Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others.
~ Thomas Jefferson

Thursday, January 26, 2012

On-Line Onanism, and the Gingrinch who stole the primaries

Onanism has been used as a euphemism for masturbation, although my very limited understanding of the Bible is that Onan was being advised to engage in coitus interruptus, rather than masturbation, as is often believed. The alliteration felt clever, even if not quite accurate, at labeling this post as a bit of mental masturbation (like the staff meetings we used to have at the VA). The end result of either is likely to be infertile, and I am afraid my feeble attempts at encouraging the few who read me to actually move toward liberty are likely to be less than fertile as well. Some are already there, and the rest will likely never see the reason for it.

It is discouraging - not conducive to bringing about feelings of courage - to think that the Republican Party will not put forth a candidate good enough to beat the campaign of lying propaganda, the voter fraud and electoral college manipulation I expect from the Obama regime. Feeling discouraged is not the same as cowardice, and does not equate to hopelessness or unwillingness to try, but it does reflect my difficulty in feeling hopeful.

Some of our most brilliant pundits, such as Thomas Sowell, have spoken of the need for a candidate with fire, with a willingness to go beyond the mamby-pamby polite disagreement with the current administration as evidenced by such as Romney and Santorum. They speak of the fact that, while Gingrinch (forgive my Dr. Seuss allusion) is certainly one of the last choices a true conservative would make for President, he still comes in line before the two limp men he is running against.

For those of you who have just sat up in your chairs or recliners, shouting "Ron Paul is the only one worth voting for," know that I agree with you. Even though I strongly believe Paul to be an anti-Semite who would sacrifice Israel to the "Palestinians" in order to keep the peace, and keep America isolationist, I would vote for him - if he were electable, which he is not. As in 2008, he will continue to be marginalized, dismissed not just by the media, but by the Republican Party itself, which refused to count the votes for him in the primaries of the last Presidential election, and will certainly do the same this time.

Even if we were able to conduct a strong write-in campaign - which I suggested to Paul's own campaign staff last time (although they never responded to my suggestion), I feel certain the Republican Party would see that those votes were buried. So, unless a miracle candidate appears with the appeal to us true conservatives of Sarah Palin, who definitely "will not run, and if elected will not serve", we are stuck with death by wimp candidates or the acceptance of a candidate distasteful to us, but who possesses fire-in-the-belly, as does Gingrinch, who after all is indeed an experience politician, a man who pulled off quite a coup during the Clinton administration, even if he did fail to follow through on his promises, as all politicians do. Check out Goldberg's article at

A good friend of mine, whose opinion I greatly respect, recently said he didn't think he could "hold his nose" and vote for Gingrinch. He agrees with a long-held belief of mine that voting for the lesser of two evils still gets you nothing but evil. That is one reason why I did not vote for a Presidential candidate in 2008. McCain is as arrogant as Obama, is as much an elitist as Obama, and I remain convinced he conceded the election to Obama even before any votes were cast. I truly believe he is perfectly happy to have Obama as President, and that his agenda does not differ from BO's in any significant manner.

This is one time in my life, however, that I feel there is enough difference in the level, the degree of evil, that we will experience if Obama is elected. Four more years awarded to a creature as arrogant, as obsessed with islam, as desirous of seeing America become a socialist country where Sharia is more acceptable than Constitutional law, will be the death of this grand experiment called America.

It will certainly be bad enough if BO is successful in stealing the election through voter fraud or other manipulations of the system. It will be bad enough if he simply does as Ahmadinejad did in Iran, and declares himself the winner. However, if he is able to actually get a majority of the vote fair and square (unlikely as it would be given the voter fraud we know will occur, but still possible, nonetheless) he will consider it a mandate to take complete control of our country, to become the total tyrant that he has shown himself capable of being.

As rotten as Gingrinch is, as poor a choice as he will always be, an America under his administration will be far safer than with a no-holds-barred Obama presidency. If I can be allowed a bit of exaggeration here, a bit of "over-the-top" hyperbole, I would rather experience a Gingrinch dictatorship than the socialist paradise envisioned by Obama, with him as our fearless leader. Although we would continue to suffer the further loss of our liberty under Gingrinch, it would not be the blood in the streets I expect if Obama is permitted another four years to destroy our economy, our identity, and our national security. The blood that will be lost if he stands idly by while Iran uses nuclear weapons against Israel (yes, they might destroy Iran in retaliation, but that would not save the Israelis, a good people who would live in peace if they weren't surrounded by those who will be satisfied by nothing less than their total destruction).

I feel quite certain that the media does not attack Romney strongly because they want him to be the Republican candidate, that they realize he is so like Obama that many will simply vote for Obama the way they did when McCain was the other option. So, unless someone comes up with a better idea, or some saint throws his or her hat in the ring soon, I am suggesting Gingrinch is the only candidate who will take a hard enough stand to actually defeat Obama in the November elections. I wish that were not the case, but that is how I see it. Please, feel free to prove me wrong, but not with wishful thinking, such as Ron Paul making a third-party run.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Sorry, folks. I was completely ignorant about comment rules. Anyone can post, but I'd prefer a name, even if it is made up. Anonymous posts just seem cheap, if you know what I mean. Also, if you want to argue a point, that's fine. Cheap shots and name calling towards me or another person commenting (ad hominem) is rude and will get you banned. Other than that, I'd love to get some comments.