Ep. 25 Conspiracy Theory or Reality Check? Let Facts Be Submitted To A Candid World [audio/text]

Ep. 25 Conspiracy Theory or Reality Check? Let Facts Be Submitted To A Candid World [audio/text]

Liberalism 2 Comments on Ep. 25 Conspiracy Theory or Reality Check? Let Facts Be Submitted To A Candid World [audio/text]

Sometimes the liberal agenda seems more far-fetched fiction than it does credible threat.  But if we are going to stop the slow descent into tyranny, we have to come to grips with what is actually going on in this country.  Need evidence that our cops are the next target?  Take a listen and decide for yourself…

Full Transcript Of Audio

Now let’s be honest. I know some of you who heard my last blog were skeptical, you were doubting what I was saying, sounded to extreme. I know, c’mon admit it. You listened to my comments on a national takeover of the police and you were like, “C’mon, seriously Feet To The Fire man, seriously?! No one really wants to do that. Too far-fetched.” And you may have even gone so far as to think “alright, buddy, this is starting to sound like conspiracy theory stuff.” Now, that hurts, honestly, I gotta admit, deep down, that hurts that you’d think that about me, but I’m willing to overlook it if you’re willing to reconsider what I said in light of more news that’s come in from Baltimore, news that has served as further confirmation of the point I was making.

And by the way, I’m certainly no conspiracy theorist. I was just giving a candid and credible assessment of the current political landscape, an assessment of the dialogue we’re hearing in the news. And I was giving, if I may humbly say, a correct characterization of liberal Democrats and their basic inclination to simply want to regulate and control anything they can get their hands on, including our local law enforcement. And I was not actually intending to talk about this topic again today, but I just had to address real quick this other stuff that has served as, well, some vindication. Kind of like, “see, I told you.” And this is helpful especially to some of you good-hearted naysayers out there who are desperately trying to attribute some shred of a dignified motive to these rabid liberals who compromise the political LEFT in America, something more dignified than merely the intent to propagate man’s tyranny against a free society. But alas, that’s what they are, and their deeds and words betray it.

This from a conservative news source that I heard during the week following the Baltimore riots, just after I did my show on local cops, “One of the great unspoken things that’s happening in police departments all over the country, in Ferguson, in Detroit, everywhere, the Obama administration is essentially taking over and rewriting police procedural manuals under the philosophies that Eric Holder and Obama have toward policing.  Their attitude is the police are responsible for this [referencing Baltimore]… There’s an unseen, an underreported effort by the Obama administration to totally take over local police departments.” Bingo, nailed it! Exactly what I was saying. Wake up, America, this stuff’s for real!

And then of course dear old Al Sharpton, whose comments some weeks back initially propelled me to address this topic on police, was at it again in Baltimore with no time to lose. On Thursday, April 30, just days after my last post, he once again started beating the same drum, “We need the Justice Department to step in and take over policing in this country. [What? Is he for real?!? Do you hear that? That should terrify everyone of us that such a comment is anywhere even seriously uttered or considered as a legitimate course of action in America. Take over policing, you’ve got to be kidding me! And he goes on…] In the 20th century, they had to fight states’ rights to get the right to vote. We’re going to have to fight states’ rights in terms of closing down police cases. Police must be held accountable.” Fight states’ rights?!? He just said it, flat out for all to hear. How patently absurd and un-American. Fight states’ rights?!? How can you fight states’ rights when states’ rights is the exact and peculiar identification of our unique political system? We ARE states, that’s what we’re called, that’s what defines us, that’s exactly who we are, the United Sates, plural, of America, not the United State of Obama’s Justice Department. That’s a nightmare. Sharpton, and all liberals, sorry, not to pick on dear old Al too much, these libs want to fight the fundamental principle of the division of power in this country, the autonomy of independent states as members of a confederated republic. He is attacking at the very foundation of liberty, at the very core of who we are. That, my friends, was an absurd and radical comment from the never-ever level-headed LEFT.

