extent of their liberal “love” by trying to subvert it and to kill the messenger—any way they can. Biblical truth makes these folks mad. They don’t want to hear it and they don’t want anyone else to hear it.

Already the mayors of both Boston and Chicago have stated that no Chick-fil-A franchises will ever be given in their cities. I don’t know much about the current mayor in Boston, but the mayor of Chicago is Rahm Emmanuel, Comrade Obama’s old buddy. Remember him? These people get on their anti-Christ high horses and prattle to the world about “tolerance.” Doesn’t seem like they have much of it for someone with an opposing viewpoint does it?

One thing you will learn about the political leftists as you go along is that the only people that are to be tolerated are those who share their left-wing viewpoints. That’s the only place tolerance is allowed. Anyone daring to express an anti-leftist opinion, and especially an opinion based on the truth of Scripture has to be silenced—and if you can manage to put him out of business while shutting him up, so much the better. If you do enough of that there won’t be that many people left around that will question your “love and compassion.” You will have silenced them all and you can now spread your leftist drivel among those who did not have the good sense to question what you say and do.

So, remember this when you hear some liberal/socialist/communist in the future bragging about how they are compassionate in their concern for “the masses.” Their compassion extends only to their own but their vitriol extends to all those daring to disagree with their “enlightened” opinions. These people hate Jesus Christ and the Bible and will consciously do whatever they think they can to undermine both the truth and grace of God.

In their intolerance against Mr. Cathy for daring to stand up for Scriptural truth they have revealed what they really are—intolerant leftist bigots. It may not help for Christians to rant at these people because it is doubtful they will listen to the truth, but maybe we should all make a bigger effort to eat more chicken.

United Nations Arms Trade Treaty Stalled But Not Dead Yet

By Al Benson Jr.

Well, the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty, you know, the one they told us would not affect our Second Amendment rights, appears to have been stalled at least temporarily. Not to worry though, the UN and our own Marxist regime will be back. So don’t think you have won a war when all you have won is a skirmish.

However, lots of folks must have contacted their Senators, because, according to http://www.foxnews.com it has been reported that a bipartisan group of 51 U.S. senators “…on Thursday had threatened to oppose the global treaty regulating international weapons trade if it falls short of protecting the constitutional right to bear arms. In a letter to President Obama and Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, the senators expressed serious concerns with the draft treaty that has been circulated at the United Nations, saying that it signals an expansion of gun control that would be unacceptable.” They noted specifically a 2008 Supreme Court decision that stuck down a ban on handguns in the District of Columbia, which ruled that private citizens have a constitutional right to possess guns for self-defense as well as for other purposes. And the court also ruled, separately, that treaty obligations “may not infringe on individual constitutional protections and rights within U.S. borders.”

As for the Senators, this is, after all, an election year and if they antagonize their gun-owning constituency many of them will be in big trouble, so they have to try to placate us, at least for now, until they get back into office. Then all bets are off, especially if Comrade Obama gets a second term (notice I didn’t say “wins” a second term).

In an article by Doug Book on http://www.westernjournalism.com Mr. Book noted: “For decades, apostles of one-world government have endeavored to convince the American people that treaties, rather than the Constitution, embody the supreme law of the land. In 1952, Secretary of State and Council on Foreign Relations member John Foster Dulles told the American Bar Association that ‘Treaty law can override the Constitution…Treaties, for example…can cut across the rights given the people by the constitutional Bill of Rights.”

Back in a saner day the Supreme Court ruled against that new world order drivel. Mr. Book observes: “In the landmark case Reid vs. Covert, the Court ruled…’no agreement with a foreign nation can confer power on Congress, or any other branch of Government, which is free from the restraints of the Constitution.’ In short, as ‘(the Supreme) Court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty’ the Constitution remains the supreme law of the land, and treaties may neither supplant nor amend it.” That’s pretty straightforward.

Will Comrade Obama try to ignore that or pretend it is not there? Of course he will. Marxist truth demands that he do such, and his one-world government handlers and puppetmasters also demand it. Never forget, these people want your guns. They will do or say whatever they have to in order to get them. Marxist “truth” demands that they lie to you about what they are doing. For them the lie is the truth.

Tonight there was an article in our local Evening Fishwrapper stating that the current Marxist administration had no further interest in gun control at this time. I talked briefly with a man that read it and believed it. I explained briefly to him that what this article means is that the current administration will aggressively pursue any gun control or confiscation measure that they can at any time. They may not do it openly, but they will do it. Bet the farm on it! This administration is committed to trashing your Second Amendment rights, no matter what they or their toadies in the “news” media say.

