re: #526 SanFranciscoZionist

Sorry, not meaning to keep picking on this one post, but what do you mean by what goes on in universities being ‘backed by force’? If you mean assault, I would say, the logical and reasonable answer, once you’re outta there, is to press charges.

I don’t mind being picked on - these are real problems, as our morals and principles are faced with outrageous challenges in real life.

The turning point in some sense was at Cornell in 1969 (or about) when black “students” (who knows) turned up with weapons on campus to demand their “Black Studies” department. The administration caved and gave it to them. Lesson learned.

Fast forward to today, and the Muslim anti-Isreal and not very hidden anti-Jewish “demonstrations” at UC Irvine and elsewhere. They are physically imposing in their shouting down and interference with normal dialogue.

Then look at the Black Panthers who intimidated voters last November and who just got a pass from Holder AFTER THEY CONFESSED.

Then read #646 about SEIU, which is far more ominous since they are national, whereas the above-cited examples were pretty small-scale (and I notice all minority - nothing intended by that, although they were/are pretty outrageous). With the Alinsky playbook in hand, the Left is in your face, and have no compuction about using legal harassment and the implication of physical threat (big guys showing up on your lawn) if not the real thing.

The Alinsky connection, with even Hillary Clinton cheering on, relates to the universities as well since there now seems to be a whole theory of “persuasion” which is in real life not “academic” at all, but highly calculated and studied - all in pursuit of the Gramscian ideal of ACTION, not contemplation.

When this is married to the electoral practices of Chicago democrats, it could be toxic indeed.

While I am totally non-violent, I try not to be an idiot, and it seems obvious to me that this has to be countered somehow. I don’t think it has been, and the current full-court press from Obama, which led Mark Rudd of Columbia 1966 fame to say that Lenin would be proud of Obama and his tactics, has already achieved an alarming amount of damage to the republic, unless I’m badly mistaken.

To counter this by saying that we should go home and think about what we can do, when there’s a life- and republic-changing plan in congress, seems not realistic.

As for having a Republican president for eight years, as you put it - no, I don’t think this did much beyond a holding action. 9-11 diverted the normal course of events, and most of the political capital of the right was spent winning against the jihad (which I think was successful - look at the state of Al Qaeda on the Arab “street” at this point). The Dems were completely obstructive whenever Bush tried to deal with serious domestic issues.

My posts have been treated a bit lightly, as though I were naive - but I don’t think I am. The “Movement” as we called it in the 60’s, has been working hard all these years, and while this may be their last hurrah, as they’re rapidly going gray, with the lucky accident of Obama they’re riding high. And they know exactly what they want to do with America - they’ve been thinking about nothing else for forty years.

People who cavalierly withheld their vote in the last election, or were pissy about supporting McCain, clearly gave no thought as to what would happen when these people got their hands on the levers of power.

While I agree we have to work hard on all the good things people have suggested, there is also a pressing need to block obamacare and cap-and-trade RIGHT NOW. If these get through, all bets are off.