Who Will Liberate America? ... J. D. Longstreet

Who Will Liberate America?
America's Soft Fascism
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet
******************************

 
It is thought that the moment of recovery begins for addicts when they hit the so-called "rock bottom" and can sink no further into their chosen depravity.  

I've been thinking about that for a few weeks and it seems to me that if one looked-up "addict" in the dictionary one would find a map of America. 

Our country (America) is truly and absolutely an addict.   That being said, if we are truly serious about recovery and rebuilding our nation -- oughten we to allow our government to take us all the way down to the rock bottom where we can begin anew?

Believe me, I KNOW how difficult it is to get one's mind wrapped around that concept.  I have been wrestling with it for a while now.

But here's the thing:  The government America has now is just NOT SERIOUS about a recovery and the rebuilding of America.  They are more concerned with maintaining the status quo and maintaining their cushy jobs.

If the republicans had any spine, at all, they would simply back off and tell Obama, "OK, it's your babe.  We're going over the cliff and YOU will own all the bad stuff at the bottom."

But there is a problem with that, well, a number of problems, but one in particular, which the GOP cannot avoid.  It is they, the GOP, which will get all the blame for everything that goes wrong -- period.

The republicans have been set up, and rather nicely, too.  No matter how the negotiations go on the fiscal cliff thingy, the republicans will be blamed for anything and everything that turns out bad or goes wrong ... no matter what.  

See, I'm one of those commentators who doesn't believe the GOP leadership, the elite of the party, understands what they are up against. I honestly believe the republican leadership actually believes they are going head-to-head with the Democratic Party. 

Alas, they most certainly ARE NOT pitted against the Democratic Party. 

The Democratic Party as a single entity no longer exists.  It was swallowed up long ago by the labor unions, and they, in turn, were swallowed up by the Socialists, and the Socialist were, in turn, swallowed up by the  Communists.  Plus, they have those Marxist acolytes in the Mainstream Media to man their propaganda machine.

If you took a desk cop out of a Police Precinct House and told him to go downtown and clean up a well known street gang. You would be very close to describing the situation the Republican Party is in as it goes up against a virtual quartet of political evil -- the CUDS Party (Communist/Union/Democrat/Socialist Party)

Some call this group an "alliance."  I call it "a gang."  The elite leadership of the GOP simply has no idea who they are up against and they have no clue as to how to combat them -- none, zero. ZIP!

As a former conservative republican, I can attest that the GOP leadership does not want input from conservatives who seem more able to recognize the CUDS Party for what it is and knows all the wrangling is not a game but a bloodsport and there can be no reaching across the aisle to try doing business with CUDS or the poor fool offering his hand will find it lopped off.  (Not a single new chairman of ANY of the US House committees are conservative.  Not a single one!)

A boyhood friend and I were talking recently.  We were, and remain, like brothers.  We grew up together, went to school together, served in the US military together where we were trained to combat socialism and communism on the battlefield.  We both expressed our shock and dismay that the USA is now ruled by communism. We expressed our fears for the future of our children and our grandchildren in America.

There was (and is) simply no organized resistance to the communist takeover of the US.  None.  Even at this late hour, those who would resist find themselves in a tiny minority unable to even create a political force (a third party) with which to replace the Republican Party as the foil of the CUDS Party.
 
So it is out of sheer frustration that I make the suggestion that we all step back and allow the county to go over that fiscal cliff.  It will be painful, but -- it will wreck Obama's second term and destroy his legacy. If will deliver another even worse recession, with unemployment upwards of ten percent, perhaps even twelve percent, and we will return to a Congress which has tied itself in knots unable to do anything.  In other words -- the return of gridlock. 

Unthinkable situations often require unthinkable action to resolve their inherent problems. 

Think of it as America's "Samson Option."  Much as Samson pushed the pillars out from under the roof of the great banquet hall and brought the roof down on the Philistines,  going over the fiscal cliff would bring the roof down on and crush America's domestic enemies. The term "sabotage" could realistically be applied here.  It would certainly sabotage the plans of Obama and the CUDS Party. (Communist/Union/Democrat/Socialist Party)

Yes, the GOP WOULD be blamed for it.  But the point is -- the republicans are going to be blamed in any case!  So why not?