And I also read in a post that in lots of these cities where we’ve seen these incidents, the Obama Administration has already come in to regulate and usurp police procedures, some 15 or 17 cities at this point. That is a direct assault on the independent executive prerogative of our local governments, meaning the prerogative of enforcement. In those cases, the Feds use the power of the purse, granting or withholding federal money, to demand compliance with these national protocol and regulations that are being superimposed onto cities. Same as they’ve done with education and common core and federal standards on public education as another example. You want federal money granted to your state for subsidizing rising school costs? Fine, you can have the federal money, as long as you adopt federal guidelines and federal standards, that’s what we call Common Core. As long as you accept the federal takeover of your schools via bureaucratic regulation, you can have the money. You reject compliance to federal mandates, you lose the flow of funds. And federal mandates is just that, handing authority for your schools over to the national government. This is why government-subsidized anything is never good, because the money always comes with the bureaucratic fine print which you better believe is always a means of expanding the central government’s authority. Education, cops, healthcare, this is all the same as everything else liberals get their hands on, and they always do it by promising cash in return for compliance. In some cultures we call that bribery, but I don’t know, I guess for liberals it’s something different. Suit yourself, if you think buying political compliance with other people’s hard-earned taxpayer dollars that doesn’t even belong to you is somehow ethical or justified, well then, I guess you’re a Democrat. Go enjoy your regulated civil tyranny. As for me, my message to politicians is keep your dirty federal dollars and your sinister government regulations. We don’t need your money or your regulatory fine print that comes with it. That’s what school districts need to say to the Department of Education, and that’s what city police forces need to say to the Department of Justice.

Here’s a quote I heard on conservative radio to prove my point further and to also show I’m not the only one saying this, “So that’s the way it ends up being, and this is how Obama and the left are changing the structure and the definition, the intent, the overall purview of police departments.  The objective is to rein them in, is to really restrain them,”

And World Net Daily had an interesting article posted on Friday, May 1 about Sharpton’s Baltimore comments. It was entitled “Obama’s ‘National Civilians Security Force’ Endorsed,” meaning endorsed by Sharpton. And what that article references is an Obama speech from 2008 in Colorado Springs when then presidential-candidate Barack said the following: “We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.” There you go! National executive force, plain and simple, straight from the horse’s mouth. That plan was essentially rearticulated and fully endorsed in Baltimore with Sharpton’s ridiculous speech, that’s the point the article is trying to make, Obama’s plan is alive and well and gaining traction. And the post goes on to mention a book from 2013 entitled “Impeachable Offenses: The Case To Remove Barack Obama from Office.” And the book documents threatening developments in his Department of Homeland Security. According to WND, the author details how even back then the DHS was already “demonstrating troubling signs the agency is shifting the balance of power away from local and state municipalities toward a centralized federal authority.” Yet again a clear articulation of exactly the point I’ve been trying to make.

And the evidence just keeps pouring in. How about the Baltimore mayor, Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, at a press conference a couple Wednesdays back on May 6th, literally requesting that the DOJ (that’s the Department of Justice) come into Baltimore and investigate the police department, it’s “patterns or practice,” and implement necessary reforms, which obviously means some sort of federal regulations or guidelines. That’s federal control, that’s federal takeover, that’s exactly what I’ve been explaining, blatant and unfiltered, the feds coming in and turning our police departments, formerly an enforcement arm of our own neighborhoods, turning them into enforcement arms of the national government that are patroling our neighborhoods. This woman is actually begging that the sovereign, independent localized law enforcement of the municipality over which she has been given charge by the electorate be ceded and surrendered over to the federal government under DOJ oversight. She even met with the new flaming liberal Attorney General Loretta Lynch on the day prior, begging for federal intervention. Begging, “Please come take over our cops!” What a breach of trust, a betrayal of the trust of the voters she was elected to protect. Surrendering municipal sovereignty, actually inviting the bureaucratic tyrants in through your front door? Federal police force, anyone? You’ve got mayors asking for it! Unbelievable! This is out in the open no less, not even being secretive here about what they’re trying to do. And that’s because they know the low information voters really have no idea what the implications of federal police force regulations are, just like unfortunately uninformed voters had no idea what federal health care regulations would mean for the medical field in this country, and that is, socialized medicine. And yes, this is the same genius mayor who, when the riots broke out, said the city needed to give “those who wished to destroy [meaning the protestors] space to do that.” So her keen insight into the separation of powers is matched only by her highly intuitive regard for personal property rights. This mayor, these people, these libs, they are unabashed in their nauseating and relentless devotion to central government.

