*This is an updated repost*
“Astonishing” is the only word rattling through my brain right now as I try and wrap my head around Obama Administration’s reaction to the Islamic world’s most recent lethal outburst which lead to the deaths of a U.S. Ambassador and three Americans in Benghazi, Libya. I realize that many would say it’s just par for the course for Obama and crew. But I must say, it is truly astonishing to me at this point. To think that a sitting American president is appeasing marauders who just declared war on America is just plain astonishing, not to mention a gross dereliction of duty bordering on treason. (Yes, I said “treason.”)
I think we need to rewind a bit here in order to get a clearer picture of just what is fomenting the current tumultuous geopolitical upheavals we see occurring across the globe. It may seem unrelated to the subject matter to spend some time reviewing the history and meaning of pure democracy, but I don’t think it is. I think it is absolutely vital to understand the actual ramifications of pure democracy and how it relates to the Obama Administration’s disastrous foreign policy.
The Fallacy of Pure Democracy
Let’s just rewind a bit here for the sake of context. I’m sick and tired of hearing the word “democracy” used to describe our (U.S.) form of government. There’s nothing the Left loves to hear more than a Republican or conservative refer to the United States as a “democracy.” We have never been a democracy and I pray to God we never become a pure democracy. This paragraph should be sending Chris “Tingles” Matthews et ilk into an apoplectic fit about now–nothing could make me happier. I’m about to jackslap Matthews and his pathetic ilk back into reality, and anyone else who needs it.
Yes, technically speaking, the United States is now a semi-democracy thanks to the Progressive Movement and the ratification of the Seventeenth Amendment–which effectively wrenched control of the Senate from the States. We now elect senators by popular vote–moving the U.S. ever closer to pure (direct) democracy. Our Founders referred to pure democracy as “mobocracy.”
“[D]emocracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security, or the rights of property; and have, in general, been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.”
In case you’re wondering, the United States was originally founded as a constitutional republic. What’s the difference? Oh, just the underpinning of law, as opposed to the capricious will of the unrestrained mob. A republic like the United States protects the rights of the minority and the majority, not just the majority, as exists in a democracy. Article IV, section 4 of the Constitution of the United States “guarantee[s] to every State in this Union a Republican form of Government,” not a democracy.
There’s a damn good reason folks like Karl Marx stated, “Democracy is the road to socialism”; and Vladimir Ilich Lenin said, “Democracy is indispensable to socialism.” Many secret societies from the past and present have been, and are, strong proponents of democracy. It’s all rooted in the purposeful manipulation of the “mob,” the masses, toward a predetermined outcome that serves only the ones doing the predetermining.
A constitutional republic does not so easily lend itself to this sort of mass manipulation of the “mob” for nefarious purposes, due to its emphasis on protecting the inalienable rights of the individual. Our constitutional republic is designed to protect, defend and preserve freedom and liberty, not democracy.
“In democracy … there are commonly tumults and disorders…. Therefore a pure democracy is generally a very bad government. It is often the most tyrannical government on earth.“
Let’s be fair here: I realize the U.S. has incorporated aspects of democracy into its current form of government–namely, the free election of leaders, free assemblage, expanded rights for individuals, etc. But pure democracy never lasts. That’s what I think Ben Franklin meant when he said “we’ve given you a republic … if you can keep it.” The danger lies in believing in the romantic definition of democracy and not understanding the true nature of pure democracy as forwarded and promoted by the left.
According to Loren Collins, it was Henning Webb Prentis, Jr., President of the Armstrong Cork Company, who laid out the stages of decline that inevitably occur in a pure democracy:
“The historical cycle seems to be: From bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to selfishness; from selfishness to apathy; from apathy to dependency; and from dependency back to bondage once more.”
Interestingly, an often used quote attributed to Thomas Jefferson states:
“The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.”
But, according to the Monticello website, there is no record of this quote attributed to Jefferson (emphasis mine):
This exact quotation has not been found in any of the writings of Thomas Jefferson. It bears a very vague resemblance to Jefferson’s comment in a prospectus for his translation of Destutt de Tracy’s Treatise on Political Economy: “To take from one, because it is thought that his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, —the guarantee to every one of a free exercise of his industry, & the fruits acquired by it.”
The point in pointing this fact out is Thomas Jefferson didn’t mention or refer to “democracy” in this context.
Early on, during the Occupy Wall Street protests at Zucotti Park in New York City, I listened to an interview (above) with Working Families Party spokesperson Nelini Stamp (video here)–one of the organizers of the Occupy Movement. She stated there were some 29-plus “occupation movements” that were occurring in the U.S. at that time. Most disturbing to me was her claim that 57 of these “occupation movements” were going on around the world. (Was that why Obama refered to 57 states? Just a thought.)
I have not confirmed all the locations around the globe where these Zucotti-style protests are occurring; but I think it is more than obvious that a number of them are occurring in the Middle East. It is worth noting that former members of the Working Families Party are in key positions within the Obama Administration.