Drastic action is called for.  What else is there to lose?  We've already lost our country -- and our freedom is being smothered to death beneath the weight of reams and reams of rules and regulations and Presidential Executive Orders. 
Americans live today in a sort of "soft fascism."  Think not?  Well, consider:  "From Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning” Soft Fascism is a religion of the state. It assumes the organic unity of the body politic and longs for a national leader attuned to the will of the people. It is totalitarian in that it views everything as political and holds that any action by the state is justified to achieve the common good. It takes responsibility for all aspects of life, including our health and well-being, and seeks to impose uniformity of thought and action, whether by force or through regulation and social pressure. Everything, including the economy and religion, must be aligned with its objectives. Any rival identity is part of the “problem” and therefore defined as the enemy. I will argue that contemporary American liberalism embodies all of these aspects of fascism.”  SOURCE:  http://airmodal.com/2011/09/03/definition-of-soft-fascism/
 
Today, I have a better understanding of the people of 20th century Europe the day after the Nazis marched in and took over and they realized they were an occupied people with no effective resistance movement and no hope.  They would have remained locked in that hell-on-earth had not the Americans come to liberate them.

Now the question is -- who will liberate the Americans? 

© J. D. Longstreet
********************


VISIT J. D. Longstreet's "INSIGHT on Freedom" Face Book Page!!:   (Just click on the link for more conservative commentary by J. D. Longstreet and other popular conservative writers!)
********************

Hypersmash.com

Ping Blog

Pingates

 

America Went Over the Fiscal Cliff Long Ago ... Alan Caruba

America Went Over the Fiscal Cliff Long Ago

By Alan Caruba

***********************

I doubt that President Obama will compromise with the House Republicans on anything that might be done to avoid the January 2^nd “fiscal cliff” that kicks in with higher taxes for everyone.

Obama has made it clear that increasing the tax rates on “millionaires” is his goal and he made that clear throughout the campaign. The income that would be generated from the increased rates would generate enough money to run the nation for about a week or so at most. In politics perception often trumps reality. And those “millionaires” are mostly middle class folks earning $250,000 or more.

As Chris Cox and Bill Archer, two veterans of the House, chairman of key committees, now in the private sector, wrote in a November 26 Wall Street Journal commentary, “The actual liabilities of the federal government—including Social Security, Medicare, and federal employees’ future retirement benefits—already exceed $86 trillion, or 550% of GDP” (Gross Domestic Product, i.e., the total the U.S. earns from the sale of all goods and services annually).

We are so far passed the fiscal cliff that the U.S. is unlikely to be able to borrow its way out of this huge debt. Cox and Archer said that “Borrowing on this scale could collapse the capacity of global capital markets—and bankrupt not only the programs themselves but the entire federal government.”

“When the accrued expenses of the government’s entitlement programs are counted, it becomes clear that to collect enough tax revenue just to avoid going deeper in debt would require $8 trillion in tax collections annually.”

By adding $6 trillion in debt during his first term, it seems to me that Obama’s goal has been to bring the nation to financial ruin. He added more debt that all the combined presidents before him. He squandered billions on bailouts of General Motors and Chrysler, loans to “green” companies, and increases in programs like food stamps. He cut off new sources of income from the energy sector and, with them, the prospect of jobs that would be generated. At one point he advocated developing algae—pond scum—as a new source of energy.

The total amount of earnings from individuals and corporations is not sufficient to cover the debt and operating expenses of a federal government that has been steadily expanding since early in the last century. Cox and Archer noted that “all individuals filing tax returns in America and earning more than $66,193 per year have an adjusted gross income of $5.1 trillion. In 2006, when corporate taxable income peaked before the recession, all corporations in the U.S. had a total income for tax purposes of $1.6 trillion.”

That’s a total of $6.7 trillion available and we have more than $8 trillion per year in liabilities. The U.S. is borrowing $4 million a day to pay the interest owed on its debt and other liabilities.

The tax system of the U.S. was created in 1913 with the introduction of the income tax and hasn’t seriously been updated since 1986, just over a quarter century ago. As Mitt Romney told a fund-raiser during the campaign, 47% of Americans pay no income tax at all. He caught a lot of flack for telling the truth.

On Election Day, responding to exit polls, 63% of Americans said they were opposed to increasing taxes. Two years earlier when the midterm elections returned power to the Republicans in the House where the Constitution mandates that all spending bills must originate, a compromise resulted in the extension of the Bush tax cuts for two years. Even Obama said it would be a mistake to raise taxes during a bad economy. He doesn’t have to compromise now and he won’t.

