KUHNER: Will Obama steal the 2012 election? "When democracy turns to tyranny, the armed citizen still gets to vote."
"Weapons free" -- a statement by a commander to a subordinate unit that it is free to use its weapons if attacked by an enemy.
You know, I was having a conversation about this subject with a friend the other day and up pops this op-ed piece in the Washington Times.
Mr. Holder says his department’s aim is to “expand the franchise.” This begs the question: Expand it for whom? Jim Crow is long dead; not one single eligible voter has been turned away because of an ID requirement. In other words, minorities are not being disenfranchised. What Mr. Holder really means is to expand the vote to groups that will help ensure a Democratic victory in 2012 - ACORN and its nefarious allies.
Stealing an election is not beyond this administration. After all, it’s the Chicago Way.
Indeed, my friend made this argument using almost exactly these words. I smiled, and said, "I don't suppose we could get that lucky."
"Huh?!?" he reacted. "LUCKY?"
Sure, I told him. Any election of Obama presupposes that he would avoid responsibility for the truth about the Gunwalker Conspiracy, that the political remedies had failed utterly. For Obama to steal the election -- in the era of the Internet -- would be the final, self-administered coup de grace to his, and the two-party predatory system's, legitimacy.
"We couldn't ask for a better declaration of war on the American people than that," I told him. "After that, we're 'weapons free' to defend ourselves against any assault, for the regime will be plainly illegitimate and will lack the standing to enforce ANY of its diktats."
He looked troubled -- as troubled as I felt even though the logic of such a situation took me to that conclusion.
He shook his head, and said, "Yeah, well, 'when democracy turns to tyranny, the armed citizen still gets to vote,' right?"
Weapons Free - may engage any target not identified as friendly
Weapons Tight - may only engage targets positively identified as enemy
Weapons Hold - may only engage if fired upon, and fire is required for defense from attack
Voters do not elect the President. The electoral college does. That is where we have to watch for corruption.
The passage of the NDAA declaring the entire US a battlefield and American citizens having no right to due process destroyed the government's legitimacy by eviscerating what was left of constitutional protections.
Not that the SCOTUS would use the founding documents or the principles of Natural Law upon which they were constructed to summarily overturn it. (sarcasm off)
We are, in fact, according to your own words, "weapons free" now, because the moment the first American is picked up, or taken into custody or 'disappeared' by any LEO or military department (including special ops) with no statement of charges to any surviving witnesses or family members, it's game on, right?
Happy New Year....
I have yet to hear any of the phoney-baloney Republican candidates say a word about Fast & Furious, or about repealing Obamacare, or... pretty much anything.
Perry a few weeks back had to refer to crib notes on which Departments URGENTLY and DESPERATELY should be shut down.... Really?
Obama will win next year because at a time when he has already proven himself to be worse than Carter (did you think you would ever see such?) The Republicans are determined to run Dole McCain again.
Obama won't need vote fraud, the Republicans have already decided not to run anybody against him.
Question: How would we KNOW he 'stole' the election?
Given the un-auditable nature of all the new "electronic voting machines" -- HOW WOULD WE KNOW?!
I have since the beginning been advocating a simple solution: add an inexpensive receipt printer to each machine. The "white copy" gets torn off and handed to the voter so they can check their votes. The yellow/pink copy gets rolled up inside the machine and can later be used for a recount/audit/spot-check, etc.
Think about this: If (for example) 10% of all voting machines had their "tape" compared to the electronic total, the odds are very good that any chicanery would be spotted.
In the event of an anomaly, then ALL machines would have to be checked, but the paper-tape could be considered 100% reliable as each voter would have checked their vote via the "top" copy...
This should cost less than $100 per machine for the printers, and only a few pennies per election for the paper tapes!
wv: "demit" -- we DEFINITELY need to "de-mitt" the R's... We oughta de-NEWT it too, while we're at it!
The declaration of war against America and Americans was declared when the PATRIOT Act passed and was signed. The NDAA only reinforced that.
