The Winds Of Civil War: Illinois-Driven Marxist Attempt To Conquer Union Threatened With Military Challenges

Be sure and check out the comments on Dollard's website in response to this article.Written by Pat DollardPat Dollard | Young AmericansPrepare to have your opinion of this war changed forever.The Winds Of Civil War: Illinois-Driven Marxist Attempt To Conquer Union Threatened With Military ChallengesFebruary 22nd, 2009 Posted By Pat Dollard.

New Hampshire fired the first shot. Although 7 other states have similar pending resolutions and bills, the Oklahoma House is the first to actually pass one. Another 27 states are expected to make similar moves in the coming months. That’ll leave the country split 71-29.Now, before you get too excited, bear in mind that all of this was likely Obama’s goal. To bait us into rebellion. Boiled down, all of these state measures are threats of secession. Recall, if you will, Obama’s obsession to be the 21st Century Abraham Lincoln, and his ominous calls to recreate and rebuild America. Who was Lincoln? Why, he was the man who “preserved” the Union by way of implementing military force against states that had seceded. Lincoln knew full well that he would not be preserving the Union, but that he would be conquering sovereign nations, nations whose cultures and ideologies he would then have to destroy, and then remake, in the image of the North’s, in order to maintain their subjugation. And that is precisely what happened in the aftermath of Lincoln’s war of aggression. He didn’t preserve the Union, he changed it forever and handed unprecedented powers to the Federal Government.The Lincoln household was most characterized by a dark spirit, an unyielding pall of gloom. He was plagued by mysterious and absolutely crippling headaches. Three of his sons were struck dead before age 20. His wife slowly went insane, the result of a ceaseless, degenerative depression. Lincoln was assassinated.Now I’m (Pat Dollard) going to run with a theory.So, what if Obama, Soros and Emanuel understand fully that our current, sudden, violent lurch into Socialism will not be tolerated by many to most of the American people, and that these people may possess sufficient physical concentration in order to secede in large territorial chunks, including those already defined by current state borders? They understand that they will be facing a crisis, right? Well, what is a crisis to the current Marxist regime of Obama other than an opportunity? Based on Emanuel’s stated philosophy, one can conclude that he and Obama seek the greatest crisis that they can possibly create. And this is it. Civil war born of broad secession is the Mother of All Crises, and therefor it is the nirvana of all crises. The current regime seeks civil war just as it seeks oxygen and food. And the actions of Abraham Lincoln provide the precise blueprint by which Obama can achieve all of his life ambitions. They provide the map with which he can navigate to the zenith of personal power, the desired destination of every narcissistic psychopath. Yes, he is a dedicated Marxist, but only insofar as Marxism is his chosen vessel to reach his ultimate goal of Absolute Power. He will defend Marxism until the day he dies, for Marxism is the only means by which he can be king, and being king is the only reason for which he lives.In order to possess long-term dictatorial powers, Obama must recreate America as a Marxist culture and Marxist economy protected by both a limitless intelligence agency and a paramilitary police force. Once these goals are achieved, the traditional military will be preserved to support similar revolutions overseas, and to defend against foreign threats. (Subduing you is his first goal, but not his ultimate one. His brain his already 150 chess moves past the end of the upcoming American civil war. You are but stepping stones. In his mind, he’s already buried you.) Audacious? Yes. The epitome of change? Yes.Now, how does Obama achieve and maintain the goals laid out in the paragraph above? Implementing Marxism by legislation in a pluralistic democracy is not sufficient to maintain the reigns of both Marxism and a Marxist leader. They can be voted and legislated away. Capitalism can then return as the controlling process of the economy. Any Marxist who let things stand as such would be committing a fatal crime against Marxism. As such, Obama can not let America stand as a pluralistic democracy. If he is to follow his duty to his Allah, one Karl Marx of Germany, he must terminate pluralistic democracy. In order to achieve this, he must first adopt the assumption that this can only be achieved by force. This is a highly convenient assumption, given that in order to maintain a Marxist dictatorship, he has to establish a paramilitary police state, along with a plausible rationale for its existence. There is one swift way to achieve all three goals. Civil war.All he has to do is create an excuse to wage literal war on those who would oppose him. This allows him to suspend democracy, crush his enemies, and establish a permanent police state, with the excuse to the American people that all of the above were done in order to preserve the Union. (The permanence of the police state will be secured by the slogan “Never Again”.) An updated version of Lincoln’s playbook, through and through.For Obama, in order to catalyze a civil war, he must first create a crisis of secession or