“The not sending of the gospel to any people, is an act regulated by that eternal purpose of God whereby he determineth to advance the glory of his justice, by permitting some men to sin, to continue in their sin, and for sin to send them to their own place;—as a king’s not sending a pardon to condemned malefactors is an issue of his purpose that they shall die for their faults. When you see the gospel strangely, and through wonderful varieties and unexpected providences, carried away from a people, know that the spirit which moves in those wheels is that purpose of God.”
~John Owen
Obama … Lincoln Redux
Years ago, H. L. Mencken exposed the fact that Lincoln, in his Gettysburg Address, used poetry as opposed to logic to reinvent these united States of America into a National Union from a Confederated Union. Lincoln, by the poetry as expressed in the Gettysburg hijacked these united States vision of itself and largely reinvented the country with that speech. As stated earlier, H.L. Mencken pointed this out in his own illimitable way,
“The Gettysburg speech was at once the shortest and the most famous oration in American history…the highest emotion reduced to a few poetical phrases. Lincoln himself never even remotely approached it. It is genuinely stupendous. But let us not forget that it is poetry, not logic; beauty, not sense. Think of the argument in it. Put it into the cold words of everyday. The doctrine is simply this: that the Union soldiers who died at Gettysburg sacrificed their lives to the cause of self-determination – that government of the people, by the people, for the people, should not perish from the earth. It is difficult to imagine anything more untrue. The Union soldiers in the battle actually fought against self-determination; it was the Confederates who fought for the right of their people to govern themselves.”
The reason I bring this up is I believe that Barack Obama was trying to do much the same thing in his 2013 Inauguration speech.
First, Obama has always tried to channel Lincoln. In point of fact Obama used Lincoln’s Bible (along with MLK’s) to take his oath of office. Could this be a indicator that Obama understands what Lincoln accomplished in changing America via his Gettysburg Address, and so aspired to do the same with his Inaugural address?
Second in his Inauguration Obama made more then one reference to the ability of America to reinvent itself. Early on in the Inaugural address Obama said,
“America’s possibilities are limitless, for we possess all the qualities that this world without boundaries demands: …. an endless capacity for risk and a gift for reinvention.”
Even earlier in his address Obama even refers how the Nation re-made itself in the context of the Lincoln Regime,
“Through blood drawn by lash and blood drawn by sword, we learned that no union founded on the principles of liberty and equality could survive half-slave and half-free. We made ourselves anew, and vowed to move forward together.”
Elsewhere we find,
“But we have always understood that when times change, so must we;”
When you combine these quotes it is clear that Obama’s intent is to remake America and my premise is that this Inauguration Address was to Obama what the Gettysberg was to Lincoln in the sense that both speeches, by way of poetry, glommed on to some honored American idea, only to twist it by poetry in a direction that contradicted the original intent of the Founders. For Lincoln, his appeal was to the the American time honored notion of self-determination in order to justify denying the South the opportunity of self-determination. Lincoln, by poetry, was able to justify his crushing of the South in the name of self-determination. Lincoln’s poetry, coloring his brutal use of the sword and the canon, remade the Nation and set it on a different trajectory from which it would never recover.
What Obama is appealing to, by way of poetry, is a twisted idea of equality in order to overturn liberty. In his Inaugural speech Obama returned to the theme of equality over and over again.
… ” what makes us American – is our allegiance to an idea, articulated in a declaration made more than two centuries ago:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,
“We are true to our creed when a little girl born into the bleakest poverty knows that she has the same chance to succeed as anybody else, because she is an American, she is free, and she is equal, not just in the eyes of God but also in our own.”
“We, the people, declare today that the most evident of truths – that all of us are created equal – is the star that guides us still; just as it guided our forebears through Seneca Falls, and Selma, and Stonewall; just as it guided all those men and women, sung and unsung, who left footprints along this great Mall, to hear a preacher …”
“Our journey is not complete until our gay brothers and sisters are treated like anyone else under the law – for if we are truly created equal, then surely the love we commit to one another must be equal as well….”
