Night And Day Politics: good vs. evil

I figure it this way: there are some percentage in the country who are not pulling for America but instead actively working or hoping against the country in some way. Now I conservatively peg this number at between 21-30% of the people. This probably fluctuates according to external circumstances at a given time. For example, it might be particularly higher during something like Vietnam protests, or other contentious events, while being at a lower tide at say the 9/11 attacks. I see an ebb and flow to it.

I’d say it is flexible.which would mean that the more stirring the times are the more that number is on the upper side or increases. The more settled the times the better.

But I don’t see the same dramatic results from positive circumstances. I don’t see that those help to unify as much as those negative circumstances tend to increase the American angst. It could also be a little like the swing-voter effect, from one side to the other.

At any rate, with that premise it doesn’t take much to consider all the ways a hostile foreign power might want to take advantage of these trends or tides of opposition. Indeed they are always looking for ways to extort the present situation for sinister gains.

It also occurs to me that this extortion should be used by our own government to capitalize on those unifying good things to boost pro-American sentiments. This is something Trump seems to be tapping into, whether it is due to this strategic theory or not. He seems to try to extort good circumstances for positive gains to the country.

But on the left, they do almost the polar opposite. They use negative events, situations, animosities, circumstances or anxieties for their political gains. (against the country)

Considering the way this left operates in their tactics, it reminds me so much of the exact way our arch enemies operate. For instance, Putin is an opportunist who finds a way to extort any negative situation — even some positives — to us for his personal gain.

So I am seeing the same formula between Putin and how Democrats operate. Of course I don’t think it is by coincidence. They both use similar political tactics. Anything bad for America is to be converted into political gain for them. They are so much alike.

Naturally, I think the conservatives and Republicans have to do a much better job using positive things, wherever we can find them, as positive influences for America. And convert negative things or events into positive results. We must start politically operating more like opportunists. This does not come easy for people used to relying on basic truth to sort things out, who are much more reserved about ‘using’ circumstances for political gain.

But why should we be timid about doing that? It is for a good cause. It is to better the country, right? Not that progressives want to really benefit the country. Tearing it down and apart has been their trademark. That is not their objective, but it is ours. And we should not run away from that motive.

Why should we be restrained in the face of an outright assault on our Republic? Why be hands off in the face of foreign invasions; whether orchestrated from hostile states or powers, or by hoards of people amassing against our borders — whatever the motives.

Right Ring | Bullright

Insecurities of Border Security

A lot has been made about Trump’s use of the word invasion. Let’s consult the Constitution, shall we? See what it has to say.

The Constitution:
Article I; Section 8 (Congress)
15: To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

Article I; Section 9 (Congress)
“2: The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

Article IV; Section 4 (states relations)

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.

Now given that our own legislature has not risen to the challenge and taken action to protect and secure the border is ignoring their duty. Who is violating their oath?

You can draw all the pertinent conclusions about it you want but I don’t see a problem with the term invasion, which is specifically mentioned in the Constitution.

Of course a borderless, lawless country would have no such worries. So, many Islamists would like to call murder an honor killing, too, but it doesn’t change what it is. Likewise, substituting the word caravan(s) doesn’t change an invasion.

Presidential oath:

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Congressional oath:

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”

See how that works? There is something about the “well and faithfully” part.

Who is lying?

Right Ring | Bullright Trump’s use of the word invasion

Gen. Hayden sees DHS as Nazis

So here we go. let the Nazi comparisons begin. But they are done by Obama VIPs and the calcified left.

Gateway Pundit

Former CIA Director Michael Hayden just compared the US to Nazis.

Jim Hoft

Hayden is outraged that immigrants are separated from their children when they come into the country illegally.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/06/former-cia-director-compares-united-states-to-nazi-germany/

It doesn’t get any lower or worse than that.

I would add, or how many Jews willingly and gleefully jumped on trains to “camps” to try to improve their lives? (or gladly went unaccompanied)

Why should walking through the Resistance portal guarantee the validity of the absurd?

Muslim invasion

It’s the invasion, stupid.

Conservative says Muslim Migration West is a Planned Invasion to Destroy Western Christendom!

“This clearly is an invasion. This is a planned invasion, not only in Europe but also in the United States. I believe for the specific purpose of destroying Western Christendom.” — Former Rep. Michele Bachmann

Former Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R-MN) is making waves (again), for her vociferous stand against the Muslim wave of migrants heading West from the Middle East and Africa. While Bachmann’s stance against Muslim immigration has been known for some time, her latest condemnation made some specific and surprising arguments – namely, that the migration was a “planned invasion” for the “specific purpose of destroying Western Christendom.”

Read more: http://eaglerising.com/30186/conservative-says-muslim-migration-west-is-a-planned-invasion-to-destroy-western-christendom/

What other reason would they have for coming, since they hate us so much?

But under this situation, the one who receives criticism is for discussing a ban on Muslims. The invasion gets none. So they’ll attack the messenger.