I have no doubt that Obama will blame whatever occurs regarding the “fiscal cliff” on the Republicans, but a January 2011 article by Paul Bedard in US News and WorldReport spelled out a plan by the House GOP to eliminate $2.5 trillion in spending over the next ten years. It’s not that Republicans haven’t a plan. It’s that Obama’s plan is to raise everyone’s taxes and keep on spending.

As Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform and an opponent of all tax increases, wrote in mid-November, “Obama’s present demand is that the top two marginal tax rates be increased to 39.6% plus the 3.8% Obamacare tax surcharge for a top rate of 43.4%. The death tax would also jump back to 55%, capital gains tax would jump from 15% to 23.8%, and the tax on dividends would increase from 15% to 39.6%”, more than double its present rate.

“If Obama follows through on his threat,” wrote Norquist, “and refuses to extend the Bush tax cuts, then there would be an automatic $500 billion tax increase beginning on January 1, 2013, that would total $5 trillion over a decade.”

In plain words, Americans who still have jobs, who have invested in the stock market, and who have any savings, will be impoverished within a decade, if not sooner. The middle class is already paying 50% of what they earn in income taxes, payroll taxes, state taxes, property taxes, and taxes on gas, telephone use, and other levies.

Obama has not talked of cutting government spending, relying on the automatic “sequestration” that would begin in January. His Secretary of Defense, Leon Panetta, called the effect on the U.S. military “catastrophic” though the cuts would reduce what Norquist calls “the Obama debt machine” and would in theory strengthen the economy.

I say “in theory”, but federal regulations in 2011 added more than $231 billion in regulatory costs to private businesses and state and local governments, adding up to 133 million hours of paperwork, according to the American Action Forum. Tons more regulations are in the pipeline, particularly from the Environmental Protection Agency. When you add in the 28 taxes hidden in Obamacare, it is clear that there will be precious little money left over for anything than the bare necessities of life.

Americans have been ill-served by their government, composed of those elected to exercise good judgment regarding the economy. It has been going on for a very long time and now the bill is coming due.

America is living in the greatest debt bubble the world has ever seen. I suspect most are completely unaware of it.

America went over the fiscal cliff decades ago and now is in free-fall. Life here and around the world is going to get very ugly.

© Alan Caruba, 2012

*************************

Alan Caruba's commentaries are posted daily at "Warning Signs" and shared on dozens of news and opinion websites. His blog recently passed more than 2 million page views. If you love to read, visit his monthly report on new books at Bookviews. For information on his professional skills, Caruba Editorial Services is the place to go! You can find Alan Caruba on both Facebook and Twitter as well.

Rights – vs. What Ifs and Mights ... Eric Peters

Rights – vs. What Ifs and Mights

By Eric Peters

************

“Rights” – like “freedom” – is one of those terms that means different things to different people. Often, mutually contradictory things. Perhaps the simplest way to identify a right is to ask whether its exercise causes a provable harm to another.

Not “might” harm a theoretical “someone.” (Or – much worse – “I don’t like that” … and therefore you shouldn’t be allowed to do that).

A demonstrable harm  – to an actual person.
If such exists as a result of your actions, then your actions were wrong – because you violated someone’s rights.

Otherwise – if your actions have caused no harm – you have every right to expect to be left free to proceed. And to be left in peace.
Immediately, the objection pops up: Won’t problems arise if people are left free to act as they please? Won’t people abuse the freedom to act – or act stupidly?
Yes – certainly.

Some people will. But that should not become the pretext for abusing the rights of others who have caused no harm.


Group-guilt is bad. Pre-guilt even worse.

Consider: Has taking away everyone’s rights ever prevented those inevitable “some people” from behaving irresponsibly or stupidly? At any time – in any place? This is the question. And the answer – obviously – is: No. Because there will always be irresponsible, stupid  – even evil – people … in any society, under any form of government. A moment’s reflection will confirm the truth of this. Irresponsibility, stupidity – evil, even – cannot be “lawed” out of existence.

But rights can be.

And all-too-often, they are. Not on the basis of actual harm done, either. But on the basis of what if? … and might.

In the absence of speed limits, for example, there will be people who drive beyond their ability to control the car. Some will inevitably wreck. Others – innocents – will be harmed in the process. This is tragic. But erecting speed limits doesn’t prevent – or even significantly reduce – such occurrences. What it does do is take away everyone’s rights before anyone’s rights have actually been violated. It cements the concept of prior restraint into both law and the public consciousness -  such that it becomes acceptable to limit everyone’s freedom because of the possibility that someone might act irresponsibly, or stupidly. In short order everyone finds their freedom of action preemptively fenced in, their lives under the control of others – whose judgment is by no means superior, but who do possess superior force. Force that’s applied in ever-increasing doses in a never-ending quest to get a handle on irresponsibility and stupidity – by assuming everyone is irresponsible and stupid and treating them as such – even when they’re not.