Obama’s constant appeal to the traditional American virtue of equality is being used to set the nation on a new trajectory that will overturn the original understanding of equality. It is obvious that the Founders did not believe in the kind of Jacobin equality for which Obama champions. Just the fact that the Founders allowed the individual states to determine who would have the franchise proves that they were not interested in the kind of Marxist equality for which Obama is advocating. The fact that the Founders crafted a document of negative rights where the Federal Government was restricted to very specific enumerated and delegated powers — powers that did not include forcing equality on the population and did allow the people to maintain their cherished liberty — suggest that the Founders “equality” is not the “equality” to which Obama constantly returned.
In Obama’s America, the phrase in the Declaration of Independence that mentions that “all men are created equal, is being used as a talisman in order to reinterpret America. The problem is that the US War for American Independence was not posited on the same premises of the French Revolution where equality as Egalitarianism was the leitmotif. America did not have the watch word of “Equality, Liberty, and Fraternity.” America did not mention “Equality” in her primary document (Constitution), or her Bill of Rights. America was not hung up about addressing everyone as “Citoyen,” (Citizen) in order to reveal a mad allegiance to equality as we find in the French Revolution was. America did not come up with a “Declaration of the Rights of Men,” and enshrine “Men are born and remain free and equal in rights” in its first point. America’s concern was Liberty not equality.
In the twentieth century, scholars like Hayek and Friedman maintain that equality is in conflict with and incompatible with liberty. They maintained that speaking of social justice in a society where individuals are free, any attempt to establish social justice or equality will deprive the people of their freedom because such an attempt requires government intervention to the end of denying liberty in pursuit of equality. A true notion of liberty understands that it includes the liberty to be different, and so unequal, due to the pursuit of individual interests. Obama’s version of “Equality” stands in contradiction to any vision of “Liberty” that isn’t Jacobin at its core. Obama’s equality is a demand for equality of outcome that always achieves a dull, ugly, drab sameness and the only way that can be achieved is by Obama taking away the liberty of American People.
Obama, in his Inauguration Speech is trying to deceptively change America much like Lincoln did at Gettysburg. If Obama is able to foist his vision of equality on America, by sentimentally appealing to the historic American notion of equality, he will succeed in changing the USA into the USSA.
Thinking About Women In Combat
On the last Panetta Announcement we were informed women would war
(We were assured that woman would manage and our power would be even more)
They would battle till broken and crippled, while our men carried the shame
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: “In war ye shall list only male names”
1.) A 6’5″ 220 pound Marine is injured in combat. Is his 130 pound female colleague going to carry or even drag him out of danger?
Consider that the average American female soldier is five inches shorter than her male counterpart. She has half the upper-body strength and 37 percent less muscle mass. Women also have 25 to 30 percent less aerobic capacity, which reduces their endurance.
2.) A female soldier is captured. Her cries of anguish while being repeatedly raped by the enemy is heard by her male colleagues across enemy lines. Will the male soldiers successfully repress the normal male urge to protect the woman or will they cast caution aside and go to their deaths in a vain but noble attempt to rescue the maiden in distress?
Israel is the only nation with real-world experience putting women in combat. Having gained that experience, Israel has banned women from combat units since 1950. Israel’s lessons were hard-won; the feminists in Congress have yet to learn them.
The first lesson is that men could be taught to kill strangers, but they would not stop caring for women. That is as it should be: civilized countries want to create soldiers, not savages. During the 1948 War of Liberation Israeli men would abandon their missions to come to the aid of women in distress, thereby endangering their missions, their units and themselves.
3.) And what of this normal male urge to protect the female? What will this mean in the context of battle? In the context of training?
In his insightful essay “Women Can’t Fight,” James Webb retells the story of how a naval-academy first-classman was reprimanded by his company commander during the first week of the academic year, the week that was traditionally the most rigorous week of the academic year for plebes. His offense? He had “upset” a female plebe. He had repeatedly corrected her table manners to no effect. In frustration, the upperclassman had ordered her to eat her next meal with oversized utensils, which was an extremely mild reproach. Her response was to burst into tears. Her female roommate hastened to the company commander and protested her friend’s punishment because it would be embarrassing. The upperclassman was ordered to stop harassing the girl.
