Appropriate and Inappropriate Violence

I find it very interesting that most commenters at Erick's post, If King George Will Not Listen, at RedSTate, are decrying the INAPPROPRIATE use of violence, but, not the idea of violence itself.

Defense may be violent. That is not an inappropriate type of violence.

Violence is only a tool.

Not all of the violence has been committed by leftists. Google "Window War" and you will come to the 3 Percenters. Some of them have, allegedly, broken windows of Democratic offices. However, they do not support the GOP either, seeing them as just as bad, but in a different way. This is an example of inappropriate violence, as are threats and any types of physical assault. Violence or advocating violence to overthrow our lawful government is also inappropriate. Nor is any of this, speaking strategically or tactically, useful. At all.

The big question is "when is violence appropriate or useful?". THAT is the dangerous elephant in the room. I do not know the answer except that those conditions have not been met.

The Left knows how to set up false crises. The Left knows EXACTLY what is going through the minds of those that are thinking about force. THEY have been there. They know what the Tea Parties are thinking. THEY have been there. The Left is going to use any crisis, real or false, to discredit the Tea Parties and like minded. They even have a play book in Saul Alinsky. They have the lemming like press. They are willing to lie, cheat, and steal to falsely accuse. Ends justify the means.

If the Tea Party protests must escalate, we must be NON-Violent. It is not a good idea to only WOUND a tiger. And the progressive movement is a tiger, but one still constrained by the chains of public opinion, law, and yes, the threat of pushing certain elements so far that the left would regret it. We must use their weapons against them. Ghandi and MLK did it the right way. We must turn public opinion against them. This is still a nation of decent people. The anger needs to be banked, not stoked. Stoked fires burn brilliantly and hotly, but are quick and are a threat. Banked fires last a long time. Anger should be used as a tool, not a weapon. Use it to motivate, not harm. Every fighter knows that the first fighter to get angry tends to lose.

We must not allow the Left and their useful idiots to use our anger as a weapon against us.

cross posted at RedState

I Never Make Predictions

Mainly because I hate being wrong.
I may be wrong about what I'm preparing to predict, but it's what I see.

Hillary Rodham Clinton is going to be the Democratic nominee for President if the convention really allows a floor vote from the delegates.

Not that impressed with the House GOP

Am I the only one that's not that impressed by the continuing drama in the House?

While I applaud the dedication of that stalwart band of Republicans willing to "speachify" to an empty House, in the dark, with no audience, where was this dedication when THEY WERE IN CHARGE?

The more I see of these stunts, the more I'm reminded that the present selection of Republican Representatives and Senators do not seem to want the responsibility of leading. Being the opposition is so much easier. You can look good and be responsible for nothing.

Yes, yes, I know that oil was cheap then. So what? We knew that this day was coming in the freaking 70's! Let's see.....we had the House, the Senate, the Executive, and 1/2 of the Supreme Court (on good days...), what did the GOP accomplish? We're STILL talking about ANWR. We still don't have de-regulation of energy development. I mean, 5-10 YEARS to approve a nuclear plant or refinery. WE WENT TO THE MOON IN NINE YEARS! WORLD WAR II LASTED ONLY SIX YEARS! And that's counting from the British time line.

Homeland Security Department? HA! Remember when the Education department was a target for removal? Remember Social Security privatization? I even remember someone in Congress SUNSETTING the current tax code! Whatever happen to creativity and streamlining?
Overreaching regulatory agencies. Crazy, out of control spending. And that's BEFORE THIS BUDGET! Pork! Pork! Pork! Corruption from both parties. How bad is the corruption if the American public actually notices it? God forbid we interrupt the continuing saga of the Hollywood bimbo of the day....

Obama, Pelosi, McCain, and countless others are always blabbering about our supposed "addiction" to oil. Like we have a choice. Are THEY addicted to food? To air?

You want to hear about an addiction?
MONEY! THEY ARE ADDICTED TO MONEY! YOUR MONEY! MY MONEY! ANYBODY'S MONEY EXCEPT THEIR OWN!

