Obama Playing Chicken with American Men

[bhvostal]

Obama Playing Chicken with American Men

"The Obama administration's current warpath against so-called "gun violence" -- which is Newspeak for non-violence committed by non-criminals with their non-illegal private property -- is a brazen challenge to America's manhood. The progressives have apparently decided that this is the moment when they can play their ultimate authoritarian hand, and let the chips fall where they may. They believe, in other words, that this is the moment when they may be able to break America at last, one way or another."

for the rest of the article.....

Articles: Obama Playing Chicken with American Men

~ Brian

 

[Spikedog]

I read it. It has some good points.

 

[Rookie]

Great article.

 

[rogerdt99]

Great article. I really like the "non-violence committed by non-criminals with their non-illegal private property" quote.

These few words wrap it up so succinctly that it just baffles me that there are those who just do not understand it.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I like the American Thinker site. While I might not agree with some of the points he made in there, I think he's right about where we're at.

 

[Jarhead77]

Excellent article.

 

[achilles]

Very good article.

 

[jayhawk]

Ridiculous and ego-centric way to frame the fight to keep our constitutional rights. It's not an attack on manhood, it's a subversion of the rights of all law abiding citizens.

 

[rhino]

Ridiculous and ego-centric way to frame the fight to keep our constitutional rights. It's not an attack on manhood, it's a subversion of the rights of all law abiding citizens.

Why can't it be both?

 

[jayhawk]

Why can't it be both?

Oh, it certainly can, it's just an unproductive way to frame the debate.

This paragraph exemplifies my problem with this kind of rhetoric:

The challenge facing the men of America -- not the mere "males," but the men -- is becoming clearer, starker, and more essential every day. That minority of us in the rest of the world who still care about freedom and modern civilization can only watch, with concern, sadness and hope, as the U.S. federal government, having reached its moment of final metamorphosis -- its "fundamental transformation" -- stares its patriotic citizens in the eye and says, "I dare you."

He's going out of his way to marginalize himself, to be a superhero standing in defiance of the evil government and the presumably less patriotic masses. That kind of rhetoric isn't going to win this fight, which unfortunately is a fight of public opinion (if indirectly). This isn't an issue that the "men" are going to win, we need the mere males and females on the side of the constitution as well. I think we'd do well to keep the debate in an intellectual realm and not delve into emotional hand wringing.

What we're faced with is what we've been faced with time and time again...some bills that must go through congress. I don't think we've quite reached the cracking point of western civilization.

 

[Mark 1911]

Good stuff! Thanks for posting. I added the American Thinker site to my faovrites.

 

[cobber]

Great article. I really like the "non-violence committed by non-criminals with their non-illegal private property" quote.

These few words wrap it up so succinctly that it just baffles me that there are those who just do not understand it.

My gun is a tool of non-violence, unless you attack me or my family.

 

[CarmelHP]

Oh, it certainly can, it's just an unproductive way to frame the debate.

This paragraph exemplifies my problem with this kind of rhetoric:


He's going out of his way to marginalize himself, to be a superhero standing in defiance of the evil government and the presumably less patriotic masses. That kind of rhetoric isn't going to win this fight, which unfortunately is a fight of public opinion (if indirectly). This isn't an issue that the "men" are going to win, we need the mere males and females on the side of the constitution as well. I think we'd do well to keep the debate in an intellectual realm and not delve into emotional hand wringing.

What we're faced with is what we've been faced with time and time again...some bills that must go through congress. I don't think we've quite reached the cracking point of western civilization.

I think you may be mistaking what his phrase about being in the minority of the rest ofthe world means. He's a Canadian living in South Korea.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Emasculating citizens is a good, concise description of what is being done. While I would tend to explain it more in terms of a deliberate, progressive (no pun intended) effort to infuse the serf mentality, it definitely works.

 

[MightySanta]

Very good article, thanks for sharing!

 

[88GT]

Oh, it certainly can, it's just an unproductive way to frame the debate.

This paragraph exemplifies my problem with this kind of rhetoric:


He's going out of his way to marginalize himself, to be a superhero standing in defiance of the evil government and the presumably less patriotic masses. That kind of rhetoric isn't going to win this fight, which unfortunately is a fight of public opinion (if indirectly). This isn't an issue that the "men" are going to win, we need the mere males and females on the side of the constitution as well. I think we'd do well to keep the debate in an intellectual realm and not delve into emotional hand wringing.

What we're faced with is what we've been faced with time and time again...some bills that must go through congress. I don't think we've quite reached the cracking point of western civilization.

It isn't intended to win the fight, but to act as a catalyst to the silent majority that their opinions and feelings on this subject are not unique, so that when/if the time comes, they don't have to waste time wondering about the legitimacy of their desire to act a particular way.

We won't "win" if the "men" don't react. This is the proverbial permission slip, the rallying cry, the cyber version of a half-blued man waxing eloquent about taking lives and freedom.