February 12, 2009

No One Writes to the Colonel, Except I

I was writing a lengthy screed wherein I posited the Goat Man was the perfect metaphor for the stimulus package, until I realized I'd snarled that metaphor so thoroughly that even I had to admit it resembled nothing more than a colding plate of double-helix vermicelli, smothered in marinara pretentiana.

It puts me in ill temper to admit to myself I'm wrong about something, but don't worry. I'll take that out on you later.

The true, unadulterated fact is that I've struggled to understand the motives of the players in this dilation and curettage of the American purse, and even allowing for the most magnanimous of intent, I find the victors at best reprobate in tactic, at worst debauched in soul. I hate all of these motherfuckers.

When Newsweek magazine, once embarrassed by the obvious fact that they were too liberal, can crow We Are All Socialists Now like the sunrise cocks they are, with no hint of embarrassment, we of the classical liberal and conservative strains are truly screwed. And fuck the libertarians. Too many of them crossed the picket line and voted O! They as a rule only want to support your 1st and 2nd Amendment rights so they can huff more Freon. Every time I meet a libertarian I think I can intellectually engage they end up handing me a Bob "White" Barr pin. And their motto? The Third Largest Party in America! That's like saying you're the third largest testicle in my nutsack, fools. We live in a binary world. Us. Them. With us or agin us.

This stimulus? The inevitable outcome of voting (D). Someone please tell me what is progressive about inculcating the policies of Woodrow "Fuck them darkies" Wilson, or Franklin "Let's round up the slant eyes" Roosevelt, or Barack "I won, honkies" Obama. Because I'm struggling with the Future as laid out in a Revenue Act of 1913 tract, or a National Recovery Act poster, or Obama's Awesome Society.

No, it's much worse than a two year recession, which would be the normative market correction, had our financial institutions not been shanghaied by insane grifters, and our government now run by tomfools with their fingers on the tritium trigger of Mammon. The "Government", if we may use the term without irony, will prolong this malaise for a decade or more. At which point the vast new bureaucracies created by the Covetous Class, compounded by the deconstruction of welfare reform, and augmented by the inevitable tax increases on the middling class just to throw interest payments to the rentseekers in the People's Republic of China, will have neutered the American spirit. We shall be done in by good old Yankee Disingenuity.

Short of violent revolution, with pitchforks supplanted by black rifles, the tide is inexorable. No federal bureaucracy has ever been dismantled, once it has become part of the Machine. The only recourse, sadly, is to await the inevitable collapse of the government under its own weight, like one of those disgusting fat people who have to be chainsawed out of their bedrooms in order to motor their bedsored hides to the hospital to save their fucking asses. The only difference is we are the flagitious enablers of that bloat against our collective will.

The internal devils that exhort us to snipe the rotten bastards from rooftop only exacerbate the problem, for the Machine is already built now, the barn door is agape, and for every melon-shotted autocrat there will arise two to take his place. Greed is no longer a deadly sin, but a factum necessarius upon one's curriculum vitae in the District of Columbia. And until a critical mass is reached, wherein one of every four citizens whacks a public confiscator out of a sense of personal grievance, the Machine will merely round up suspects, punish the perpetrators, and pass even more draconian laws to prevent its reoccurrence.

Lookit: sheep don't bite. The electorate of this once proud nation lack not only the spine, but the historical context to stage a counterrevolution to reclaim the ideals of the Founders.

The military does, of course.

I cannot believe I would ever utter this thought, and I have no desire to live in 1967 Greece (or 1923 Turkey, for that matter), but my sad conclusion is a coup d'etat by the right military officer might just be the only remedy to our slide to socialism. I for one can only postulate that a tribunal headed by a David Petraeus, with a carefully selected praetorian of like-minded colonels, could do far better than the unindicted co-conspirators currently wreaking havoc with our childrens' and grandchildrens' birthrights (it's always colonels and naval captains you have to empower. Too many of the flag grades are politically corrupted by the co-conspirators, and must be cashiered before they can attempt to return things to the status quo ante).

There is precedent: it may have taken 16 years, but Pinochet's junta peacefully turned power over to a democratically elected government, and Chile is now the paradigm of Latin democracy. The Turkish military is constitutionally obliged to step in on occasions, smack heads, and straighten out the messes the Islamists and nihilists inevitably create. In fact, there is only real democracy and liberalism in Turkey when the generals step in and run things, and they take this responsibility quite seriously.