4.) How will women be treated by Muslims when taken as POW’s when the Muslim believes that the Woman is a lower being? Will the insult of a having a woman killing Muslim men lead to tortures unknown once women are captured?
When the Muslim opposition discovered that they were fighting women in battle with Israel, the Arabs spontaneously chose to fight to the death. The very thought of being defeated by a band of women was so shameful to them that it made them implacable. They would not surrender to women. Every encounter became bitter and protracted.
5.) Are women, who are on the whole physically weaker then men, going to reduce the fighting capacity of front line units?
Consider that women assigned to artillery units are often too weak to lift the ammunition. These are tasks that are expected for these military occupational specialties so, clearly, standards are being dumbed down to accommodate women.
Also consider a study of military personnel who have reached the rank of colonel revealed that 5 to 6 percent of men had permanent orthopedic damage due to the rigors of military life. The number for women was thirty percent. As a Nation are we good with abusing women like this?
6.) Will surprise attacks on front line units find troops not being alert because those troops are having sex? At the very least jealousies between troops could easily wreck front line combat units as they have their morale deteriorated because of competing competition for the female troops affections.
All of this is just another example of the Jacobin insistence that reality must conform to their preconceived worldview. This progressive worldview insists, quite despite the evidence, that men and women are the same and are interchangeable cogs where no difference is discovered when one is replaced with the other. All of this is in worship of the philosophy of Egalitarianism. Egalitarianism teaches that sex roles are mere social constructs that can be changed at will and that men and women are not really different. And so, many women will be sacrificed to support this lie and our Military will exchange male testosterone for Female Breasts.
In closing, make no mistake. This is not an agenda being pushed by people who do not know the above stated facts. Oh sure, there are always the useful idiots who are the true believers in such lunacy. However, the NWO oligarchy, who are at the top of the Bureaucratic food chain, full well know that women can neither be men nor fight like men. The push for equality is merely a tool towards a larger goal and higher end. Equality is being used as a tool to eliminate Biblical Christianity and the Historic West. All of this is about overturning a Christian social order and dethroning God in favor of humanistic dark chaos and old night and the enthronement of soul-less misogynist misanthropic humanistic man.
But the God’s of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return.
A great deal of the statistics and accounts are drawn from,
http://www.weirdrepublic.com/episode123.htm
Fisking Obama Speech — Times Have Changed And So Must Americans
“Through it all, we have never relinquished our skepticism of central authority, nor have we succumbed to the fiction that all society’s ills can be cured through government alone. Our celebration of initiative and enterprise, our insistence on hard work and personal responsibility, these are constants in our character.
But we have always understood that when times change, so must we; that fidelity to our founding principles requires new responses to new challenges; that preserving our individual freedoms ultimately requires collective action. For the American people can no more meet the demands of today’s world by acting alone than American soldiers could have met the forces of fascism or communism with muskets and militias.”
Obama Inauguration Speech — 2013
1.) Times have changed and as such we have to finally relinquish our skepticism of central authority and now embrace the fiction that all society’s ills can be cured through government alone.
2.) Collective action can only be achieved through the State. So the State, accruing increasing power to itself, will make sure that individual freedoms will be preserved. Yeah, and fire can only be provide warmth as water is poured all over it.
3.) The ideas of individual freedom, initiative, and personal responsibility in today’s world is as old fashioned as fighting the forces of fascism or communism with muskets and militia.
Note the irony of the appeal to give up individual freedom in order to organize collectively in the context of fighting against collectivism. We must become collectivist just like those evil collectivist that we defeated long ago.
Back To Back Napoleon
“What makes us exceptional — what makes us American — is our allegiance to an idea articulated in a declaration made more than two centuries ago:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal …”
President Obama
Presidential Inauguration Speech — 2013
“ALL ANIMALS ARE EQUAL
BUT SOME ANIMALS ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS.”Napoleon the Pig
President of the FarmGeorge Orwell
Animal Farm