And then finally, two articles from the Politico, which is an online news website, articles that specifically detail the march of the feds into our cities. Obviously, since it’s the mainstream media, it’s painted in the most glorious of light, and any who oppose are racist, extremist, myopic conservatives. And the articles use the new buzz words now for liberals who want to establish national police force policy, and the buzz words are “criminal justice reform” and “investigating pattern-and-practice” That’s their key phrases they employ now to silence dissent because who could think to oppose that, right? That is, if anyone can even figure out what in the world that all means. Criminal justice reform? What the heck does that inane jargon even mean? Like reform how we judge criminals? Does that mean change justice, reform justice, like stop using justice and let’s go with injustice? It’s so stupid and meaningless, it’s just a fancy way, a clean-sounding way to say, investigate cops and over-regulate local police because we think they unfairly target minorities, a claim for which there is no justifiable evidence. But it’s a claim that makes for good propaganda to perpetuate the policies of government overreach. And even though criminal justice reform means nothing substantive, it’s still effective lemming-talk, and people and politicians all sigh with their politically correct yummy noises and say “ooh yeah, mmm, yeah, criminal justice, let’s reform that. Yeah, we gotta do something about that.” What the heck, what does that mean, I ask again? Do something about what, using justice? You can’t reform justice, you implement it! I can’t take this. It’s all mindless, vapid propaganda, meaningless platitudes, to get people to buy into the problem and the proposed socialist solution, which necessarily carries with it the slow yet deliberate dissolution of our liberties. Meaningless platitudes repeated and regurgitated by the masses, classic technique of dictator regimes.

Anyway, the first article starts out discussing how pressure is coming on Republicans to consider criminal justice reform and police reform. And of course, there’s the token slap in the face to conservatives, who the article says don’t usually consider this issue of significant importance. Right, because conservatives don’t care about dead civilians. Give me a break. It goes on to note that the outcry is increasing for leaders to do something about police murdering blacks. And yet what it doesn’t say is that this social outrage is completely and perfectly orchestrated by the community agitators who comprise the radical LEFT, like Obama and Mayor Blake.

So there it is, presumed police targeting of blacks, no question on that, no challenge to that proposition, it’s taken at face value and already assumed in the narrative that cops are slaughtering minorities with reckless impunity. Then, of course, the implication that conservatives don’t care about it because well, obviously, conservatives don’t care about blacks or minorities, right? C’mon, everyone knows that! And so we can’t just sit on our hands and do nothing, how terrible, that’s not an option!… See, see how it’s portrayed? That the plan for federal intervention is better by far! It’s a must, it is vital, it’s necessary and inevitable, it just has to be because it means we’re doing something about this crisis! And conservatives, how dare they?! They want to just stand idly by and do nothing and turn a blind eye to the rampant brutalization and unjust incarceration of innocent minority civilians, all at the hands of racist cops? The federal government has to act, they’ve got to step in and do something for crying out loud!

See folks, I told you, federal regulations, this is how the entire national conversation is going. And the move towards full nationalization of cops is all done in the name of regulations, that’s how the slow process of a national enforcement agency is implemented in an otherwise free society.