This is how rights – real ones – are put to sleep. On the basis of what if … and someone might.

Meanwhile, crime – actual harm done to actual flesh and blood people – continues on its merry way.  If anything, real crime – with real victims – is enabled because so much in the way of attention and resources is frittered away on non-crimes.

Consider, just for instance, how much police manpower is spent enforcing arbitrary traffic laws. Stalking, stopping and issuing fines to people who haven’t actually harmed anyone. Oh, they might? Well, possibly. But wouldn’t it be more judicious to wait until our hypothetical they actually do harm someone?

As opposed to harming everyone by such things as radar traps and checkpoints?
Which is better: To be free to travel unmolested, but with the knowledge that it’s possible (although not very likely) that you might get hit by a “speeder” or drunk driver? Or to know that you will be ticketed merely for exceeding an arbitrary velocity – or forced to submit to a random stop/interrogation/presentation of your papers because the law has decreed that everyone must be treated as a presumptively drunk driver?

Unfortunately for the cause of liberty in America, a dauntingly large percentage of the population appears to be perfectly willing to live in a society that regards might and what if? as more than sufficient cause to extinguish their rights.

And everyone else’s, too.

The circles grow smaller. Because might and what if? are infinites. Rights – properly understood – finite specifics. They are lines in the sand, beyond which others may not trespass against us. Because we have not trespassed against them. And until we do, we have every right to insist we be left in peace, free to go about our business – exercising our own judgment, to reap the benefits – and accept the consequences. And to resist when this freedom is denied us.

Freedom – respect for human rights – does not mean an end to human suffering. Just less of it. Because irresponsible, stupid – even evil – individuals can only do so much damage. And be held accountable far more easily. Empower the collective to impose itself on millions of individuals – and the potential damage is essentially limitless.

It is the difference between an occasional pile up on the road – and a pile of bodies in a mass grave.

Eric Peters

Facing a Triple Threat: Doha, EPA and Congress ... Paul Driessen

Facing a Triple Threat: Doha, EPA and Congress

Paul Driessen

******************

Climate alarmists are meeting in Doha, Qatar, to hammer out a new international treaty to replace the Kyoto Protocol that expires this year. The US Environmental Protection Agency is poised to unleash its first wave of carbon dioxide regulations. And Congress is teaming up with the White House to legislate taxes on hydrocarbon use and CO2 emissions, on top of pending tax hike on “the rich.”

This serious triple threat to our energy, economy, jobs, living standards, health and welfare is justified by assertions that the actions will stabilize Earth’s climate and prevent a litany of global warming horrors.

Our planet’s climate has never been stable, and never will be. There is no empirical evidence that carbon dioxide drives climate change, or that greenhouse gases have supplanted the complex and interrelated natural forces that have produced big and little ice ages, floods and droughts, stormy and quiescent periods throughout the ages.

Even as atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have risen from 280 parts per million before 1880 to 391 ppm (0.0391%) today, average global temperatures have flat-lined for 16 years;hurricane and tornado frequency and intensity have fallen to new lows; Antarctic sea ice continues to expand, while Arctic ice caps were reduced, not by warming, but by huge storms; and the rate of sea level rise remains steady.

While alarmists insist that Hurricane Sandy was “unprecedented” and proof that “climate change is real,” it is just one of many major storms that have battered New York and eastern Canada over the years.

Moreover, every ton of painful, economy-crippling US carbon dioxide reductions would be offset by 100 tons from India, China and elsewhere, and atmospheric CO2 concentrations would continue to climb.

But these inconvenient truths are irrelevant to climate campaigners, who are using “dangerous manmade climate change” as the best pretext ever devised to control energy use and economies. They simply hypothesize, model and assert that every observed weather and climate phenomenon is due to human CO2 emissions. Warmer or colder, wetter or drier, more ice or less, more storms, fewer storms, occasional big storms – if not now, someday, sooner or later. It’s exactly what climate alarmists predicted.

This is not science. It is political science, rooted in a loathing of hydrocarbons, economic growth and humanity. It’s ideological, religious – the only state-sanctioned, state-supported religion permitted today.