Our greatest misfortune as a nation in this scenario, unfortunately, is our officer corps' duty and willingness to uphold the Constitution unto death. They will neither support nor engender any coup d'etat. For this, of course, they are to be commended. It just means my outcome, my desire to see the malefactors in charge brung low and hung high, is unachievable. As much as Hollywood loves to portray the military as a feral pack of Jack D. Rippers and James Matoon Scotts, that is fantasy born of prejudice and ignorance. And not a small amount of shame.

I won't see my coup, but it would certainly be invigorating to witness the shameless cocksuckers who betray us awaken each morning in fear of just such an outcome.

A boy can still dream, can't he?

And, since this is an unusually indecent jeremiad, the following disclaimer is in order:

Coup d'etat!

Apocalypto!


blhand.jpg



Posted by Velociman at February 12, 2009 6:33 PM | TrackBack
Comments

I don't think you're far off, frankly. I joked about it in the past, but I suspect it'll happen within out lifetimes.

I think you're too harsh on the libertarians though. Do you really think McCain wouldn't have engaged in another bailout like Obama did? I mean sure, the pork would have been reduced, but not by much. And then we'd be blamed for his erratic shitstorm that would inevitably ensue.

Better this crap happen on their watch, if you ask me.

Posted by: rob sama at February 13, 2009 8:42 PM

I've often suggested an overthrow and as often wondered if the sheeple will ever get enough of having their tails raised and the reaming begun. They never seem to bring any K-Y jelly and I'm still waiting for the kiss.

Posted by: kdzu at February 13, 2009 9:09 PM

From your keyboard to God's ears, V-man.

We can only hope...

Posted by: doubletrouble at February 13, 2009 9:12 PM

Not much to add to that. Truer words were never spoken---at least, not without dire consequence in a police state.

It's wrong for a person to hope our enemies will next target the Capitol Dome, isn't it? But just imagine a free country running on the good will and deep-founded virtues of its birthright, without the swilling swine of Congress fucking it up.

Yeah, it's wrong, because the core problem that sent those fuckers to DC would just vote in even worse devils. It's useless to blame it on our Congresscritters. For good or ill, they is us.

Posted by: Joan of Argghh! at February 13, 2009 10:16 PM

and Joan, remember what Pogo said,

"We have met the enemy and he is us".

Posted by: doubletrouble at February 13, 2009 11:33 PM

dilation and curettage of the American purse ...

Yep, they're gearing up for a total hysterectomy.

Posted by: PeggyU at February 14, 2009 12:12 AM

No, the military would not involve itself in a change of government or in ruling through it, but to the man who would bring this accumulated abomination down their support would be crucial, as would federal and state law-enforcement.
Under the circumstance of depression, collapse, or terror, a man could run and win the Presidency in an articulated program to turn back government's numbers, powers, and responsibilities a century or more, and increase the responsibilites of the citizen.
The opposition from judicial seditionists, the Congress, and especially the Bureaucracies would be prodigious. That is why measured reform is useless.
It is ironic, but I have seen more hatred from the Left for Pinochet than tyrants who laugh at Pinochet's trangressions. That is because he did the unforgivable in imposing liberty at the point of a gun.
There is no doubt the Founders would advocate counter-revolution to a man. Even Franklin.
This can be done, and done very well. It can also be done very badly.

Posted by: james wilson at February 14, 2009 12:14 AM

Our greatest misfortune as a nation in this scenario, unfortunately, is our officer corps' duty and willingness to uphold the Constitution unto death.

Yeah, but how does it play out if the commander- in-chief blatantly dismantles the Constitution? How does that weigh into it?

Does the Second Amendment right to bear arms really mean "guns", or does it mean that the citizens should have access to the latest tools of war? What was the purpose of the Second Amendment anyway? First and foremost, to keep the government in check! How are you going to keep the government under restraint without using modern technology? So if this interpretation were applied, wouldn't the responsibility of the military be to keep the government from getting out of control? If the government ceases to function as a republic and establishes itself as a fascist state, doesn't the obligation of the military to obey it end? The contract is broken, IMO.