Mr. Book ends his article with a very cogent observation. He says “Though Congress has the authority to nullify a treaty legislatively and federal courts have the power to overturn any unconstitutional terms, the American public has learned that neither of these institutions can be trusted with the defense of the Constitution or the rights it secures. Should Barack Obama win re-election it will be up to the people to defend their 2nd Amendment rights. And that could make for a very messy affair.” In other words, no matter what, it is up to us to protect our Second Amendment rights and that will require continued vigilance. If, by some fluke, Obama should lose, don’t make the mistake of thinking that because you have a Republican in the White House you can go back to sleep. Romney comes from Massachusetts, one of the most heavily regulated states in the country as to gun rights, so that should tell you something.

A total Marxist agenda cannot be implemented on this country until they have all the guns. No matter how “reasonable” they try to sound, remember that one salient fact. You can’t resist if you are not armed.

Planning to dismantle the Second Amendment

by Al Benson Jr.

July 27, 2012 is the day that St. Hitlery plans to sign the Arms Trade Agreement with the United Nations.Gullible gun owners have been told that this agreement will not effect their right to own firearms. If you believe that I have a bridge in Tucson, Arizona I will sell you really cheap–and it’s made out of solid gold bricks–a real bargain for only $1500. I bought it from the Easter Bunny at bargain basement rates, which is why I can give you such a great price on it!

The current Marxist administration has been trying to undermine the Second Amendment ever since it took office in one way or another. It is the most active anti-gun administration I can remember. Just today there was an article in the papers about Obama trying to convince Americans that no one really  needs an AK47 for hunting purposes. He was, of course, referring to the tragic Colorado situation. What the “news” media has not generally mentioned is that the area the shootings took place in was a gun free zone. That law on a piece of paper somewhere does not seem to have prevented the carnage does it?

Unfortunately, most gun owners do not grasp the real intent of the Second Amendment. They have been taught even by various “pro-gun” groups that it is there so they can hunt. It’s great to have the Second Amendment so old Uncle Joe can go squirrel hunting on Saturday morning and it protects his rights as a sportsman, right? Actually there is a little more involved than that.

You could rightly say that you will not be able to protect the rest of your rights as enumerated in the Bill of Rights if you lose your Second Amendment rights. It is sort of a guarantor of the rest.

What your public school “history” books have not spoken of for generations is that the real intent of the Second Amendment is to allow ordinary cit8zens (the militia) to protect themselves and their families from the designs of a tyrannical government. This is its sole intent. Hunting rights have nothing to do with it. The Second Amendment is a protection against tyranny from those who run our government, and nowadays who can deny that we need this protection now more than ever? That is exactly why the government seeks to restrict our gun rights. Oh, they don’t call it restriction but that’s what it is.

They may not try to take the guns immediately, but once some sort of registration is enacted it won’t be too long before the tentacles of confiscation begin to reach out.

Supposedly the Senate will have to ratify this monstrosity because it is a treaty. All concerned gun owners, and those that are not gun owners but want to see the Second Amendment protected, should contact their senators very shortly and let them know you want them to vote NOT to ratify this treaty!

Should the Senate, in an election year, vote against ratification I imagine Comrade Obama will sign it into law anyway. He and his handlers are closer to disarming the American populace now than they ever were before and they can just taste it!

Just remember that Obama’s version of Marxist truth tells him we would all be much better off without our firearms so the government can “protect” us,  with the same kind of protection you get in prison.

Call your senators and let them know in no uncertain terms what you expect them to do. If Obama plans to disarm us let’s don’t make it easy for him by sitting it out and let’s make our senators sweat a little should they decide to sell us out!

It’s Not Hypocrisy, It’s Marxism

By Al Benson Jr.

Many have accused Barack Obama of being a hypocrite because he badgers Mitt Romney to release more and more of his tax records while he refuses to release hardly any records pertaining to himself. It’s easy to look at this situation and consider him a hypocrite. However he is not a hypocrite, he is a Marxist ideologue, and for a Marxist, whatever he does or says that advances the Marxist agenda is “truth.”

