Recent
public opinion polls have indicated that Obama might lose to Mitt Romney, the
likely GOP candidate. My concern is whether that election will be held;
especially if Romney appears to be the winner or nearly so.
During
the 2008 election, Obama said, during a campaign stop in Colorado, that he
wanted a civilian national security force established with a budget equal to
that of the Pentagon. Obama also said that his expectation was that energy
prices would necessarily skyrocket and that any power generation plant using
coal would be bankrupted. Remember also that Obama back then was most surprised
by how fast gas prices increased that fall but not how high they became. And,
of course, once Obama was inaugurated, he bowed to the Saudi king, to the
Emperor of Japan, to the President of China, and interestingly, to the Mayor of
Tampa, Florida. Americans do not bow to others; it’s not our style, at least
that was before Obama set his own stamp on what our public officials do.
Then,
during 2011, the world saw the so-called Arab Spring sprout in Tunisia, then in
Egypt and Libya. Shortly afterward, Syria’s population rose up yet Obama did
not express support for the people of that country. In fact Obama’s Secretary
of State referred to Syria’s tyrannical leader as a “reformer,” that statement
seemed quite strange at the time. And before that, in 2009, Iran’s people rose
up and took to the streets expressing a desire for more freedom in their lives.
Obama did nothing to support those masses, even after the Iranian government
began to suppress them most violently too.
Lastly,
for the past year, there have been many rumblings about whether Iran is
developing a nuclear weapon; coupled with Iran’s continued statements about
intending to wipe the State of Israel off the face of the Earth. Many American
take Iran’s threats quite seriously as does, seemingly, Obama, yet he does
little except admonish Iran. Syria is Iran’s close ally in many things and Iran
has said that the world should not interfere with Syria’s internal affairs.
So now,
North Korea tried to launch a rocket, which it said was meant to be used to put
a new satellite into space; that rocket launch failed. Now, North Korea is
threatening to conduct another test of its nuclear weapon capability; two of
which it has done in recent times; the second of which seemed to be a fizzle.
India successfully launched a missile test, showing it could launch weapon
strikes on targets 3,000 miles away; it is now the 6th nuclear
weapons country to have shown that capability. Its neighbor and fierce
traditional opponent, also a nuclear power, followed up with its own missile
test, demonstrating it could match India’s ability with its own.
The
world seems to be waiting, in a real sense, for whatever will happen next.
History does not truly repeat in lockstep however the past does show what can
happen under similar conditions. The many warnings about repeating the failure
of Munich, back in 1938, do ring true today yet I doubt that very same
conditions exist.
The
vaunted Arab Spring has turned into a somber morass of much doubt about how it
shall turn out. Pakistan and India do not trust each other and a failure on one
side could turn the sub-continent into a raging nuclear firestorm before others
could raise a caution. Syria is repeating what Old Man Assad did back in 1982
when he put down a rebellion after many killings and violence; perhaps 30,000
were killed by Syria’s military. Iran is warning the world to keep its hands
off of Syria; not too sure if there’s an “Or Else” clause in that warning but that
seems to be implied.
Obama’s
administration has said that it is leading from behind, unlike past
administrations which might have led from the front. Personally, Obama’s
foreign policy is a disaster site and that’s not really funny in any sense of
the word.
And of
course, America’s internal politics seems just as screwed up as our foreign
policy; why not, got to be fair and balanced. The Occupy Wallstreet efforts of
2011 are scheduled to be repeated in 2012. Van Jones, an admitted Marxist and
Communist, is leading a renewal of the Occupy efforts, calling for a great push
for May 1st; perhaps like the great May Day Parades that the old
Kremlin held in balmy old Moscow back in the day of the Soviet Union. Of
course, the history of the 2011 Occupy efforts is one of violence against
established order, occupation of public spaces as a sense of entitlement on the
part of the Occupy activists and strong resistance to police and order.
Somehow, it seems that Van Jones is calling for something more than holding
parades, perhaps more like so-called street actions, whatever that is supposed
to mean.
