Nom de plume: Rivrdog

Hypothetical situation

I'm not going to GBR IV. Between fixing my boat and saving money ahead of an offshore trip, the funds aren't there.

If I WERE there, I would try to get some conversation going on a subject near and dear to my heart - just where IS that line in the sand these days. You all know the one, the line, that when crossed, means that the Federal Government has completely tossed the Constitution, and it would then be our decision of whether to let them trash it, or fight them to restore it.

I think I know where that line is now.

It's here.

The (D)onks probably have the clout to ram this bill down our throats (especially with the help of RINOs like Olympia Snowe), and when they do, they have armed the bomb of their own destruction. That's NOT to say that they have set off that bomb, they've just enabled, or armed it.

Let's face it. There are ZERO hypothetical situations where an attack on the cyber security of the USA would be so severe as to require shutting down the entire Internet from public use in order to "save the Republic". The ONLY situation which fits that scenario is if said public is actually at war with the Federal Government. In other words, if a Civil War is in progress and the revolutionaries are using the Internet as a vital means of communication.

One would almost expect the Feds to do that, though, and in the case of a civil war, they probably wouldn't need any such bill to do it, it would just be done.

No, this bill is in the works because the Federal Government wants to have the capability to HEAD OFF what they perceive as a civil war against their authority. If you believe Speaker Pelosi, and others, that "civil war" is CURRENTLY in progress against the leadership, you would want this bill. It dovetails perfectly with this information. What we obviously have here is a multi-pronged attack on the First Amendment, and it's not just an attack contemplated by the (D)onk leadership, it's an attack in progress. For them, it's not enough to lie their way into positions of leadership. Having done that, they now want to make that leadership into a dictatorship by silencing the opposition and by shitcanning the Constitution.

If the First Amendment goes away, the Second Amendment will be next. With the two primal conditions of the Bill of Rights gone, the Bill of Rights is dead, and the Constitution with it.

My line in the sand is easy: the day the Internet goes off, my opposition to the Federal Government goes active. Let's make it even clearer: the day the Internet goes off is the day I declare war against my Government.

I'm no cyber-warrior. With the Internet gone, I may have one less method to communicate with, but I can still move and shoot. If I go to war with the Federal Government to restore the Constitution, it will be because those same Feds have already declared war on that same Constitution.

I am not going to do a "first-strike" on the Federal Government, but with this bill, it is obvious that the Feds want to be able to do one on me.

For my entire warrior-life, I have fought from the decided disadvantage of having to shrug off the enemy's first blow before dealing my first blow back. This war won't be any different, but I can at least ask that others consider beforehand what the Government's first blow might be.

So, all you gunnies at GBR-IV: where is YOUR line in the sand?

Proposal: The Un-Do Party

In the military, we use "Op-Plans" (Operations Plans), various constructs that achieve only a limited purpose, but when they are all linked together, the overall mission gets accomplished.

I've long thought that the best way to run a political party would be with Op-Plans. With an Op-Plan, a specific, limited objective could be accomplished. An example might be as limited as taking back one seat in the Senate, or it might be expanded as wide as taking back the entire Senate (taking it back from the leftists).

I need some help here, because I am about to propose that all previous thought on the organization of (supposedly) conservative political parties be abandoned. That would put all the current right-of-center parties (GOP, Libertarian, Constitution, the new Conservative Party, etc) out of business.

In their place, I propose a Coalition Party. The Coalition Party would involve the ENTIRE Right (and as much of the Center as could be convinced to join), and it would have a limited political objective, and when it had accomplished that objective, it would disband. Sort of like the Coalition put together to defeat Saddam Hussein in Kuwait in the Gulf War.

The overall objective of the Coalition Party would be "The Un-Do".

Yes, the party would exist for a "negative" reason. It would gain and hold power specifically for the time necessary to roll back, by proper Constitutional means, the bloated and intrusive Federal Government. Ronald Reagan started out to have this as his goal, but along the way, he became involved in the big government instead of rolling it back. Most thought that Arnold Schwarzenegger started out towards that objective in California, but he has obviously gone over to the Dark Side of big government as well.

Another advantage of having a Coalition Party with this objective is that the current Democratic Party will re-constitute itself to fight it, and fight the Un-Do. When they do, they will use, shall we say, "excessive force", and in doing so, un-intentionally promote the Coalition Party and the Un-Do. Their zeal to defeat any idea of an Un-Do might even get hot enough that the nation might decide to shed it's burdensome government with a cataclysmic event, and in doing so, hasten the accomplishment of the Un-Do. The Coalition Party would have to plan to use that contingency if it develops. As of now, such planning would still be protected by the First Amendment, but who knows how long the First will last? It is being assaulted almost weekly with new proposals to muzzle dissent of the machinery of big Government and it's current leader, President Obama.

Even the Convention required to establish the Coalition Party would be a useful exercise, since a Constitutional Convention will probably be required after the Un-Do, and the Coalition Party members will have practiced the niceties of such assemblages, and will have an advantage over the Left when one is held.

Notice here that I don't advocate eliminating the Left from the political scene. I want to simply being the nation back to a level of governance that gives only the most basic help necessary to the individual, who will then succeed or fail depending on his/her own strengths and skills, and not be artificially supported by Uncle Sugar, as close to 50% of our population is now. We dare not allow that percentage to actually get to over 50%, because then that majority will permanently enslave the remaining individuals as a permanent source of their support. Such enslavement is currently advocated by the Obama Administration, and if given sufficient time, will be accomplished even without a corresponding political majority.

So, time is running short to form a Coalition Party and get it registered for the 2012 election and beyond.

The first job in forming such a party is to get the right-of-center parties to bury their dogmatic hatchets in favor of an Un-Do strategy. I think that peace between the parties of the Right can be achieved, if only those parties will look to the security of the overall idea of Un-Do. All parties right-of-center are endangered species now anyway, and unlike the little creatures of the planet, do NOT have the protection of government to insure their survival. If Obama has his way, we WILL become, first de-facto, then de-jure, a one-party nation (aka a dictatorship).

The Un-Do will have to be done. It is a matter of National AND individual survival. Let's do the Un-Do now, while sufficient INDIVIDUALS still exist to lead the effort. Most of us who can lead this effort will be gone in a few years, and as we die off, we are NOT being replaced in sufficient numbers to prevent a complete change-over to a gimme-society. IN no more than five years, the gimme-society will have sufficient of it's tentacles around the Constitution to actually smother it's flame of enlightened individualism, and at that point, the only option left will be a violent Un-Do. As a military man, I would not care to speculate on the success of THAT Un-Do, but suffice it to say, we have an opportunity to make our Un-Do work legally and properly, but we have to act quickly.

Let's talk up the idea of a Coalition Party, with the ONLY purpose of that party being the Un-Do. Let's look up some of our friends in the righto-sphere and ask them the important question: are YOU willing to put ALL your political dogma aside to achieve the objective of an Un-Do, and ONLY that objective?

I will write more about my idea of a Coalition Party and the Great Un-Do in these pages. Please don't try to convince me that force of arms will be required to accomplish the Un-Do, because I have come to the realization that while such military action might be a fine way to die, it is unlikely to achieve it's objective of an Un-Do. We have to do this through the Ballot Box, not the Cartridge Box.