Thursday, August 1, 2013

The PATRIOT: Edward Snowden - Thank You

A wise man once said:  "a man who will exchange liberties for a temporary safety (comfort) deserves neither liberty or safety/comfort."  That was Ben Franklin - a White Male Founder of this nation.  He was not alone in this thinking; as many of the Founders wrote similar thoughts.  The Bill of Rights are "God Given" liberties that neither man nor government were empowered to alter or remove.  The Founder's intent was to permanently protect the rights and liberties endowed by God using a Constitution whose language prohibited the government from acting to lessen or eliminate the rights and liberties, permanently ordained upon man/citizen. 

The liberty metaphor I offer is: Freedom is a tightrope walk without a safety net.  Freedom is innately shrouded with risks and threats.  The preservation of freedom requires a people who comprehend the risk of liberty and who are adequately prepared to defend their freedoms.  Man must be eternally vigilant in preserving his freedoms.  The weak, timid, and fearful cannot, will not, defend themselves - or their freedoms.  The frail are irresolute respecting liberty.  They fear the risks freedom contains.  The feeble and weak seek protection from a source who asks the least for providing the protection.  Women being smaller in stature and genetically inferior in strength to a man - traditionally seek a husband for self protection and for their offspring.  The genetic bond a man shares with the offspring produced between the pair typically prompts the man to protect the woman and offspring; instinctively   Democrats have pursued policies to transfer/eliminate liberties to the federal and state governments.  A single husband is unable to compete with the resources a government enjoys and controls.  Once government decides to rob the freedoms of its citizens, it can and it will.  Democrats/Government(s) seeking the political authority to steal Constitutionally protected liberties so do through the voting process.  Democrats have been able to enact policies that weaken and eliminate liberties due primarily to votes they receive from women.  Women are the majority of the electorate and their votes predicate election outcomes.  Women seeking protection from acts of terror - a repeat of the 9/11/2001 attack - voluntarily enabled Democrats to enact policies that spy upon citizens - through actions Democrats claim are structured to protect the citizenry.

One employee, Edward Snowden, was employed in an agency of the federal government.  Through his employ, he witnessed actions within the agency that defied the US Constitution's protections for personal property - the 4th amendment.  Mr. Snowden acted to inform the US citizens of the threat posed to their rights and liberties.  Snowden broke an oath he took for agency security purposes.  Snowden saw one of his his oaths and actions within the agency as incongruent.  He could not act to protect and preserve the duty the Constitution imposes upon every citizen AND deny the actions within the agency that trample over the rights and liberties guaranteed in the Constitution.

Mr. Snowden is a patriot.  Snowden's respect and dedication to the preservation of the freedoms and liberties articulated in the US Constitution prompted him to forswear his security oath made to the US government agency and embrace the responsibilities and loyalty he was ordained by virtue of his birth as a US citizen.  Snowden broke a rule specifically to assure the the liberties and freedoms guaranteed in the US Constitution - which the employment oath was ostensibly created to preserve

Snowden will live the remainder of his life hiding in a God-forsaken corner of the globe - if he isn't murdered for his actions. A drone strike will likely end his life if Obama/Democrats/Agency officials locate him. Snowden informed the world what the US government was doing with their snooping equipment.  This is equipment that US citizens presumed (because they were told by legislators) is used to look for potential terrorist before they struck. Apparently, considering the number of terror attacks that have escaped detection; spying on the American people and the political enemies of Democrats has assumed a predominant role within the agency that employed Snowden. Amazingly, BOTH political parties voted to permit, and continue to defend, a government that snoops and confiscates the personal property of its citizens. 

The President and government's official farcical response is they actively snoop into the personal property to make Americans safe. These are the same folks who abandoned a US Ambassador and Navy Seals in Libya when threatened. They died. So will Snowden. Our government does not want us knowing what they are up to, and the information they now hold and control.

The recent IRS scandal where employees and Obama's political appointees (operatives)  should make everyone's blood run cold. If a President and/or government chooses to use a government agency that now controls a citizen's personal property, to attack the citizen based upon political preferences, to what lengths will they go to eliminate political opposition? There are no limits and no laws Democrats and government employees will not break to maintain their offices and authority in Washington, D.C.. Democrats in government are keeping copies of everyone's emails, internet searches, social media (contacts and activity) every phone call - all this information and more is captured and stored for some future date when the enemies of the State will be identified and prosecuted from crimes not yet enacted into law - or perhaps they are enacted - in tiny paragraphs written into obscure places like the farm subsidy bill.

Women are primarily responsible for allowing this activity that breaks Constitutional protections and offends liberties. Once women gained the vote - comfort and safety became the primary concerns for the majority of citizens (women) when voting.  This female behavior is instinctual and largely immutable.  It is influenced by concern for their offspring.  Even rational women who weigh political debates eventually insert the security factor into their rationale, and the security risks drive their votes.  When Democrats introduced and codified birth control and abortion fears, the female vote became axiomatic for the majority of women.  When the Founders chose to deny women the voting franchise, they did so after considering the implications realistically - and from experience.

The Founders were not sexist men but they knew the behaviors of women and denied women the vote because of their preferences of safety and comfort - RE: Protection.  Women number over half the population of voters.  Together with weak, timid, conniving men, they can assemble a majority of voters.  Democrats require a person deny the information their senses deliver to them.  Democrat voters suspend reality and focus upon imaginary forces, risks, and threats rather than upon what their senses reveal are the problems in their lives.

As the Democrat Party increasingly stole the liberties of white men, and set upon a path of denigrating white men and isolating their political powers, they sought to lure women to consider government as their surrogate spouses/providers.  Abortion and birth control were the mechanisms used.  Democrats were successful and have stolen significant freedoms accordingly.  Democrats are presently empowered to steal a considerable number of liberties and perhaps permanently rest control of government.  A majority of women apparently value safety and comfort over liberty and freedom - or they they are too feckless to know how their votes works to end their liberties.  It is no wonder why Democrats frantically advanced a preposterous Republican "War on Women" assertion during the past election.  The War on Women tactic is used by Democrats in every election, and with every sanctioned political groups Democrats claim to represent - and PROTECT!  Risk, threats and Fear are the operative dynamics.  Democrats have articulated threats for each sanctioned group - racism, sexism, homophobia, et al.  Sound an alarm!  Define the threat.  Encourage and enable the group's fanatical response.  Provide a solution (end to the threat) VOTE Democrat! 

This factual observation, with ample evidence supporting the observation, does not positively reflect upon women and their priorities.  It further enforces the Founding Father's conclusions that women should not hold the voting franchise because women are instinctively predisposed to seek security for themselves and their offspring.  Instinctual predisposition renders women incapable or unwilling to choose liberty and the parasitical risks and threats contained in liberty over security.  While not all women are physically and emotionally ordained by their morphology to trade away their liberties, the majority will and so do.  This reality so significantly alters the political landscape and the Constitutional protections afforded every citizen - women holding the ability to vote should be reconsidered and alternative means rendered and provided for women to express their instinctual security needs and behaviors. 

No comments:

Post a Comment