Posted by: PeggyU at February 14, 2009 12:34 AM

I think the rollercoaster's definitely over the crest and heading down and I don't think it's going to stop.

The thing that worries me about the military under these kinds of administrations is that competent people with honor often leave in disgust while the lower ranks become more attractive to people looking for nothing more than three hots and a cot. Combine those two, and one can see the potential problems.

Posted by: Tam at February 14, 2009 8:36 AM

I hate the motherfuckers as well, and you're right, we do live in a binary world and all bits are off.

I've never been in a revolution, so I'm signing up for revolution 101 and I'm gonna buy my bitch some bullets for Valentine's Day.

We're in some very very deep deep shit.

Posted by: Sam at February 14, 2009 8:54 AM

Well hey, I suppose we could enlist. :)

Posted by: PeggyU at February 14, 2009 12:11 PM

Well military officers swear an oath that has the words, "..to defend the Constitution of the United States against enemies both foreign and domestic.." The catch there is that if Your commander in chief is an enemy of the Constitution, then does he becomes the officer's enemy. What might happen would be some officers would show up and have a quiet talk with the administration and alternatives would be presented. The administration would be visibly in place but it's actions would be very restrained. None would run for public office ever again.

Posted by: toad at February 14, 2009 12:43 PM

Believe t or not , those same up high that you want to bring low still do things in public.

One day you will finish that sandwich and turn the corner and ......
Well they say history repeats itself.

Posted by: Gavrillo Princip at February 14, 2009 5:57 PM

It is an insult to motherfuckers everywhere to refer to this pondscum with such decorum.

A good question: What happens when upholding the Constitution means preventing the elected pondscum from carrying out their clearly unconstitutional, nihilistic, destructive policies?

Methinks the military would take a pass on upholding the Constitution.

James Wilson was correct when he asserted that a successful coup would require the support of the military as well as law enforcement. This would be unlikely from both, but especially law enforcement, which has, at the federal level at least, been pretty firmly in the Democrat camp for some time now.

After all, they know who butters their bread, and this latest "Stimulus" Obamanation is giving them an awful lot of butter.

Posted by: Jim at February 14, 2009 7:52 PM

Fuck the fucking fuckers!

Posted by: Dash at February 14, 2009 8:23 PM

What Dash said ... with a cactus!

Posted by: PeggyU at February 14, 2009 10:25 PM

The only caution I can make is that the cutting of revolution must be followed by the sewing of the new garment. You can't just shoot the f*ckers and expect everything to work out peachy. There has to be something to pick up the baton and keep running. Not in the same direction, of course, but running still. Otherwise it all just falls apart.

Posted by: Joanna at February 15, 2009 12:59 AM

Interestingly, I was asking Trooper just the other day about the - er - logistics necessary for such a dream.

I believe it isn't as hard as everyone might think. But, indeed, one wonders at what might need be done after...it's an awful lot of bodies. And who to stand up in their place?

Still, do-able, I think. And, in a year or two, perhaps completely unavoidable.

Posted by: LauraB at February 15, 2009 9:37 AM

Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss.
- The Who

Posted by: Elisson at February 15, 2009 11:01 AM

I remember "Goat Man"; saw him in 1962 outside "Chief Tomochichi's" bar and package store, just north of Kingsland, Ga. My dad had to go inside for some "camping supplies". So my friend Tater and I talked a little to "Goat Man"; he said he and those goats had been all over.

Posted by: Mockingbird at February 15, 2009 12:01 PM

The problem isn't government -- the problem is our common belief that the government is the solution.

Posted by: Bob at February 15, 2009 3:12 PM

It's important not to confuse the political heads of "law enforcement" with the cop on the street...or the political heads of the "military" with the commanders in the field.

Even in Coastal California, while the police chiefs are all in bed with the Liberal Left. The cops are almost to a man, much more conservative.

Making the case to the Field commanders and the regular cops who understand "defending the Constitution" may not be as hard as it seems.

It does require the decapitation of a few "heads", but the larger body of honorable heroes, it seems to me, will, when the situation is desperate enough, and the offenses clear enough, and the future dark enough...chose the right side.

The problem is to make the move at the right time. Not before the critical moment...because it will be seen as treason. But to be ready when the fatal moment comes.

It seems so surreal (God, I hate that overused word) to be talking about this, but maybe this time WE'RE those ordinary people being thrust into extraordinary circumstances.