If Eisenhower’s military-industrial complex was bad, what are we to make of today’s political-scientific-university-bureaucratic-military-industrial-media-environmentalist complex? Funded and driven by tens of billions of dollars annually for research grants, renewable energy programs and regulatory regimes, it has far too much at stake to forsake adherence to Mann-made global warming cataclysm hypotheses.

According to Government Accountability Institute president Peter Schweizer, well-connected political cronies take hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars for “green energy” and “global warming prevention” programs, funnel it to soon-to-be-bankrupt companies, keep a few million for themselves, and launder a few hundred thousand back to the politicians who brokered the deals. Obama campaign bundlers, says Schweizer, received more than $21,000 of corporate welfare for each dollar they donated to the Obama reelection campaign. Big Green environmentalist groups also garner countless millions in taxpayer lucre.

The consequences for average workers and families are dire. If even one of these swords of Damocles falls – Doha, EPA or the carbon tax – the effects will be disastrous. If all three are imposed (or all three in conjunction with tax hikes on job and wealth creators), the impacts will be utterly devastating.

Ignoring these facts, extensive other evidence for natural climate change, and the numerous scientists who reject their manmade climate catastrophe claims, advocates of a new Doha climate treaty, EPA “CO2 endangerment” rules, and “carbon taxes” insist these actions are needed to avoid ecological calamities.

They are adamant in contending that carbon taxes will somehow benefit the economy, create jobs and balance out-of-control spending. One is reminded of Will Rogers insightful quip: “Suppose you were an idiot – and suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself.”

Every one of these actions is intended to increase the cost of the hydrocarbon energy that powers our economy. But raising the cost of transportation fuels, electricity, lighting, heating, air conditioning, and thus of food, materials and equipment will severely impact the bottom line for factories, utilities, offices, farms, shops, airlines, shippers, hospitals, schools, churches, charities and government offices.

The poorest families may get rebates for their increased energy costs. These institutions will not. They will be forced to reduce wages and benefits, hire fewer full-time employees, lay people off, outsource operations to countries where energy costs are lower, or even close their doors.

Taxes paid by companies and employees will dwindle. Instead of paying taxes, newly jobless workers will collect unemployment and welfare – from shrinking government coffers. Charities will have much less money, even if deductions for donations remain in the tax code.

Unemployment will bring reduced nutrition, increased stress, and higher rates of heart attacks and strokes, spousal and child abuse, alcohol and drug abuse, suicide and premature death. The social, economic and healthcare costs will further “fundamentally transform” America, as President Obama is determined to do.

Even if Congress legislates carbon taxes, nothing suggests that Lisa Jackson will refrain from imposing EPA’s anti-hydrocarbon CO2 rules on top of them, or that the White House will reject any Doha treaty. There is no hint that the Interior Department will cease using the Endangered Species Act and other laws to shut down oil and gas drilling, while ignoring the ESA and growing slaughter of eagles and whooping cranes by wind turbines – or that the Energy and Defense Departments, EPA and Congress will stop spending more in borrowed funds to subsidize corn ethanol and Navy biofuel schemes.
These anti-hydrocarbon policies also mean the US Treasury will be deprived of hundreds of billions in lease bonuses, royalties, taxes and other revenues that it would realize from the development of our nation’s vast oil, natural gas and coal deposits. Instead, the United States will be forced to pay billions more for imported oil, often from dictatorial, unethical, environmentally reckless countries.

New hydrocarbon energy restrictions and green energy demands will deprive Third World families and communities of abundant, reliable, affordable energy, obstruct human rights progress, and keep entire nations impoverished. They will kill millions more from lung infections (from burning wood and dung), intestinal diseases (from contaminated water), malaria and other diseases of poverty and eco-imperialism.

Those countries will receive far less foreign aid from increasingly cash-strapped Western nations – and little of the Green Climate Fund cash that industrialized nations will supposedly transfer to kleptocratic ruling elites in poor countries, as reparations for supposedly causing climate change.

For every nation, this coerced energy and economic deprivation will make it increasingly difficult to adapt to future climate changes that nature will inevitably bring our way – in an era when mankind ought to have the wealth and technology to adapt far more easily than our ancestors were able to do.

The Climate Change Complex will do everything in its power to avoid discussing these issues, and vilify anyone who brings them up. However, we need to have this debate, and we need to have it now – in Doha, Congress, the courts and our state legislatures – before our fate is sealed for us.