“Pure democracy cannot subsist long nor be carried far into the departments of state, it is very subject to caprice and the madness of popular rage.“
–John Witherspoon, Signer of the Declaration
The United States has never been a pure democracy; this fact just can’t be hammered enough, in my opinion. Being knowledgeable of our true form of government is essential in combating the left’s onslaught on our Constitution and the rights of the private U.S. citizen. The reason I bring up all this “democracy” stuff up in the first place is due to the fact I believe Obama and his extreme-left cohorts are creating chaos throughout the Muslim world under the guise of “democracy,” or what Obama and his supporters affectionately call “Arab Spring.”
The Fallacy of the Arab Spring
What has been the result of Arab Spring? The so-called “democracy movements” all over the Middle East have created power vacuums filled up by the likes of Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood–as in Libya and Egypt. Anyone who had even a cursory knowledge of the Qur’an and the tenets of Islam knew that in a predominately Muslim culture such Islamist forces would take control by intimidation and violence if given even the slightest chance to do so. The “democracy movements” were just a springboard for Islamist elements to seize authority and control. Democracy proves as useful for the predetermined ends of Islamic terrorists as it did for Marx and Lenin.
On September 11, 2012, the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya was attacked by Islamic terrorists, more than likely Al Qaeda-linked fighters. Our ambassador was tortured and killed, along with three other Americans–an act of war. Our diplomatic personnel in Libya were not even provided standard security, despite an increase in terrorist attacks prior to the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Libya. No effort was made to beef up security in anticipation of the 9-11 Anniversary. Additionally, our embassy in Egypt was stormed by angry mobs. Since that fateful day, we see protests popping up all over the Muslim world.
So, one could argue Obama’s tacit and overt support of “democracy movements,” i.e. Arab Spring, around the globe is leading to the destabilization of entire states and populations, and endangering Americans and American interests abroad. In Syria, so-called democracy protests have lead to a very bloody and vicious civil war whose outcome is uncertain and extremely precarious for the people in that region. Syrian violence is now spilling across the Turkish and Lebanese borders.
After nearly four years of enduring Obama’s reign, we can clearly see how the Community Organizer-in-Chief plies his trade–issues, problems, crisis, conflict … create the problem; control the reaction to it; and provide the solution (cf. dialectical process). But there’s just one problem with this sort of predetermined-end-justifies-the-means approach to governing … one unavoidable big problem: one can make the plan but one cannot control the outcome.
Obama and his minions claim the reason for all the hostility and Muslim rage toward America is due to an obscure, bizarre film trailer critical of Islam’s prophet Muhammad entitled “Innocence of Muslims,” even though this conflicts with those in his own administration. The story gets murkier when one looks into the identity of the film’s producer. At first, it was claimed the producer of the film was an Israeli–possibly an Israeli Jew (gasp). Then it was alleged the producer was an Egyptian Coptic Christian residing in California. Al Arabiya reported that the film producer was a pornographer with links to “right-wing Christian groups.” It was also reported that he had donated over a million dollars to the Obama campaign.
Federal authorities pressured local California law enforcement to bring Nakoula Basseley Nakoula in for questioning–assuming the man guilty until proven innocent. All this due to a cheesy film. There are any number of anti-Muslim films on YouTube. It is very interesting why this one video has been singled out by the Left and the Muslim world as the reason for all the rage aimed at America and the Western World.
Nakoula Basseley Nakoula was detained by police for possible parole violations and is still in jail to this day, according to my sources. The important thing to remember here is Nakoula has allegedly not been formally charged with a parole violation–simply arrested for the possibility that he may have violated his parole. Well, that’s being assumed guilty until proven innocent. If this can happen to this guy, then every American is at risk of being hauled of in a similar manner for doing nothing more than expressing their First Amendment rights–as offensive or non-offensive as they may be. If this man is being detained without charges due to pressure on local law enforcement by the feds, then this is an outrage that cannot be allowed to stand.
Obama sent out UN ambassador Susan Rice to denounce the “offensive” film as the sole cause of all the violence against U.S. diplomatic outposts in Middle East and North Africa, despite the fact the film had been posted to YouTube for several months. Libya’s own president stated that it was preposterous to believe the attacks on our embassies were not preplanned. Rice appeared on no less than five Sunday talk shows claiming it was a spontaneous protest spurred on by a YouTube video.
The choice of UN ambassador Susan Rice to pass the meme that a little video is the sole cause for all the attacks directed at the U.S. is disturbing to say the least. Obama has signed off on the UN’s Anti-Blasphemy Law. Once again, as Obama did in his illegal war in Libya, the president supplants the United Nations as the sovereign authority over our U.S. Constitution–which he swore an oath to preserve, defend and protect. Obama referred to the YouTube video some six times in his speech before the UN–stating, “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”
In case you missed it, it was Obama who engaged the U.S. in an illegal war in Libya in the first place. That’s right … it was an “illegal” war that was never approved by Congress, according to the provisions set forth in the War Powers Act. Unlike George W. Bush, who did acquire the necessary congressional resolution to go to war in Iraq, as mandated by the War Powers Act, Obama circumvented Congress entirely. The war in Libya was unconstitutional, therefore illegal–an impeachable offense. Obama cited a UN resolution as justification to go to war, not a congressional resolution, thereby ceding national sovereignty to the UN.
