Reflections From a Murky Pond

In August of 2007 Johnny Logan Spencer Jr. posted a poem – well, it was semi-lyrical prose – entitled The Sniper on the neo-Nazi website, New Saxon. Last week federal law enforcement arrested the 27 year-old Kentuckian over the subject matter of that poem.

After 28 months of the poem being posted on the internet and  18 months of the Secret Service being aware of it Mr. Spencer has been charged, after an investigation that lasted under a week, with federal crimes pertaining to threatening President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama.

Below is the poem, if one can truly call it that given its broken meter and piss-poor rhyme, in its entirety:

THE SNIPER

As the tyrant enters his cross hairs the breath he takes is deep
His focus is square on the target as he begins to release
A patriot for his people he knows this shot will cost his life
But for his race and their existence it is a small sacrifice

The bullet that he has chambered is one of the purest pride
And the inscription on the casing reads DIE negro DIE
He breathes out as he pulls the trigger releasing all his hate
And a smile appears upon his face as he seals that monkeys fate

The bullet screams toward its mark bringing with it death
And where there was once a face there is nothing left
Two blood covered agents stare in horror and dismay
Looking down toward the ground where their president now lay

Now the screams of one old negro broad pierces thru the air
Setting off panic from every eyewitness that was there
And among all the confusion the hero calmly slips away
Laughing for he knows there will be another negro holiday

–  Johnny Spencer

Much like the previous poll on Facebook about assassinating Obama I am maintaining and publishing this for the sake of posterity and the integrity of our 1st Amendment.

For anyone who is terrified of anyone who would post such material and who wishes to do something about it, my local US Secret Service Field Office can be contacted at (718) 840-1000.

Please feel free to report me.

So what we have here is a very poorly crafted attempt a poetry that paints a racist’s fantasy about assassinating a Black POTUS – presumably, given the nature of New Saxon and the use of “tyrant” as a descriptor, one of authoritarian bent who is forcing the “Black Agenda” upon America by fiat.

What we do not have is a direct reference to the Obamas – though we have to assume they’re who he was writing about, a direct threat to their lives, or a direct call for violence against them. Some combination of these things have, until Obama’s regime, been required before such speech was criminalized and federal law enforcement sent out to arrest and imprison the people involved.

Even with some combination of direct reference and overt or explicit threat or call to violent and/or criminal action, in the past plenty of people were allowed to speak as they wished to without fear of reprisal from the White House or its federal law enforcement agents.

No, these people were not arrested by either local, state, or federal officers for threatening President Bush.  But that was then and this is now, and apparently vastly different rules apply under President Obama.

Some will stridently claim that there is an inherent difference between the images displayed by the Liberal and Black protesters against President Bush and the poem by Spencer about presumably assassinating President Obama in front of his wife – and they’re right; there is a vast sea of difference between protesters gathering in large groups and calling for the murder of a POTUS – or anyone else for that matter – and the rancid masturbatory fantasies of a White Supremacist about assassinating a President who hadn’t even won his party’s nomination as of yet.

It is sadly ironic - and not in a remotely humorous way – that President Obama and his federal agents, upon identifying Spencer, acted in manner consistent with a Tyrant, which is exactly how Spencer described him in The Sniper.

One wonders if this is based upon an actual fear of Mr. Spencer, who had done nothing to realize his fantasy and was not found to have any weaponry or even links to weaponry, or if it is just more race-baiting for the sake of political expediency during the lead up to Obama’ healthcare summit and the November Congressional midterm elections.

For the first time in the 17 years since President Clinton signed 10 U.S.C. § 654 (Policy Concerning Homosexuality in the Armed Forces), better known as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) into law it will be addressed by Congress.

The Senate Armed Services Committee will address the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy Tuesday — the first time in 17 years the topic will be debated before a Senate committee.

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Michael Mullen are slated to testify on the law, which bans openly gay Americans from serving in the military.

The hearing on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” comes in the wake of Obama’s State of the Union address last week, when he declared his desire to end the policy.

“This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are. It’s the right thing to do,” Obama said.

Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin has said repeatedly he “has never supported” the controversial policy, and other senators have expressed their opposition to it as well.

“The military’s ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy is an unjust, outdated and harmful rule that violates the civil rights of some of our bravest, most heroic men and women,” said Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) in a statement. “I’ve been working with my colleagues in Congress and other leaders to overturn this wasteful and destructive policy. I am hopeful that President Obama will make this a top priority.”

Some Republicans, however, question the timing of the administration’s push to lift the ban.

“In the middle of two wars and in the middle of this giant security threat,” House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) asked Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” “why would we want to get into this debate?”

Personally, despite President Obama’s claim of desire to end this policy, I sincerely doubt that anything will come of it. It’s an election year, one that looks to be particularly grimly fought, and Obama no longer has enough political capital to make up for the hit that any incumbent would take for trying to repeal this law.

This is just a stageplay designed to pander to gays and the farther Left of the country and to give the Dems a chance to again paint the GOP as bigoted and obstructive.

To my mind that is a crying shame because Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell should be repealed. It is predicated upon unconstitutional ideas and, as such, should have been struck down by the Courts years ago. Sadly, they have to-date failed to do so, though the SCOTUS has not yet deigned to hear any case regarding it.

Read the rest of this entry »

As America truly enters into the 2010 midterm Congressional Election cycle the one word that Americans, especially Conservatives of all varieties, should keep in the font of their minds is subsidiarity.

The Merriam-Webster Dictionary definition:

Subsidiarity
Pronunciation: \,s?b-si-d?-’er-?-t?, s?b-,si-\
Function: noun
Date: 1936

Definition(s):

1. a the quality or state of being subsidiary
2. a principle in social organization: functions which subordinate or local organizations perform effectively belong more properly to them than to a dominant central organization

Simply put, subsidiarity is the idea that a central authority should have a subsidiary, or secondary and lesser, function and perform only those tasks which cannot be performed effectively at a more immediate or local level. Among other things it is the foundational concept underlying the 10th Amendment to US Constitution.

This concept should be a touchstone for Americans in the 2010 Congressional elections and in any state and local elections that may arise in the upcoming months. While not the only issue that Americans should consider when choosing a political candidate, subsidiarity should be one of the key issues analyzed when making those choices.

At the local, district, and state levels Americans need to look for candidates that will “step up to the plate” and take action and responsibility, one’s willing to fight to take power back from higher, more centralized authority and hold it in trust for the People that they serve. At the federal level Americans need to look for candidates that will relinquish those improper powers currently co-opted and/or seized by the federal government back to the states.

Frankly, most of the current ills inflicted upon America are because we, the People, have allowed the federal government to take too much power unto itself, power that rightly belongs to the the people of states and the local municipalities. That can be corrected, but it will take work – and the upcoming elections are a good place to start.

Subsidiarity In 2010 – learn it, love it, vote for it.