To me,
there are many such portends of possible gloom and likely doom that appear to
be on horizon of our society. The external forces that are possibly arrayed
against our country will be greatly amplified by our domestic economic conditions,
an ongoing recession, one fueled by Obama’s many decisions regarding our
economy. Obama’s veto of the Keystone Pipeline caused a large ripple in the
price of gas for our cars. The EPA restrictions being placed against shale oil
production or being withheld have hurt our economy. Uncertainty as to what near
term taxes business must pay has been the source of much concern and hindered
business expansion; that has really harmed our economy.
So,
what is my concern? It is quite frankly that Obama wants there to be civil
unrest in this country, throughout the land. Recall that in 2008 Obama said he
wanted to have a civil national security force, a paramilitary force, to protect
our country. The question then was why was this security force needed and who
was it protecting and from whom?
For a
while, in 2009 and 2010, it seemed that the Purple shirts of the SEIU union
locals would be that civilian national security force that Obama mentioned.
That still might be. However, Van Jones might be organizing his so-called
protestors as either a supplement to such a SEIU group or even in place of that
group; a paramilitary force might come from multitude sources.
Another
possible force for disorder in the country could come from people like Bill
Ayers and his wife Bernardine Dohrn, both admitted Communists
and former members of the domestic terrorist group the Weather Underground,
which Ayers co-founded back during the late 1960s. Ayers was quoted as saying
back then that the radicals might have to kill 25-million Americans to take
over effective control of this country.
Ayers statements back then sounds much
like that of a current USA EPA manager’s statement that his approach to
controlling our energy companies will be much like that of the ancient Romans
crucifying the first five men they meet in a newly conquered town; made for a peaceful town citizenry for some
time thereafter. Ayers and Dohrn are now getting to be quite aged and no idea
of how they might like to engage in an active demonstration of their radical
communist principles, yet I suspect they would encourage Obama to act on those
ideas they had back in so long ago.
It’s been proved in country after
country that a group that uses terror as tactic to control its citizenry can
succeed at a great cost in lives. There are too many examples of that happening
in Europe, Asia, and in Latin America too. The issue has always been about
control of the masses by the elite, power, control.
The
change in a country’s makeup can result from many different causes but a common
cause can be great unrest and much civil disorder. That is my concern about
Obama, that he wants that disorder to happen in our country so that he can realize
his goal to exert power over our society. Our former allies now seem to
distrust the USA that we’ll keep our word to support them and to assist them in
mutual endeavors. Obama has behaved very coolly towards Great Britain
traditionally our closest ally, France our oldest ally, South Korea, and
others. It’s like Obama has intentionally acted in a hostile manner towards our
friends and bowed, figuratively and literally, to other nations that are not
typically friendly towards our country.
Iran
acts like it has the power to strike down our country. Venezuela, a close ally
of Iran, acts in a hostile manner. Cuba, openly hostile towards us for over
50-years, seems to mock Obama and the USA.
If
there were to be a major strike against our country, from any external source,
Obama will use that as an excuse, in my opinion, to declare martial law and
suspend civil rights until that emergency is over. That emergency will never be
over if Obama has his way. That great civil disorder can come about if Van
Jones efforts come to full fruition, or if Ayers’ and Dohrn’s old plans from
the 1960s and 1970s are realized, or if there is another terrorist or military
strike against our country.
I truly
don’t believe that the cause of that civil disorder is important to Obama but
rather than it happen in some significant manner, one that causes great concern
over loss of life or material damage to the country. Of course, one way is to
encourage an outside force to strike at our country.
Look at
how this country came together over Pearl Harbor, or over the 9/11 attacks. By
the time the dust settled, Obama will have achieved his goals, power over our
society. Obama will then have the flexibility he wishes to achieve. By then,
even when we the people realize what has happened, Obama will be in control and
that control would have to be wrestled from his grasp. So, what Obama said to
the outgoing Russian president, that Obama would have more flexibility after
his last election, might come true in ways that many of us will not accept nor appreciate.
Even if
my concerns are never even realized, we are living in interesting times, much
more exciting than I ever wished for. Pax Americana might be over. What else?