When Bush committed to military action in Iraq, the left went berserk at the time and insisted “the people march on Washington, D.C. and demand the president be impeached,” despite the fact Bush complied with the Constitution, regardless of how one may feel about the decision. That didn’t stop people like Joe Biden, who voted for the Iraq War resolution, from turning around and calling the war in Iraq “illegal,” along with a host of other duplicitous Democrats. There’s not a peep from the major network news regarding Obama’s actions in Libya, Yemen, Pakistan, Syria and Afghanistan now.
Over 70% of fatalities in Afghanistan have occurred on Obama’s watch–only the sound of crickets at the studios of ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, etc.
I truly believe Barack Hussein Obama does not see our diplomatic missions as U.S. soil. Obama does not believe in American sovereignty per se, in my opinion, but rather the United Nations as the sovereign authority over the United States. This is all part of Obama’s “fundamental transformation,” in my opinion. This is the reason I believe Obama chose UN ambassador Susan Rice as his Middle East policy mouthpiece. Rice recently spoke of “universal free speech” and how it must be curbed as to not offend Islam. I assume this is all covered in the UN’s Blasphemy Law.
Open Letter to the President et al.
What you and your media cohorts are saying, Mr. President (who will now be referred to as “Barry”): it is totally “natural” to exact vengeance through violence on anybody who should insult one’s religion. I mean, I know you’re into fairness, equity, sameness, and all that, Barry. So it’s only fair that Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, etc., should be allowed to murder, rape and pillage in response to our ambassador and three other Americans being tortured and killed (or whatever else might offend us at any given time).
Ironically, Barry, the notorious work known as the “Piss Christ” was brought out for exhibit on September 27, 2012, in New York City. FOX News Radio reports:
“‘Piss Christ,’ once branded as a ‘deplorable, despicable display of vulgarity,’ will be displayed at the Edward Tyler Nahem Gallery in Manhattan on Thursday [Sept. 27, 2012]. The artwork features a ‘photograph of the crucifix submerged in the artist’s urine….’”
According to you, Barry, it would be considered a “natural reaction” for Christians to storm the art exhibit and torture and kill the artist, since such a disgusting and deplorable object like the “Piss Christ” is considered blasphemy to devout Christians.
The fact that an act of war has been perpetrated on the United States and the Obama Administration is using the crisis to once again attempt to clamp down on the First Amendment is truly disgusting and deplorable. I guess that Chick-fil-a thing didn’t work out so well, so here’s a new opportunity for dear leader to enforce politically correct speech under the auspices of the United Nations.
I find it disgusting and deplorable that you, Barry, are more than happy to sit down with Egyptian president Muhammed Morsi, who was quoted saying, “The Koran is our constitution, the Prophet is our leader, jihad is our path and death in the name of Allah is our goal,” but you steadfastly refuse to sit down with the Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netenyahu. For crying out loud, Barry! What the hell is your major malfunction? Inquiring minds would like to know!
So, since you, Barry, and your UN cohorts are so greatly offended by this insignificant little film critical of Islam’s prophet Muhammad, I would like to remind Obama et al. of some things that are disgusting and reprehensible to me. Oh, I know … not all Muslims condone murder, torture and despotism; I’m just talking about the ones that do.
FOR EXAMPLE …
Muslims who hack Christian children to death …
Muslims who burn down Christian churches and Jewish Synagogues …
Muslims who burn Christians alive in the streets …
Muslims who behead those who convert from Islam to Christianity …
Muslims who stone women to death …
Muslims who execute young women for adultery …
Muslims who forcibly circumcise their little girls …
Muslims who teach their children to hate the Jews …
Muslims who hang adolescents for allegedly being homosexuals …
Muslims who force prepubescent girls into marriage …
Muslims who shoot 14-year old girls in the head for wanting to go to school.
Muslims who kill 2,753 of my American brothers and sisters on September 11th, 2001 …
And on and on and on …
I can’t understand how anybody of decent moral character can find a fictional film or cartoon so offensive that they could justify torture and murder, and claim they’re doing God a favor to boot! But, then again, I’m not a psychopathic murderer or a worshiper of death. There are many things I don’t understand–nor wish to understand, for that matter. For our president and his staunch supporters to try and morally equivocate the killing and brutalizing of innocent people to a fictional film many Muslims may find offensive is not only disgusting, deplorable and extremely offensive, it is downright evil!
“Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!”
–Book of Isaiah 5:20 (KJV)