Keep working on those spy and subterfuge skills, Book.

If the enemy prioritizes their artillery on, say, Sarah Palin, then you know she is an important strategic objective for them that you shouldn’t deprive resources and support of. If the enemy prioritizes gun control, healthcare spending on Muslims terrorists, and high risk mortgages to blacks and other poor minorities, then you know where to focus your attention at.

That is the fundamental over arching facet of importance here, not people’s individual preferences. Individuals will always have different priorities compared to others. But what cannot be argued, what cannot be a subjective thing where “everybody’s views are right, no matter how different” concerns actual military and political strategy. Those things, those things of the enemy, are not “subjective”. They are either true or they are false. They are either accurate renditions of enemy intent and ability or they are not accurate.

There is no such leeway here for “I prefer this issue over this other issue”. None of it will matter once the enemy wins or achieves a strategic advantage.

Now, having said that, I believe Obama intends to make a economic crisis, which has already happened due to Obama’s Fannie Mae lobbyists and other factors, to create socialism and communism, expensive and unavailable healthcare combined with Nationalization, complete with the fascist “patriotism” required to push thugs through the street to blackmail legislators into voting for “Change”.

Now, this is a two pronged strategy in my view. First it requires immigrants, terrorists, and criminals (gangs or free lancers) to make our lives a living hell. At the same time we are suffering from economic collapse, we get hit from the other side with the thuggish club. This is Obama’s strategy to make us come begging with hat in hand for Federal or State largesse and mercy. Then they will own us.

As a counter-strategy, you need to save up some economic capital that Obama can’t confiscate. Stash up ammo and guns (which people have already been doing the moment Obama was elected and even some time before). Get yourself training now, before Obama starts “tracking you” or your Fake Lib friends turn you in and maybe take your children away too.

If you can’t or won’t own a gun, get some hand to hand killing skills. If you feel you need some kind of aid, learn the basics of club and knife usage. (They are very simple to use, if you know the basic principles. They don’t require more than a few hours of training on the mat, although more time leads to proficiency and efficiency.)

As for politics, people will do whatever they feel like doing or whatever they feel they have to do. Pain is nature’s gift to allow us to learn wisdom. And there will be quite a large amount of wisdom to be gained in the future.

At the end of it all, we have will. If you don’t want to get things done, then it won’t get done. If you don’t want to defeat our enemies but our enemies want to make slaves of all of us very very much, then we’re going to lose. As Iraq showed, local insurgencies and counter-insurgencies are fought based upon the morale and will power available to each side, in addition to the resources. But all the resources in the world, all the resources, military and political, that the United States could bring to bear did shat good until the locals got a spine up their back.

What are the social issues: abortion and euthanasia are a given. Gay marriage? Any others? Does welfare fall into this category? or in the economic category? There might be some crossover on some of these…

Economic issues: what should government be doing for citizens? how shall it be paid for? Defense, welfare, education, road building, emergency situations, commercial regulation (including bank guarantees)… others?

Defense issues: As the single dominant country in the world, we have been made the unofficial world policeman. Should we accept that role, should we limit our role to those situations where we have a viable interest, or anywhere wrong is being done? (as decided by whom?) or should we just pull back and let the world solve its own problems?

Care to add or subtract?

I ask myself – would I rather live in a socialist country where every life is valued from beginning to natural end, or in a wealthy free-market country where inconvenient children and old people are murdered (Oh, Pardon Me! I should have said “aborted or euthanized”), and anyone who’s fairly expensive to keep alive is either denied care or “lethally treated”?

That’s not too difficult a question for me to answer…how about you?

I think this is a “hang together or we’ll all hang alone” thing. The problem is how you convince people that a candidate who doesn’t place _their_ preference at the top of the heap can still benefit them enough to overcome their reluctance to support him.

My view. If a candidate does not support the social facet , think life, guns, speech, etc,. then what use is the economic facet? With out any means to protect life and property money is useless. There will always be a more powerful entity willing to kill you and take what they wish.

Call me extreme, but I will vote social issues over economic issues. I will cling to my guns and religion.

http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/feb/09022001.html

http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/committee-proceedings/committee_transcripts_details.do?locale=en&Date=2009-02-09&ParlCommID=8859&BillID=&Business=Agency+review%3A+Human+Rights+Tribunal+of+Ontario#P410_119027

Heh. From the AT article. I’d pay to see that. The only problem I see is that Gibbs might not know even enough to understand when Santelli embarrasses him. Hey…as far as that goes, I might not either. It’s a bit like trying to explain algebra to a fifth grader – they hear the words, but they just don’t have any concept of what you’re trying to explain.