Back in 1960, Dr. Fred Schwarz, founder of the Christian Anti-Communist Crusade, wrote an informative little book called You Can Trust the Communists (to be Communists). With the so-called “end” of the Cold War many would think such a book would be irrelevant. Actually, it ought to be reprinted and given to high school students across the land to read, but I’m not holding my breath waiting for that to happen. The Marxist’s war against America and its once Christian culture did not ever end, anymore than did the War of Northern Aggression against the South end. All that happened in both cases was a shift of tactics—and the Marxist mentalities that seek to destroy America had many European ancestors fighting for the North against the South. In the Northern war against the old Confederacy when the shooting was over the next tactic became “reconstruction” and that tactic endures until this day in various forms. The fact that this country has a major problem with Marxism and cultural Marxism today is due in large measure to what happened after 1865.

Washington, D.C. has ever had a problem with those in this country that are opposed to Marxism. What they did to Joe McCarthy was a small sample of what they will try to do to anyone who dares to oppose and expose them.

At any rate, Dr. Schwarz’s excellent book explains much of the Marxist mentality and we would do well to absorb some of that knowledge for it is just as important in our day as it was sixty years ago.

Dr. Schwarz wrote: “The Communists invariably tell the ‘truth,’ but it is the Marxist-Leninist ‘truth.’ Those who believe the Communists will lie in the interests of Communism are mistaken. In fact, it is not possible for a Communist to lie in the interests of Communism. By definition, if a statement is in the interests of Communism, it is the truth.”

Also observed by Dr. Schwarz was this: “The Communists are not hypocrites. They suffer from paranoic delusions of an intense sincerity. They are so enmeshed in the delusions of Marxism-Leninism that they are beyond the scope of rational argument and conviction. All observed phenomena are interpreted within the framework of their preconceived conclusions. If they were hypocrites it would be much easier to deal with them.”

This is one reason the Marxists continue to prattle on and on about “peace” although their definition of it is not our definition. Their definition of “peace” is “absence of resistance to Marxism” and they really believe there will be no lasting peace until all that resistance is done away with. They really want “peace” and their way of obtaining it is to put their boot heel on our necks, militarily and politically.

This is one reason Obama is so radically committed to doing away with the Second Amendment. There can be no “peace” in this country until our ability to resist Marxism is totally done away with and the best way to bring about such a “peace” is to get all the guns away from those who might resist Marxist “peace.” So Obama will do whatever he has to do, legally, illegally, or by whatever means he has to use to usher in the “peace” of a Marxist America.

By the same token, this is why we need his Marxist “health care” program. Unless we have totally Marxist health care we will never, in the Marxist mind, have the health care we need. We need a health care system totally controlled by the dictatorship of the proletariat (government). The idea of Americans being responsible for their own health care programs just sends the Marxists up the wall.

When Obama first got into office and started appointing people to various posts some were aghast because he appointed all leftists to any position he needed someone in. The comment usually was “How could he appoint that Communist to such a sensitive post?” A Marxist ideologue has no problem appointing a Communist to a super-sensitive post. As far as he is concerned no one but a Communist or radical socialist would be qualified. It’s impossible for him to think outside that box. Expecting him to think in a non-Marxist mode would be akin to expecting an Eskimo to think like an African Bushman.

I watched his tenure in office as even the conservative press first referred to him a a radical, then later on as a socialist, and as his agenda grew more obviously Marxist they finally got around to using the infamous M word. Those of us who bothered to read The Obama File on the Intenet back in 2008 knew what he was before he was elected. But nobody wanted to hear that. Calling a spade a spade was way too negative for most folks, even Christians, so they kept their heads buried in the sand and hoped all the unpleasantness would just vanish and all would be sweetness and light. It hasn’t quite worked out that way has it?

Now we have people moaning “How did it all come to this?” It all came to this because most people, Christians included, just didn’t give a hoot. They just ignored all the obvious signs—stuff too ugly to deal with, so pretend it isn’t there.

Perhaps God, in His wisdom, has decided that this culture needs to be judged and so He has given us the Marxists that we refused to deal with as part of that judgment. Christians at one point had the option of opposing Marxism and they mostly did not want to be bothered. Evangelicals hated the John Birch society but they loved the liberal leftists to death—probably their own death but you couldn’t tell them that. I’d be willing to bet you still can’t.

In a couple days St. Hitlery will sign an agreement with the United Nations that will begin the dismantling of the Second Amendment. After that there is not much left except the beginning of Marxist “peace” in Amerika.

The Real Birth Certificate Farce

By Al Benson Jr.