Are we up to the job?


Posted by: the-gunslinger at February 15, 2009 9:50 PM

If you guys didn't revolt over the trillion bucks disappearing into the Iraqi sends, bundled up in stacks of hundred dollar bills, given to nobody knows who because no records were kept, my guess is you won't revolt over another trillion spent boosting everyday government pork through normal, accountable channels.

Posted by: Goran at February 16, 2009 4:14 AM

If the founders were alive to see it, our military, sucking up such a huge percentage of GDP, professionals down to the last man and woman, with it's own culture from the rest of society would be tops on their list of horrifying government institutions.

Posted by: Goran at February 16, 2009 4:18 AM

While I am utterly disgusted by the present (and a good deal of the past) state of our government, and have a great deal of dread regarding the future, I think you should all give a lot more thought to the revolution thing.

I am very into my family history, and over the weekend happened to re-read a very short autobiography that my grandfather wrote - he who lived through the Russian Revolution. The description of the violence and starvation, the utter hopelessness of an average citizen was stunning. He said in the letter, and I remember him saying to my face, that no one in his family knew whether they'd be alive by nightfall - and not because of an accident like stepping in front of a truck, but because of the sheer violence and lack of value placed on human life. FYI, he got out at the tail end of the Revolution, and nearly got killed in the process. 5 siblings and his parents couldn't get out, and he only got to see 4 of the siblings once more, 46 years after leaving, for a couple of weeks.

I know how you all feel - I'm old enough to remember a very different America, one much better in most respects (even if we didn't have as many interesting electronic toys), and it really pains me to think about the kind of country that I'm leaving to my kids. BUT...revolution isn't a neat and quick thing like soe video game or book - it is EXTREMELY nasty, effectively a civil war. That really and truly must be the last possible resort. I'm not sure that we are there just yet.

Posted by: A Texan at February 16, 2009 10:23 AM

traitors. To the last man of you on this site.

I don't remember reading about the need for capitalism over socialism in the Constitution. You fags need to get your priorities right.

The Constitution is bigger than what type of economy we run on.

Posted by: james at February 16, 2009 12:25 PM

God damn, you people are HELLA funny.
Whew.....

Posted by: Andy at February 16, 2009 1:24 PM

I'm not sure where you cretins think I'm fomenting revolution. I did proffer a bloodless alternative as devil's advocate, but I suggest you start with Alice & Jerry primers, move up to Horton Hears a Who!, and get back to me when you've outgrown your nappies, and can count without your fingers and toes.

Posted by: Velociman at February 16, 2009 2:13 PM

"I'm not sure where you cretins think I'm fomenting revolution."

Nice straw man.

No, Velociman, you didn't call for bloody revolution, only for a military coup.

Posted by: Goran at February 16, 2009 2:45 PM

Well, Gollum, they are two different things. One is generally bloodless. And, given your constrained grasp of reading comprehension, you just might adduce that I am merely suggesting that the continuous rape of the nose-to-the-grindstone taxpayer may lead to outcome B) to avoid outcome A).

Posted by: Velociman at February 16, 2009 3:12 PM

Ahh..traitors, coups, the echo of jackboots on cobblestones, lack of reading comprehension or a sense of humor........ Little bit of everything here.

That's why I like the Gumbo. So rich and diverse. Gumbo is Nubian for "Hairy Pickle." Bet you didn't know that......huh?

Posted by: Andy at February 16, 2009 3:18 PM

A bearable amount of Keynesian spending in an economic downturn, and you fascist (this is one instance when using the f-word is not hyperbole) fools want the Congress to be destroyed and Pinochet installed.

Let me tell you, I've met Petraeus, and he is no Pinochet. He's a lot better. Based on his counterinsurgency strategy of using money and social programs, I doubt he's a right-winger. The Stimulus has a lot in common with the Surge - using "money as a weapon" to stimulate economic activity, it's just a lot bigger. We spent billions in Iraq on stimulus type programs, including subsidizing state-owned industries.

Posted by: John Wintergreen at February 16, 2009 3:31 PM

Wintergreen: You, sir, are an idiot.

Posted by: Velociman at February 16, 2009 3:41 PM

Another liberalanche? Somebody order pizza!