Paul Driessen
******************


VISIT J. D. Longstreet's "INSIGHT on Freedom" Face Book Page!!:   (Just click on the link for more conservative commentary by J. D. Longstreet and other popular conservative writers!)
******************

Hypersmash.com

Ping Blog

Pingates

 

 

Racing Toward Revolution? ... J. D. Longstreet

(First published in November 2009)

Racing Toward Revolution?
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet
*******************************

 
There is a strong undercurrent of anger just beneath the surface of American society these days. It is a "teeth-grinding" anger. It is hot and wrathful while, at the same time, cold and calculating. In short -- it is in a state of "becoming". Becoming what? It is becoming, I am very afraid, a spirit of revolution.

To anyone looking objectively at the USA today, it is clear -- this country cannot survive as she is today. That is the reality.

The population is very nearly equally divided on practically everything. We are constantly at each other's throats. We are fast becoming a bitter, unhappy, people. The famous American optimism is gone.

What happened? Socialism happened.

Socialism is a terminal disease to any country unfortunate enough to contract it. The FDR Administration first exposed America to the disease of socialism. With The Obama Regime America has advanced to stage four, or terminal, condition. In short: America is dying.

The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines socialism as:

1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property . b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state

3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done.

Winston Churchill once said: "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."

Now that America's government has chosen socialism it has separated itself from "The People." It is no longer representative of the wants and desires and, yes, even the needs of those it governs. Many Americans are aware of this widening gulf, which has developed in the past two years, or so, between the American people and their government. It is a gulf they feel cannot be bridged -- ever -- again.

Until the congressional elections of 2006 the American people had a connection, tenuous though it was, to their government. After the election, and the socialist tendencies of the new congress became apparent, many Americans recoiled in horror at what they and their fellow Americans had created. But the dye was cast. The Rubicon had been crossed. America had stepped over the demarcation line that defines where democracy stops and socialism begins.

With the election of Obama, in 2008, America took a giant leap into socialism and, in doing so, in my opinion, sealed her fate. The representative republic of America doomed herself. We are just beginning to feel the effects of the death throws of the greatest nation ever to have graced this globe.

The near collapse of the American economy did not "just happen." I am convinced our near economic collapse was planned and the near crash was executed according to that plan. America had to be broken to prepare the way for the socialism the Obama Regime was bringing into the American government. It worked -- and, as a result, America is infected and rotting at her core and death is imminent.

What of the Revolution? It will not be likened to the revolution, which bought us our freedom. THIS revolution will be different for Americans.

Americans, of the conservative persuasion, have begun to coalesce around an idea that one of two things must happen. America must be healed by a complete take-over of the dying government by conservatives or, Americans must agree to split the states into two separate countries -- one conservative and the other socialist. To remain as a single country means the death of all 50 states. That is not acceptable. Conservatives agree that you amputate that portion of the body with national gangrene... socialism... in order to save that portion of the country that is healthy.

It is my contention that the break-up of America will follow, to some degree, the break-up of the 1860's. The southern tier of states will, for the most part, remain as a single entity. -- with the notable exception of Louisiana. Louisiana has become so used to being a ward of the federal government they are unable to fend for themselves. Should the southern states accept her into their "country" she will, most likely, be broken up and the several parts given to the states that now surround her. No single state can afford to be the solitary "care-giver" for Louisiana. Some states, such as Texas, may decide to become a Republic, or in Texas' case simply revert back to being a republic, a country unto herself.

The states on the left coast and the states on the northeastern coast will, of course, be the die-hard socialist states and will have to figure out their own survival. As their money dries up, the northeastern states may well apply to Canada for acceptance into the Canada. The states on the western coast will probably do the same, but, I expect they will apply to China to sponsor them as client states.

What about all those states in the middle of the former USA. My guess would be lots of small republics will be formed through-out what was the heartland.

Of course, I am guessing about the alignment of states after the collapse of America. But think for just a moment. A goodly number of conservative writers are speculating about the same thing. SOMETHING is about to happen. To think that America can survive in her current state of apathy and ignorance is to chase after an ethereal dream.

Just a few questions remain. Are we being set up for "Global Governance" -- for a "One World Government?" Was America's death premeditated? Was it murder? I am convinced there is a one word answer to all those questions... YES! For those who would rule the earth and all upon it, America was an obstacle. That obstacle will soon be gone. What then?

J. D. Longstreet

*********************

VISIT J. D. Longstreet's "INSIGHT on Freedom" Face Book Page!!:   (Just click on the link for more conservative commentary by J. D. Longstreet and other popular conservative writers!)
*************************

Hypersmash.com

Ping Blog

Pingates