Thursday, April 12, 2018

Is this the hill you want to die on?

The United States and Puerto Rico
The United States currently administers 16 territories as insular areas:
Minor Outlying Islands:
  • Bajo Nuevo Bank
  • Baker Island
  • Howland Island
  • Jarvis Island
  • Johnston Atoll
  • Kingman Reef
  • Midway Islands
  • Navassa Island
  • Palmyra Atoll
  • Serranilla Bank
  • Wake Island

I read this today and nearly exploded at my desk. I was going to address that, but Aesop over at Raconteur Report addressed that nonsense far better (and far more colorfully) than I ever could. How he kept his sanity while writing this is a mystery to me. An epic rant.

My own take is this - try to take one star off of my flag, try to remove one square millimeter of soil from my country and I'll fight you. To the death.

Yup, this is the hill I'd choose to die on. This cause? No better place to die.

Fix it, don't run from it.




36 comments:

  1. Yup, Aesop knocked it out of the park on the first pitch. Nobody is carving my country up, not while I can ambulate. Because there are things that need fixing you don't run from them.

    ReplyDelete
  2. We need to keep the Bill of Rights intact. That will solve the problems discussed in the article. It was designed to protect citizens from the government. The Second Amendment is as important as the other 9. There is something insidious about the 24 hour news cycle that is creating hysteria for the purpose of ratings and viewership and I think in time, people will simply begin to turn it off. You can only listen to so many hours of discussion about Stormy Daniels body parts, or black lives matter, or hog and his 'movement'. American doesn't buy that crap. That's why Donald Trump is president, not Hillary.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Completely agree LL. I turned off the news on TV a few years ago. Food tastes better, the air is fresher.

      I feel smarter.

      Delete
    2. A lot of what Jesse suggests could be accomplished with better enforcement of the 10th amendment. If the people in California want to pee in whatever restroom is available, they pass that law and it affects only them. No forcing their policies on the rest of the country.

      Delete
    3. Most "problems" perceived by certain groups in society are generally caused but not enforcing the laws already on the books because that is not perceived as "doing something." So they make new laws, which also are not enforced.

      And yes, if you want things a certain way in your neighborhood, fine make it that way, but like you say, don't push your crap into my neighborhood.

      Delete
    4. OAFS,

      The problem is the Progs want to push their crap into your neighborhood. They have no boundaries and they know no boundaries. The Progs desire is to force everyone to live in their hellish nightmare of insanity.

      Delete
  3. After reading Jesse's drivel, there were so many things I wanted to say but words do not come easy for me so I will just say this: Aesop puts my feelings into words perfectly as do you. And one other thing, I may not be as mobile as I used to be but if it comes down to it, put me in a favorable spot with plenty of ammo and I will do my part. After my session at the range last month, I can still hit 4 inch groups at 200 yards with my Remington 270!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And you need a good base of fire. Just sayin'.

      Delete
  4. "Fix it, don't run from it."

    35 percent of the country actively wishes to destroy it. They tell you this openly. Folks like Jesse, Kurt, and Dana spend their days catching death threats by those people. They have control of our institutions of learning, and openly revolt from their roles in the bureaucracy.

    35 percent of the country is, as you say, open to "fixing it". They understand the role of the government, the limitations that are supposed to be put on it. Unfortunately, those they elect- and be quite certain, that amounts to 95% of them, who currently hold both chambers of the Congress and the White House, have no actual interest in "fixing it", only maintaining their sinecures.

    The other 30% is functionally ignorant, bordering on mentally retarded, and are more interested in the comings and goings of their favorite celebrities and sports teams to concern themselves with the larger picture, and when push comes to shove, goes with then former 35% because their false idols make it look cool.

    35% can't fix 65% that has no interest in repair, and is actively pushing the decline.

    I suspect that Jesse feels that he shot at enough people on behalf of this country in OIF, and figures there's no point in Civil War 2.0. But be certain- when people are wholly interested in the criminalization of their fellow citizens for the holding of differing ideas- as is taking place as a part of every engagement the Left is invoking against the Bill of Rights; and be certain- every right is under assault, open conflict is where you're headed. They are emboldened by the media, and they are emboldened by what they see from the bureaucracy.

    You'll have to forgive him if he's no longer interested in a conflagration. I suspect they wouldn't accept the offer to begin with, because the Left isn't interested in coexistence, but domination. Doesn't hurt to consider an amicable split before people start getting hurt, or killed, over this nonsense situation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. An "amicable split" reduces us to the status of a second rate power. Not an option. We are the last hope for the planet. The fall or splitting up of the United States will lead to a new Dark Age. A thousand years of totalitarian darkness, we HAVE to fight this bullshit.

      Delete
    2. An "amicable split" serves the interests of Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, and every other nation that would gain from a diminution of American economic and military power. The resulting two countries will have negligible influence on the world stage. Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia were not players on the world state. Breaking them up didn't change things, other than the horrific death toll in the Third Baltic Wars.