Posted by: PeggyU at February 16, 2009 4:15 PM

.... you know, just for fun, someone should throw in some Reagan quotes.......

Posted by: Eric at February 16, 2009 8:02 PM

Wintergreen: You, sir, are an idiot.

Pot, kettle, etc. Or more likely, projection.

Posted by: Xanthippas at February 16, 2009 9:41 PM

Wintergreen: You, sir, are an idiot.

Quite a high level of discourse at this blog, I see.

I just want someone to explain to me how doing what Petraeus does - spending billions to revive Iraqi state-owned enterprises, giving Iraqi and Afghan businesses microgrants and loans, and funding construction projects to stimulate economic activity and provide jobs in Iraq in Afghanistan is OK, but it's such a horrible thing to do it for Americans in a recession?

Posted by: John Wintergreen at February 16, 2009 11:51 PM

For openers, much of the pork stuffed into the bill won't be realized soon enough to jump start the economy. I read that some of the projects won't be funded until 2011.

Here's an example near and dear to my heart. Our own illustrious idiot, Sen. Patty Murray, has managed to finagle a credit extension for the Bonneville Power Administration to help build more substations and string more power lines, as well as to spend on alternate energy projects (I saw wind power mentioned). However, BPA officials say that money isn't the problem. The projects are already in the works, and what is holding them up isn't lack of funds but government red tape: environmental regulations and an arduous permitting process.

Posted by: PeggyU at February 17, 2009 2:28 AM

I am merely suggesting that the continuous rape of the nose-to-the-grindstone taxpayer may lead to outcome B) to avoid outcome A).

If only:

I won't see my coup, but it would certainly be invigorating to witness the shameless cocksuckers who betray us awaken each morning in fear of just such an outcome.

A boy can still dream, can't he?

The world is filled with petty dictatorships.

When the founders threw of their dictatorship, they already had in mind a better form of government. Heck, they already had most of the government in place and decades of practice in it. They were aiming for something better.

You would throw that away to aim for what? Turkey? Chile? Very inspiring.

Posted by: Goran at February 17, 2009 2:35 AM

I just want to hang Madame Mussolini from a lamp post, along with Boxer and Feinstein.

Posted by: Casca at February 17, 2009 1:19 PM

If someone had said this kind of thing when Bush was president you all would have been screaming TREASON! Not sure how this is different.

Posted by: Mike at February 17, 2009 2:13 PM

My lowly opinion is that we would be much more likely to see one or more assassinations long before we would have a coup. My predictions are leaning more and more toward the possibility of a string of high level politician attritions via the morgue.

They would serve as pressure relief valves for those that see the government as being or becoming tyrannical, postponing any military (or other organized) action.

In one scenario, someone important gets shot, and those that jump right up to propose banning most/all guns/ammo will become the next victims by those that are already operating at near their capacity for fear of losing the 2nd Amendment.

Which either causes those in power to crank up the anti-gun heat or back off in order to protect their own behinds. Knowing the self-preservation tendencies of most politicians, I'm guessing they will channel their efforts into look-good feel-good attempts that don't actually accomplish anything. Committees, blue ribbon panels, hearings, etc. Nothing worthy of getting shot over, but something they can tell their constituents in order to protect their position.

Posted by: TheGunGeek at February 17, 2009 3:06 PM

A boy can still dream, can't he?

Wet-dream, more likely, but that's all you can do. You all don't have the balls (or the smarts) to pull off a military coup, but Goddamn, son, I wish one of you would try ...

Posted by: George Washington at February 17, 2009 3:14 PM

You people are fucking stupid!

Posted by: Gene at February 17, 2009 4:26 PM

No federal bureaucracy has ever been dismantled, once it has become part of the Machine.

Well now I dunno. Capitalism may save us yet, what with Kalifornia laying off 20,000 bloated positions. That's real progress toward smaller government. I'm doing my part by remaining unemployable. I'm thinking of moving back to my pirate town and becoming a street artist. Hell, I was making what, $10 every Saturday morning just strumming my guitar at the farmer's market? Shit. Atlas may shrug yet, and we, like the Ruskies, will endow a huge black market with our time, talent and resources with nary a shot fired.

Posted by: Joan of Argghh! at February 17, 2009 7:02 PM

Go for it...It's called treason, and I for one would love to see a bullit put through your stupid shallow scalp.