rebellion. He intends to do so via a mix of irresponsible, crisis-creating government, and legislative implementation of the first stages of absolute Marxism. These two will be sufficient to create a rebellion against his government. The rest will follow naturally.The simplest remedy for this? For the employees of the Federal Government to refuse to work for him. No secession, no rebellion, no bloodshed, just a man who gave a war, but nobody came.Just don’t count on it.Pat DollardOklahoma 10th Amendment Resolution passes in House 83 to 13″ on Constitutional EmergencyWHEREAS, many federal laws are directly in violation of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States; andWHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment assures that we, the people of the United States of America and each sovereign state in the Union of States, now have, and have always had, rights the federal government may not usurp; andWHEREAS, Article IV, Section 4 says, “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government”, and the Ninth Amendment states that ”The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people”; andWHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court has ruled in New York v. United States, 112 S. Ct. 2408 (1992), that Congress may not simply commandeer the legislative and regulatory processes of the states; andWHEREAS, a number of proposals from previous administrations and some now pending from the present administration and from Congress may further violate the Constitution of the United States.NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND THE SENATE OF THE 1ST SESSION OF THE 52ND OKLAHOMA LEGISLATURE:THAT the State of Oklahoma hereby claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States.THAT this serve as Notice and Demand to the federal government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers.THAT all compulsory federal legislation which directs states to comply under threat of civil or criminal penalties or sanctions or requires states to pass legislation or lose federal funding be prohibited or repealed.THAT a copy of this resolution be distributed to the President of the United States, the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate of each state’s legislature of the United States of America, and each member of the Oklahoma Congressional Delegation.COMMITTEE REPORT BY: COMMITTEE ON RULES, dated 02-12-09 - DO PASS, As Coauthored.Washington Times:States Assert Sovereignty With 10th AmendmentWorried the federal government is increasing its dominance over their affairs, several states are pursuing legislative action to assert their sovereignty under the 10th Amendment of the Constitution in hopes of warding off demands from Washington on how to spend money or enact policy. The growing concerns even have a handful of governors questioning whether to accept federal stimulus money that comes with strings attached.The sentiments to declare themselves legally independent from Washington have swept across as many as a dozen states, renewing a debate over so-called unfunded mandates that last raged in the 1990s. The states question whether the U.S. government can force states to take actions without paying for them or impose conditions on states if they accept certain federal funding.“We are telling the federal government that we are a sovereign state and want to be treated as such. We are not a branch of the federal government,” said Arizona state Rep. Judy Burges, who is leading an effort in her state to pass a resolution called “Sovereignty: the 10th Amendment.” Ms. Burges was inspired to action by a pair of Bush administration initiatives: The No Child Left Behind education law of 2002 and the Real ID Act, a 2005 law that established national standards for state-issued driver’s licenses and identification cards.In other states, lawmakers say they are bracing to repeal federal mandates to spend their money that they expect will emanate from Washington once President Obama begins delivering some of the big-ticket programs promised during his presidential campaign.Oklahoma state Sen. Randy Brogdon introduced a resolution that he said would enable his state to “reclaim its 10th Amendment right to reject any and all acts of Congress that go beyond its enumerated powers in violation of the 10th Amendment.”Other states pursuing sovereignty resolutions are Hawaii, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire and Washington. Similar measures are likely to be introduced in more than a dozen other states, analysts said.“The states are sending a message,” said Robert Alt, a legal scholar at the Heritage Foundation.The nearly $800 billion stimulus bill also has raised worries.Republican governors Mark Sanford of South Carolina, Bobby Jindal of Louisiana and Rick Perry of Texas expressed reservations this week about accepting their states’ shares of the stimulus package because they are worried that the federal government will impose conditions on how it can be spent.As a self-styled staunch conservative, Mr. Sanford, the new head of the Republican Governors Association, aggressively opposed the stimulus plan. However, in a Thursday morning interview on CBS’ “The Early Show,” Mr. Sanford said his state would accept money from the stimulus bill. Opposing the plan “doesn’t preclude taking the money,” said Mr. Sanford. South Carolina’s 9.5 percent unemployment rate is the nation’s third-highest.