(Some people even learn to use toilet paper.)
Naturally, when the kids are so rebellious and disobedient we can't control them, we call in the Great Uncle and he teaches us parental skills. Works for me, why shouldn't it work for our elected 'parents'?
"...The mayor said there is another option - and that would be declaring martial law. The governor would have to declare it and then the National Guard would come in. The mayor said it's more for a transition to a new police force if that were to happen...."Capital News 9 24 Hour Local News TOP STORIES Schenectady mayor considers options, martial law over police woes
After all, it wouldn't work for him to actually do psychological and background checks on the people the community hires-- that'd be an infringement of their civil liberties and we know how that would turn out.
And naturally, we must not allow anyone, especially those who disagree with us, to be allowed their Constitutional Rights: that would be an assault on our senses and so dangerous for anyone who wants to have a little insurance they could protect themselves if needed. And, golly, defending ourselves is so very irrelevant because we have the fuzz to protect us. Right?
"...An orderly society is the goal," concluded their report. "Public safety is the paramount consideration. The fact that public clamor has reached the ears of politicians is irrelevant. The immediate revocation will get the issue back to square one. At that time, deserving individuals will qualify and others will be denied...."
Naturally, we have the military to protect our best interests as a nation. So why don't we empower them to do so by giving them the tools they need? After all, they're the ones who we will want to patrol our streets, doing door-to-door warrantless searches, enforcing curfews, setting up roadblocks for 'papers please' checks or any damn thing else their commander's whims dictate. After all, the men and women of our military are just a bunch of torturers and baby killers. Aren't they?
"...Murtha, who publicly accused U.S. Marines of cold-blooded murder in a firefight in Haditha, Iraq, and was caught on camera in the Abscam scandal appearing to negotiate a bribe, was honored by the Navy for his "selfless devotion to the Nation's Sailors and Marines..."
Since our military members are no more than fatherless children who run around beating other children and continually conspire to not fire their weapons upon fellow American citizens, of course we need to insure complete control over their lives.
"...A military commander at Fort Campbell in Kentucky demanded his soldiers give him the registration numbers of any guns they own privately and then reveal where they are stored..."
(Having been a private gun owner in the military, I understand and agreed that so long as I lived in the barracks, my firearms were stored in the Company Arsenal. No problem with that. The problem is the Brass wants the serial numbers, amounts and locations of weapons stored off base in private homes. True, also, the U.S. Military is really not a Democracy, but the troops do not forfeit their Constitutional rights just because they're wearing a uniform. Quite the opposite: they swear to uphold and defend the Constitution with their lives. That alone should give them even more Constitutional privilege, IMO.)
While we're on the path to removing the Constitution from the annals of American history, let us continue our assault on the populace by using fear tactics and ACORN brown-shirting to brow beat those who actually use their rights as citizens of a 'free' nation.
"...A short time later, he said he found two U.S. marshals on his doorstep..."
After all, we can't actually be accusing SCOTUS members of not doing their job, of spitting on the very Document they also swear to defend. Can we? I mean, isn't it just so criminal to expect someone to actually uphold the laws of our Nation?
But by all means, for God's sake, let us not do anything that would entail enforcing any laws that would make us unseemly 'law abiding' people the rest of the world frowns upon. I mean, really-- what's the sense of having a law if you're going to enforce it? What's the sense of that?
"...House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat, condemned immigration raids as "un-American...."
Really: let's get serious here. Why have a law we'd want to enforce? After all, having laws is nothing more than admitting there are certain standards of morality we expect people to live by, certain 'codes' we are to follow if we are to survive as a 'community'. Rather than have laws we need to enforce, let's get rid of the standard by which we make our laws. What good are laws and moral absolutes, anyway?
"...Is Satan a religious fable, or an actual being wreaking havoc in the world?..."
Naturally, if we decide he isn't for real, who the hell will the libs and criminals have to accuse "made me do it"? Literally. Does a decadent society really 'need' a devil, anyway? But wait: if we remove the Devil from the equation, won't those very same people need to accept responsibility for their actions? God forbid they need do that! But wait-- if Satan isn't real, then obviously God isn't real, either. Hmmm... and this will lead us down what path?
Oh, right. Sorry, I forgot. Communists don't believe in God, so why believe in a Devil?
Bless God, God bless.
Shy III
A-flippin-men Shy! This is all so crazy anymore I can hardly keep up with everything and every new law they want to shove down our throats!
ReplyDelete