There’s a lot of talk about America’s new economy and how we all have to do whatever is necessary to adapt to it.
America’s New Economy
These animals’ view of America’s new economy is an economy based upon the productive being enslaved by the worthless and, as every previous attempt of this Keynesian nightmare has shown us, this economic model is doomed to utter failure.
As far as I can see, most of this talk – and all the jabbering spewing out of the maws of Obama and his coterie of vermin – should be rejected by we, the People of the United States of America – rejected by force and with extreme prejudice if needs be.
Already America is in a state where and when for every 1.25 productive citizens there is one resident that is either being supported through welfare or who is employed for the government in some capacity. A 1.25:1 Maker to Eater & Taker ratio is ridiculous, abhorrent to men of good character, and utterly unsustainable.
If America’s new economy is one where people who work for a living are being overwhelmed by people who vote for a living, then it’s time for drastic change starting in DC, working down to the ghettos and slums, and not stopping until America is cleansed, purified, and reborn once again as nation it was created as and always meant to be.
No matter the orthography, the sentiment is clear and is as true, right, and applicable in the America of 2013 as it was in the Greece of 480 BC. 2493 years don’t change anything of meaning.
The same “offer” is being made to Americans today. Our lives in exchange for our ability to defend both those lives and the liberties that make those lives the lives of free men and women. And the same response must be given to our modern day Xerxes, Obama and to his coterie of Liberal and Progressive gun-grabbers.
Come And Take Them…If You Can
We, the People, the true-born sons and daughters of America, have not rendered offerings of earth and water to our domestic enemies and we are not subject to- or subservient to them.
Liberal “Anti”-racism is a amazing thing, not in it’s value but in it’s inherent prejudice and bias and it’s foundation of lowered expectations of- and requirement from Blacks. Liberal views on racial relations and “equality” can be summed as the strident call to lower the bar – any bar, even basic civility – for any and all non-White people while simultaneous holding Whites to ever-shifting but always unreachable standards.
A current example of this particular Liberal failing is their and the MSM pundits’ total silence on the matter of Pennsylvania State Representative Margo Davidson’s (D-164) tacit threat to gun down fellow Pennsylvania State Representative Daryl Metcalfe (R-12) while debating an expansion of PA’s Castle Doctrine, a law allowing lethal self-defense to be used by an armed citizen who feels threatened.
If the gentleman from Butler County stood yelling, knowing that he’s a gun-toter, and I felt threatened, would I be protected under court law if I blew his brains out?
That’s what passes for anti-racism in Liberal and Progressive circles. A Black female asking such a question about a White Man in a public forum, a Legislative forum in point of fact, is not something to commented upon. Yet, can we imagine what would have been the hew and cry from the left and their jabbering Black political sharecroppers if the races had been reversed?
This is also likely an example of Liberal anti-Sexism as well, given that Davidson’s female and Metcalfe is a man. Female bad behavior is normally excused by the Left, especially when directed and Men and/or boys, but the Feminists would have a hysteria-laden field day if it’d been Metcalfe who asked that “question” in reference to a woman.
But that’s thing about the so called anti-racism and anti-sexism measures demanded by America’s domestic enemies. They’re all based up maintaining different standards for different groups and basing those standards upon race and gender as applicable. Indeed, any attempt by Americans to apply a single standard for anything is decried by the left and their minority tenants as being racist and the most common argument that they use is that doing so “disproportionately affects” one or more of their “protected” groups.
Think about that for a moment. It seems to me that either those “protected” groups are incapable of adhering to normal standards and, hence, are undeserving of any sort of protection or the Liberals perceive them to be so. If the latter is true, isn’t that the worst form of racism or sexism?
NOTE: Personally, I have no problems with Davidson’s question. Sometimes hyperbole and shocking statements or questions are necessary to wake people up and get them thinking about the possible ramifications of a proposed or planned course of action. I have a problem solely with the double-standard and the metrics used to form it that the Liberals have concerning such things.