Leave it to Republican Senator Pat Toomey from PA to bring sanity to the discussion, who was quoted in the article saying the following, “there’s no epidemic of police criminality in this country. Policing, historically, has been and belongs in the province of the states, [YES! that’s what I’ve been saying]… he continues…] so I’m not sure that there’s a role for Congress per se, except to engage in this discussion and make some points about the fact that the majority of the police do a great job.” Thank you, Senator Toomey, just what I said from the get-go: local police force is an extension of state and local government and thus distinctly the purview and jurisdiction of local government only. It is a clear expression of the division of power in our confederation. The feds need to stay out. Their commentary is unnecessary.

And then the second article. That one details how the DOJ is so chomping at the bit to get it’s hands all over regulating our cops that they’re asking for, you guessed it… more federal money! They just can’t handle all this over-regulation without paying for more bureaucrats and lawyers. So I’m not crazy, the libs are actually desperate for funding just to nationalize. This stuff, these liberal projects, they cost money, ya know!

And to be honest, the underlying tone from Politico is despicable. The second article starts out with the statistic of 18,000 law enforcement agencies throughout the country and refers to “rogue law enforcement bodies.” And that’s all to make a point: lead with a shockingly high statistic that screams inefficiency and zero accountability, that implies under-regulation and a natural problem with the system. Let me translate – too many separate entities for any sensible management, they’re too independently autonomous, so nationalizing is the only way to effectively “reform” policing.

And the title says it all, “Police scandals threaten to overwhelm justice department.” What police scandals?!?! What is this garbage? What police scandals other than the spurious claims of controversy being whipped up by the LEFT?!? Well, the article answers for us with the same theme: it’s media coverage of stories about police killing “unarmed black men.” Incredible. Keep running the same narrative article after article. If that isn’t blatant propaganda, I don’t know what is. And it calls the Baltimore Mayor’s proactive request for DOJ intervention precedent-setting. And so we see baby-steps, inch-by-inch, precedent by precedent, towards nationalizing, and for liberals this new precedent is received with glee and ecstasy because of the regulatory possibilities it opens up.

And listen to this chilling fact: since taking charge, Obama’s regime has invaded and probed at least 21 autonomous police departments (that’s even more than the post I referenced earlier) in urban centers around the country, from LA to New York, (I think the number is higher by now actually). These are investigations that include lawsuits and legal agreements for federal standards. You know, legislating local police policy to conform to centralized mandates. Are you seeing this now, folks? Am I beating a dead horse enough for you to see the writing on the wall? Libs want this, they want to dominate our personal, local prerogative of armed self-defense, our local executive power, because this civil liberty of self-defense stands as one of the single greatest impediments to their march towards tyranny. And sinful man has just such a nagging penchant for tyranny and oppression over his fellow man.

I told you guys! Who didn’t believe me last week? We gotta stop hand-holding with these extremists who unfortunately comprise the Democrat party, gotta stop assuming they have the best of intentions, gotta stop getting all excited about their national initiatives supposed to fix these “problems” that the media is helping to whip up. Nationalize means consolidated authority, and that equals: bad. Dispersed authority, division of power, plurality of states, multiple, independent spheres of government: good, it means the perpetuation of liberty. You get it? Do you get it? We gotta get this and not lose the intellectual battle here over who we are in America.

Let justice roll down like waters, America, and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream. Don’t believe the hype out there. Correctly identifying and defining the LEFT, warning of their motives and strategy, predicting their next insidious move to stifle liberty and consolidate power: that’s not conspiracy theory stuff, that’s calling it like it is, facing reality and candidly exposing evil. Look, if I start telling you to wear tin-foil hats and to never trust your mailman, then maybe you can start to qualify me as a wacko. But when conservatives like me simply raise an alarm because crazy Dems are going after our cops, don’t be immediately dismissive. Liberals may call it rhetoric and scare tactics, but we call it, well… tyranny. And when tyrants rear their ugly head, you better be ready to hold their feet to the fire…

Related Articles

Copyright © 2015 All Rights Reserved - Feet to the Fire New Jersey Web Design | PuxApps

Back to Top