Fort Sumter has come and gone folks.
And vote we shall.
Obama 2012 Plan - Have as Little Dealings with Congress as Possible
Like the democrats do, we will need to vote early and vote often. But we won't leave any hanging chads...
Obama signed NDAA this afternoon, after stating before its passage that he would veto it. We have no friends in Washington. I expect that things will begin to get interesting very soon, perhaps in the spring. Pray that we are wrong, prepare like we are right.
Guns Hot= shooting your way into and out of an LZ!
I was just reviewing some of the reasons the FBI/Homies have labeled me a potential terrorist: paying for items in cash, own a flashlight, purchased MRE's, demand privacy, quote the bible and constitution, own a gun, etc. This insanity has the late Marcus Wolfe written all over it. My personal opinion is we won't make it to November. The long train of abuses will continue until someone "pops a red smoke" and we all go guns hot!
Zero signs defense bill, with "reservations"
Ah the hidden legislation signed amidst the NYE frolic into the dead of the night; another piece of the machine assembled, planned long ago, for a future endeavor weighted by the oiled chains of tyranny.
Alas, there's nothing to see here folks, since Zero did a signing statement(!) decrying* what is in the bill (yet signs it anyway) and saying indefinite detentions of U.S. citizens without trial "won't be authorized" and you can trust him -- oh really, you can. C'mon, has he ever lied to you?
* decrying here, yet Lindsay Graham admitted Zero administration behind detaining American citizens indefinitely:
from the congressional record debate, http://www.lawfareblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Detainee-Debate-SASC-floor-Nov-17-and-Nov-18-20111.pdf (NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012 -- Senate - November 17, 2011), comments were from Sen. Linsay Graham regarding the Bill
"..But why did we take out the language Senator Levin wanted me to put in about an American citizen could not be held indefinitely if caught in the homeland? The administration asked us to do that. Why did they ask us to do that? It makes perfect sense. If American citizens have joined the enemy and we captured them at home, we want to make sure we know what they are up to, and we do not want to be required, under our law, to turn them over to a criminal court, where you have to provide them a lawyer at an arbitrary point in time. So the administration was probably right to take this out.(page 45) "
This video clip needs to be run over and over again prior to next November's vote and pounded home with a lot of commentary to inform the illiterate voters what's going on. Got to vote those ShitBirds OUT OF OFFICE. But that is only my humble opinion.
"Voters do not elect the President. The electoral college does. That is where we have to watch for corruption. "
Not quite. Accountability and knowledge is the issue and that resides with the media. They are making these things possible because they "manage" the "news and information" the average person receives. This is otherwise known as propaganda and is in fact treason due to the underlying intent to seize power from the people it was left to.
That leaves us in a Weapons tight condition, in a target rich environment, with absolutely everybody against us, most especially the US government. As far as they are concerned the constitution and bill of rights are dead, except as they choose to define it.
This doesn't end peacefully folks unless you surrender. Those are your choices, all of it payed for by you and your children.
Obama may well steal the election, but it won't be anything that can't be papered over by the Ministry of Propaganda. The last thing the ruling class wants to lose is legitimacy, and no better way to do it exists, than turning elections into obvious shams (they are already shams, but just not obvious ones).
Have all of you criticizing NDAA actually read the bill? I did and it doesn't seem to say what everyone is saying it says.
To Warren Crocker Herrick:
You have to understand government-speak to know what this law says. I won't quote chapter and verse, but it effectively says that the indefinite detention of an American citizen declared by the Executive Branch to be a "terrorist" is "not required."
That "not required" bit is key, mainly because of what it DOESN'T say: it DOESN'T say "not permitted." Thus, it IS permitted - and rest assured, if something is not explicitly forbidden to the goon squads and their bosses, they WILL do it. Hell, they've done many things even though they weren't permitted, so how much more likely that something NOT FORBIDDEN will be done if it is to their advantage?
Post a Comment