Thank you again for FINALLY showing some backbone. But next time, do it at the BEGINNING of the Congressional session.

Lies that your Congress tells you. Or why do the Progressives need you fat, dumb, and angry....

Truism: If you repeat a lie long enough, it becomes recognized as the truth.
Truism: If you have no respect for the voter's intelligence, you forget that they can FACT CHECK YOUR ASS!
Truism: Pelosi and Obama are raving, power-hungry empty suits that think the voters are stupid.

Both Pelosi and Obama have spread the lie that the oil companies are leasing 68 million acres and are, apparently, just sitting on them; just spending that money for nothing......

The Demoratic party continues to spread this statistic because they understand that the truth is harmful to the progressive movement. As long as the citizenry are hurting, and private enterprise can be blamed, the progressives can point to more government as the solution. This demand also allows the progressives to put forth ideas that, normally, would be abhorrent to the populace, such as nationalizing the oil companies, taking their profits and giving them to the populace, or nationalizing the refineries. All of these ideas have been put forth by the Progressives in Congress and running for President.

From Greg Feldmeth:

I. Sources of Progressive Reform

A. Industrialization, with all its increase in productivity and the number of consumer goods, created
1) Unemployment and labor unrest
2) Wasteful use of natural resources
3) Abuses of corporate power

B. Growing cities magnified problems of poverty, disease, crime, and corruption

C. Influx of immigrants and rise of new managerial class upset traditional class alignments

D. Massive depression (1893-1897) convinced many that equal opportunity was out of reach for many Americans.

II. Who Were the Progressives?

A. New middle class composed of young professionals

1. Sought to apply principles of professions (medicine, law, business, teaching) to problems of society
2. Strong faith in progress and the ability of educated people to overcome problems
3. Rise in volunteer organizations organized to address issues (American Bar Association, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, National Municipal League, eg.)
4. Mainly urban in residence and orientation

B. Muckraking journalists attacked corruption and scandal with a sense of moral outrage

While Progressivism did address certain problems at the beginning of the 20th century, like most government-centric programs, the movement has outlive its usefulness. The modern Progressive movement depends on statism and autocratic ideas for its very survival.

The Progressives still cite "unemployment and labor unrest" though we are at full employment and membership in labor unions is down, voluntarily. They decry the "problems of poverty, corruption, and crime" as the need for more government controls without the admission that the worst urban areas ALREADY are under Progressive control.

While new immigrants are now the norm and do not "upset the traditional class alignments", the progressives seek to upset the traditional ideas of national sovereignty with allowing unlimited illegal immigration, knowing that the votes would go to them.

We are not in a depression or even a recession. But have you noticed over the last few decades, that whenever the progressives wish to regain power, the economy must be seen to be in a recession, or driven to one with horrible policies that are supposed to "save" us. High gas prices anyone?

The description of the "typical" progressive is accurate. College professors (Woodrow Wilson, our first fascist) comes to mind. Volunteer organizations....."community organizer or activist"....who does that bring to mind?

The ability of "educated people to overcome problems" definitely describes the Obamas and most of Congress. God forbid that the uneducated, unwashed masses actually fix their own problems. Force students into state run schools, force programs that teach to the lowest common denominator, and then, prevent competition even within that small realm, and you won't have citizens that can think critically. And then you won't have citizens to point out the lies, exaggerations, and distortions of history by the governmental classes.

And if you noticed the map of the last election by county, the idea that progressives are urban is obvious. Congressional election maps are very illustrative.

The terms "muckraking" and " journalist" have almost become synonyms. Journalism of today seems to demand continual outrage from its adherents. And all attacks must be towards the "corruption" found in private enterprise. Scandal, as long as it is attributable to any enemy of the press, is trumpeted to the skies. Moral outrage is selective. The press, of course, has always been this way, but at least, in the past, they ADMITTED IT!

The disease of Progressivism and Socialism is deadly to Freedom in both the short term and long term. I include both the Democratic Party and more recently, the Republican party, in the Progressive movement. If government intervention is seen as the only solution, we will ultimately become slaves to the very government that was invented to SAFEGUARD OUR FREEDOMS!