Keep Drinking the Kool-Aid

I wrote an article recently concerning standing up for Liberty where I stated the following:

The signers of the Declaration of Independence were not looking for a leader, they were affirming their freedom. That must be our only goal.

This simple premise has brought out the expected Kool-aid response from an ABO (anybody but Obama) follower on another site which posted the article. When I suggested that he stop drinking the Kool-Aid, he wrote the following response:

1. The tired old Kool-Aid statement has no explicit meaning, unless you can say where I got it.

2. What does “Fight For Liberty” mean, specifically? (a) Shoot off a machine gun? (b) Run down the street, throwing hand grenades at the cars? (c) Go to a union rally and disrupt the meeting with shouts and yelling? (d) Join the Army and get sent to Iraq? (e) Vote for the Libertarian candidate on the ballot?  (f) Write in “Mickey Mouse” on your ballot?

3. My “Fight For Liberty” has only ONE action: Get as many people to vote for Romney as possible.


No other action will get rid of Premier Obama. 

And, by the way, don’t waste my time with nonsense statements about Kool Aid, and Fight For Liberty, which have no exact meaning and don’t lead others to take specific actions which will save our country.

So we have two different paths for the future of our country if we discount the Socialism pathway:

1. Vote Republican

2. Restore the Constitution

Let’s explore the first pathway according to the above comments by way of  Saul Alinsky in Rules for Radicals:

Rule 5: Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It’s hard to counterattack ridicule, and it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.

Instead of responding to my belief that we should be fighting for Liberty as our forefathers did with sacred Honor, the premise was ridiculed with his suggestions of what my actions will be in the future. I would like to believe that these suggestions are the result of his frustrations with our government.

Rule 11: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it. Don’t try to attack abstract corporations or bureaucracies. Identify a responsible individual. Ignore attempts to shift or spread the blame.

This rule is used against both me and Obama above. Again, no facts, just rhetoric.

According to Alinsky, the main job of the organizer is to bait an opponent into reacting. “The enemy properly goaded and guided in his reaction will be your major strength.” 

Here is my reply:

The fight for Liberty is all that there is: it is the basis of our country.You can dismiss my credibility with supposed accusations along with the warnings from our founding fathers concerning Liberty, sacred Honor and security. People who blame Obama for this country’s problems are willing to vote for anyone to remove him. Last year’s deficit spending was $5 trillion: over $42,000 per household. Under the Constitution, the Republican controlled House of Representatives is responsible for allocating expenditures.

We learned nothing from the 2008 election which gave us McCain for the nominee. Now we have Romney who will save the country. How? How will he address the $130 trillion debt? I do not think it is too much to ask for solutions to this nation’s problems (or even address them). But people keep drinking the Republican Kool-Aid and support “anybody but Obama”.

This will not solve anything. As for you other assertions in item 2, there are not worth my time: ridiculing people to make a point is one of Alinsky’s tactics in Rules for Radicals.
My Fight for Liberty is the same as our forefathers. As for your fight for liberty, here is Mitt supporting the NDAA and Obama:

 I will stand by my original premise: Liberty should be our only consideration. Everyone in this country understands how our Declaration of Independence and Constitution have been abused by the government. I would like to point out that not one reader asked the simple question: what am I proposing? I posed one course of action to Stewart Rhodes of Oathkeepers: is it time for a Bonus Army II (see video)? The purpose of this army could be as simple as asking Congress to pass a budget as outlined in the Constitution.

The second pathway is to restore the Constitution. Mr. Rhodes’ answer to this question is three steps:

1. Nullification

2. Civil Disobedience

3. Revolution

You can watch Mr. Rhodes’ speech to gain more insight.

America has become a nation of sheep with our hands out asking the government for “More Please”.  I will not ask a government of men for my Liberty. EVER.

David DeGerolamo

Plugin by: PHP Freelancer
This entry was posted in Civil Unrest, Editorial and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
1 Comment
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
11 years ago

At the present time, I do not see any state using nullification. The people using Civil Disobedience to some extent maybe, but probably all three would/will happen almost simultaneously.