      The western power that will become the remaining light of freedom and liberty will be Germany. There is an irony in that worth contemplating.

      This bullshit needs to be fought.

      Delete
    3. We're not always on the same page Comrade Misfit, but in this we stand together. Well said.

      Delete
    4. Fringe,

      I think there was a similar proportion of people wanting a change about 242 years ago. The American Revolutionaries were well less than 50% of the Colonists. Look what they did!

      Delete
  5. An amicable split does no such thing.

    Look at the draft percentages by state in WW2. Then look at enlistment after 9/11.

    The promise you speak of is forgotten by half, yet we remain the hope of the world.

    You can trim the deadwood out and let the tree grown again, or you can let it die from complacency. But you can never push life back into branches that have been dead for fifty years.

    And you'd better make a decision quickly because Europe is doing everything in its power to render the costs paid just seventy years ago moot, and they're doing it as fast as they can.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My point is that the split will NOT be amicable.

      Delete
    2. I wouldn't be too sure of that.

      Delete
    3. The staying could be a little more amicable if people, like the writer of the Federalist article, stopped calling people that they disagree with "un-American".

      I regard myself as a liberal in most things. I served my country with honor (according to my DD-214). I may be in my sixties with health problems, but I assure you that anyone who wants to call me "un-American" to my face is running the risk of requiring emergency dental and/or urological surgery.

      Delete
    4. I never served my country, nor took the oath that most of you here did. Bad decisions and bad genes both contributed to that. But...

      From Kindergarten to 12th Grade I pledged allegiance to the Flag and to the Country. Which I consider as binding and as part of my very soul as the oath. And I will protect and defend right with you, brothers.

      Delete
    5. Some paid attention, I see that you are one.

      Well done.

      Delete
    6. @Comrade Misfit,

      Be in no doubt:
      The writer of the federalist article didn't call anyone un-American, AFAIK.

      I did.

      And I would cheerfully call you or any other (expletive deleted) (expletive deleted) "un-American" - not for some paltry disagreement, like chocolate vs. vanilla, or blondes vs. brunettes (both cases of which, as any fool knows, the correct answer is "Both, please.") which mischaracterization trivializes my complaint as if this were but a tiff of differing opinions - but done rather than for any such petty rationale, for the author's wholeheartedly out-loud advocating in print for cheerfully throwing 30 states in the republic under the bus because he, you, or anyone else, regard them and their inhabitants, Americans all, as expendable assets useful only to keep you from having to break a sweat and act like a citizen, rather than neutered housecat.

      I call that "un-American". primarily because it is exactly so.
      Let's also not sugar-coat it, I also called it traitorous, treasonous, gutless, and chickenshitted. I also called it even more unprintable and even less flattering things. If that offended or continues to offend anyone, I offer my heartfelt and sincerest wishes that they untwist their panties, pull up their big boy pants, and get over it.
      If anything, I understated the depth of the pusillanimous perfidy undertaken in that Federalist essay by orders of magnitude, mainly out of consideration for bandwidth and people's digestion.

      But I just wanted to make sure it was well understood, that of all the truly offensive and horrible things I said about the Witless Wizard who burped that misbegotten screed out, I would have it known beyond any doubt and with absolute crystal clarity, that I meant every last one.

      Yours sincerely for less treason in public discourse,
      -Aesop

      Delete
  6. I read the first bit at another blog. Am still doing a slow burn. As is my routine, I stopped here a few clicks later and read this (admirably portrayed by Henry Fonda)---

    http://defense-training.com/2018/theodore-roosevelt-jr/

    So, anybody want to go to the American cemetery in Normandy, stand in front of those perfect white headstones that go on forever, and explain this split idea to them? Tell them 'Sorry, we just couldn't hack it.'? Right.

    Not one star. We tried that once. The scars from that aren't going away anytime soon. I got the left flank, Sarge. And I'll bring extra ammo.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Much as it makes our heads explode and blood pressure soar, free speech is just that. Doesn't stop us from calling out the %#^&*#$$'s.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. All the 1st Amendment does is protect us from the Government telling us what we can say (or think.) No protection from private companies or people telling us what we can say.

      Unfortunately, it seems the Government stuck it's nose under our tent on the 1st.

      Which is why all the lack of free speech on public universities and in public schools needs to stop.

      Delete
  8. Once again late to the ball, once again y'all have said everything I would have and much better than I could have managed.

    Thanks for the post.
    Paul L. Quandt

    ReplyDelete
  9. You have to admit it'd be kinda nice to force liberals from California and NYFC to have to go through the entire immigration process before they can infect places they ain't ruined yet.

    But I'd rather see those places liberated and returned to the USA.

    ReplyDelete
  10. This is one Badger that would not tolerate that proposition. I will stand by you on that hill.

    ReplyDelete

Just be polite... that's all I ask. (For Buck)