Never did I consider myself a dyed-in-the-wool “birther” regarding the birth certificate supposedly presented to the public by our current Marxist-in-Chief in the Red House, but I must admit I would have liked to have seen a genuine birth certificate from him. We have so little information about him in other areas, with virtually no information about him available anywhere. It’s all sealed. It would seem that Marxist “transparency” rules in Washington. For this administration that means handing the public a blank sheet of paper with nothing on either side—but if you hold it up to the light you can see through it.

A “genuine” birth certificate was supposedly presented to the public back in April of 2011 and that was supposed to silence the queries of the “great unwashed.” Within a day computer experts demonstrated how this document had been created and many of the problems with it. These problems remain today, having never been resolved.

On July 19th an article by Jeffrey Kuhner appeared in The Washington Times dealing with the investigation as to the authenticity of Obama’s birth certificate conducted by Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Arizona and the team of specialists he brought in to check the authenticity of the birth certificate . The conclusion of their investigation is that the birth certificate presented to the public is a forgery. They do not attempt to lay blame for the forgery but they do believe it is forged.

According to Kuhner’s article: “His (the Sheriff’s) chief investigator, Mike Zullo, says that the document is full of errors and omissions. In particular, Mr. Zullo claims that the numeric sections are not filled out that otherwise would have been in birth certificates from Hawaii during that time. But other sections, such as those dealing with Mr. Obama’s race and his father’s work and field of study, are completed. Hence Sheriff Arpaio’s investigative posse definitely believes the birth certificate is not authentic, but was manufactured to provide Mr. Obama with a veneer of constitutional legitimacy.”

Kuhner then observes: “ Sheriff Arpaio’s findings threaten to plunge America into an unprecedented crisis. For if—and again, I emphasize if—he is correct, then Mr. Obama has perpetrated the most elaborate hoax in U.S. history. A fraudulent birth certificate would mean that Mr. Obama is ineligible to serve as commander-in-chief. His presidency would therefore be legally and constitutionally illegitimate.” What that would mean is that everything he has done while in office, Obamacare, the Stimulus packages, all the executive orders and all the political appointments would all be null and void. This would make Watergate look like a Sunday school picnic!

Kuhner notes that “the ruling elites—the establishment media, the Hollywood left, the federal bureaucracy, the myriad regulatory agencies, the public sector unions, big banks and the financial sector—have refused to seriously examine Mr. Obama’s background. In fact they have repeatedly propped him up.” Somewhere along the line some of these people know the real story, and part of their agenda is to try to make those digging up this information look stupid or seem like “conspiracy nuts.” They have a vested interest in making sure this information is suppressed.

I watched the video interview the Sheriff and Mr. Zullo gave regarding the “genuine’ birth certificate. They were very thorough in the evidence they presented and took care to make sure it was all presented in the proper context. After the interview was over the “news” media got to ask their questions. They couldn’t have cared less about the evidence presented. They were not there to gather news—they were there to try to put the right spin on it. Most of their questions were about things having nothing to do with the “genuine” birth certificate. They hardly wanted to discuss that. It didn’t fit their agenda.

Not only is the origin of the “genuine” birth certificate in doubt in this country, but in Europe as well. On 6/27/12 a report on http://www.wnd.com  noted that: “…a former aide to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher warns his hereditary peers in the U.K. the Obama presidency is in danger of failing because of evidence he considers conclusive that Obama’s birth certificate is a forgery. ‘Mr. Obama’s legitimacy is now in doubt’ Lord Christopher Monckton concludes” in a 20-page report published by World Net Daily.

World Net Daily also published a report in January of 2011 where they interviewed a former Hawaiian elections clerk, Tim Adams, According to World Net Daily, Mr. Adams “…has now signed an affidavit swearing he was told by his supervisors in Hawaii that no long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate existed for Barack Obama in Hawaii and that neither Queens Medical Center nor Kapi’olani Medical Center in Honolulu had any record of Obama having been born in their medical facilities” So if that’s the case, then where did this “genuine” birth certificate posted on the Internet for the gullible public come from? Some backroom ribbon clerk in Washington that was told to put it together? It’s like everything else about this president—we know nothing! All the information about him is sealed away–all in the name of “transparency and openness.”

The secret about his “genuine” birth certificate has got to be the most poorly kept secret in the country. It’s like everyone knows it but no one will admit to knowing it. They just ignore it. All we have is this “genuine” birth certificate that was never really there.

Watergate got lots of press coverage because some of the useful idiots in the “news” media actually thought Nixon was a conservative and so they honed in for the attack. Obama is a Marxist. He will get a free pass from the media no matter how blatant his falsehoods are they will be treated as revealed “truth” from on high—the “wisdom of the ages.” The possibility that he is something other than what he appears to be will be swept under Washington’s political rug to fester with the rest of the vermin there.