After 8 miserable years you Refuglicans are all atwitter about US cleaning up the mess YOU'VE made.

Bush, Rove, Cheney and his band of war criminals (Haliburton/Blackwater anyone) should have been put out years ago. You got what you asked for....Nation building in Iraq while our own implodes.

You people are disgusting.

Posted by: Hdtex at February 17, 2009 7:20 PM

Never has so little been written to infuriate so many. These things write themselves in my sleep.

Posted by: Velociman at February 18, 2009 3:07 PM

"Never has so little been written to infuriate so many. These things write themselves in my sleep."

Wow, you're so vain. You apparently slept through the whole Iraq "debate", where merely pointing out that invading would be stupid and morally wrong was enough to be called a traitor.

You actually had to advocate treason!

Posted by: Goran at February 19, 2009 12:18 PM

"These things write themselves in my sleep."

Why bother stating the obvious?

Posted by: R.Mutt at February 19, 2009 12:20 PM

Why bother stating the obvious? Because you obviously don't get the joke, fuckface.

Gollum, I called the Iraq war a mistake in 2002, before it started, and no one has ever called me a traitor for it. Why do you idiots just make shit up?

Posted by: Velociman at February 19, 2009 4:59 PM

Thank goodness, but you weren't the only one who opposed the Iraq war in 2002.

But I understand now that you really are disenfranchised: The set of people that are both far right / libertarian and opposed the Iraq war is so small that they have no representation in government.

Posted by: Goran at February 20, 2009 3:20 AM

Wolverines!!!

Posted by: wintex at February 20, 2009 6:18 PM

It would requiire only that officers look closely at their oath.
"I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.[1]"

There is nothing in a commisioned officers oath that he swears to anything other than protecting the constitution.

Enlisted folks get to swear to follow orders:
"I, (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.[1]"

But an officers sole duty under God is to protect and defend The Constitution.

Those founder dudes were pretty smart, I pray our current crop of defenders has their sand.

Timothy M Isaacs

Posted by: Tim Isaacs at February 20, 2009 9:09 PM

General Sherman knew how to deal with treason.

Posted by: wintex at February 21, 2009 10:34 AM

Wow, that's some treason. You're advocating the violent overthrow of the duly elected government.

Enjoy your stay in gitmo, fucker.

Posted by: bob dobbes at February 24, 2009 5:44 PM

I thought dissent was the highest form of patriotism, you all-of-a-sudden Gitmo fans. At least you pussies want to keep it place for some reason: to lock up those who disagree with you.

Posted by: Velociman at February 27, 2009 5:54 PM

Dissent is one thing, you nutjobs have actually advocated a coup, and one of you advocates assassination. All of that because of a potential resurgence in New Deal liberalism! Wow, can any of you incompetent drama queens actually read? Historically speaking, government spending in WWII took the country out of the depression, Eisenhower had 90 marginal tax rates for our wealthiest, and you scum have sat on your hands when you weren't applauding when Bush dragged us into Iraq and squandered a 4 trillion dollar surplus on weapons spending and tax cuts for rich people. Now our economy is in free fall and as the government is the spender of last resort, you all complain about government stimulus to reinvest and rebuild this country. You people are absolutely pathetic and as citizens are both ignorant and beneath contempt. Try picking up a newspaper and a history book before you ignorant *sses opine, because you don't know what you are talking about.

Posted by: JT74 at March 3, 2009 2:38 AM

The problem is to make the move at the right time. Not before the critical moment...because it will be seen as treason. But to be ready when the fatal moment comes. Are we up to the job? It seems so surreal (God, I hate that overused word) to be talking about this, but maybe this time WE'RE those ordinary people being thrust into extraordinary circumstances. It does require the decapitation of a few "heads", but the larger body of honorable heroes, it seems to me, will, when the situation is desperate enough, and the offenses clear enough, and the future dark enough...chose the right side. Even in Coastal California, while the police chiefs are all in bed with the Liberal Left. The cops are almost to a man, much more conservative. It's important not to confuse the political heads of "law enforcement" with the cop on the street...or the political heads of the "military" with the commanders in the field. Making the case to the Field commanders and the regular cops who understand "defending the Constitution" may not be as hard as it seems.

Posted by: resbute at November 3, 2012 10:37 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?