The Stark Choice- Freedom Or Obama
– Future generations may indeed use the word “Obama” in the same way that Norwegians remember the name “Quisling”. Quisling was a man who placed his ideology, an ideology rejected by Norwegians, above his country. Even if the People didn’t want his brand of national socialism, he was determined to impose it on the nation. Not even the brutal occupation and terrorization of Norway by the Germans phases this man, he keeps pushing until the bitter end, right up until the moment of his execution.
Obama is not going to be executed, and he doesn’t need a foreign power to help him, in fact, he is far more popular than Quisling ever was. The comparison between Obama and Quisling is rooted in the fact that both men held radical ideological views that, were they to be out in the open, their countrymen would reject. Obama’s form of progressive socialism is globalist, not nationalist, and, unlike Quisling, he is not at all up front about it.
Obama does have a radical ideological agenda, and he doesn’t care HOW it gets imposed. The facade of “democracy” is all well and good, until that democracy stands in his way. During his 2012 State of the Union speech, Obama as much as declared his agenda- he was going to get his agenda done, “with or without Congress”. This was nothing short of a declaration of war on freedom and democracy itself, but most did not see it as such, most chalked it up to “political rhetoric”. Forget the ideal of “the republic, for which it stands” (the flag), Obama’s only flag is the bright red flag of his progressive socialist ideology.
With his army of Union stormtroopers, a progressive media establishment that towes his party line, complicit courts, and dozens of well-catered to special interest groups, Obama has set up all the preconditions for an outright dictatorship, even his rheotric was that of a dictator: every idea but his own he lables as “partisan”, only his ideas are “patriotic”, and indeed the very history of the nation’s founding principles is rewritten in progressive socialist terminology. His opponent demonized and divided, his army of street rioters at the ready, with untold powers over the means of communication, there remains only a pretext, whether real or manufactured.
This does not mean that if a reach for ultimate power, and the termination of the Republic, is attempted that it will succeed, but as each day passes without united opposition to the real enemy of freedom, the man and his minions who Occupy the White House, it becomes more likely that any attempt to rid the nation of the progressive socialist threat to its existence as a free Republic will be resisted with, how shall we, “less than civil means.” The progressive socialists think this is their last shot to create a progressive utopian super-state that will make its billionair sponsors supremely rich and powerful. Those who fail to understand that this group of people wants to end America as a free Republic and create what is essentially a soviet socialist “republic” are failing to see the stark truth.
The election in 2012 will determine, once and for all perhaps, whether the progressive socialists can be removed from power peacefully or whether we will see the nation torn asunder by tyranny or even some form of civil war. Progressive socialists are the real enemy, everyone else had better unify, behind someone, right now, or watch this nation suffer, possibly unto death! Whatever you think of Romney’s flip-flopping or Newt’s filandering or “lobbying”, none of these men are hard-core dedicated progressive socialists, despite the frantic rantings of Glenn Beck.
This will only sound over the top to people who refuse to believe that the unthinkable could come to our shores. It has happened in this nation before and it has happened in many other nations, often with seeming “suddenness” that is “shocking”. The signs are there, clear as day, that the progressive socialists want a dictatorship headed by Obama. Obama has shown his contempt for democracy and freedom, and has never hesitated to put his ideology and his party ahead of the interest of the nation.
Whatever happens, future generations will see in the name “Obama” a byword for “putting radical ideology ahead of the nation”