My first thought is that the American public ought to stand up and demand answers from the politbureau in Washington and Congress should look into this, but who is to say we would get any straight answers from them? We probably wouldn’t, but we need to fuss at them anyway. They need to know that we know and that they ain’t fooling anybody.

My second thought is—if this guy is a fraud (we already know he’s a Marxist) then why must preachers and pastors in church every Lord’s Day pray for him that he will govern the country wisely? I can see them praying for his soul, and then they should call on him to repent. Unfortunately, many evangelical pastors today seem to have a particular tolerance for leftist politicians they would hardly display for anyone on the right.

Maybe that’s part of our problem.

As an addendum to this article check out http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/48202  if possible. I did not have that info when I posted this article but think it is worth people looking at if they can.

 

What Determines How People Vote?

By Al Benson Jr.

We have an electorate today in this country that is probably not the most brilliant in our history. When you meet people on the street that can’t tell you what century World War 2 or the War Between the States was fought in then you have an electorate whose grasp of the real issues falls far short of where it should be.

I remember when I was a lot younger and much more ignorant of political issues. John Kennedy was running for president and I lived in a part of the country where Catholicism was quite prevalent. Although I was politically ignorant at that time, I did listen to people talk. Most of the Roman Catholic people I knew were going to vote for Kennedy because he was Catholic—period! They didn’t have a clue where he stood an any issue or what position he had taken on anything—all that mattered was that he was the “right” religion. I don’t intend this to be picking on the Roman Catholics, but folks, that’s a lousy reason to vote for anybody. And at some level lots of folks are guilty of this, not just Catholics.

Some folks vote Democratic because the Democrats “are for the working man.” Maybe their Daddy told them that and maybe 100 years ago he thought it was true. Even if it might remotely have been, it isn’t any longer. Many Democrats today are outright Marxists. They just don’t use that label because it might cost them votes. I once heard a man say “I’d vote for the devil himself if he was on the Republican ticket.” In other words evil personified is okay as long as its Republican—and let’s face it, since the War Between the States there has been lots of evil in the Republican Party—from “Lincoln’s Marxists” on down to today.

The 2008 election was no different. Probably 98% of the black people that voted for Obama did so on the basis of skin color alone and they probably didn’t have a clue where he stood on any issue. What mattered was skin color. What’s worse, the demagogues among them started chanting the line that “You are racist if you don’t vote for Obama.” How many guilt-ridden whites bought into that hogwash? Probably too many, and so they voted on behalf of skin color, probably with no idea of where he was coming from.  Having done that they felt they had cleansed themselves of the “sin” of being white. That “racist” label scare lots of people, and that’s the intention. You’ll have to pardon me, but if not voting for a black Marxist makes me a racist then I plead guilty. On the other hand I wouldn’t vote for a Marxist of any color. One thing that bothered me was all the evangelicals I heard about that voted for Obama. These folks should have been alert and awake enough to do some homework and it appears that they were not.

Of all the people who should be out there checking out potential candidates at any level, the Christians ought to be in the forefront and it seems that mostly, they don’t want to be bothered. Too much trouble checking out all these people and I might find something that disturbs me about some of these candidates, so better to remain ignorant and just vote for who I like in my ignorance. Much more enjoyable to just indulge in my quest for personal holiness and let the rest go to blazes. The idea that the Christians ought to be storming the gates of Hell is the furthest thing from these people’s minds—that’s way too negative when we want a positive world so we just won’t deal with any of that.

So now we approach another election and the situation does not seem to have changed. The electorate was bombarded with two turkeys in 2008 and we have the identical situation this year. The Democrats want everyone to back their Marxist candidate while the Republicans want anyone except Ron Paul. They’d gladly take the devil himself rather than Mr. Paul. Who knows, they may get their wish.

As for Obama, most blacks will continue to vote for him on the basis of skin color. Four years ago they didn’t have a clue as to where he was coming from and even though he has stiffed most of them along with the rest of us, they will vote for him again to give him one more term to finish the job. They still don’t have a clue about his Marxism. Indeed, most of the ones I have talked to don’t know what Marxism is, but Obama is black and that’s all that matters. He could sell them down the river tomorrow and they’d still vote for him again the day after.

I wonder how long it will be before we end up with a one party state and a “dictator for life” because we sold our birthright and voted ourselves into slavery.