I linked to your "Fighting a Cold Civil War" post from Instapundit. I am one of those who have had all that I can stand of the liberal left. I strongly feel that it is in the best interest of the country to divide ourselves into the two camps. My approach is to allow each state to hold a refrendum. The people in each state will vote on which version of government that they wish to join. Those who disagree with the version of government choosen by the state in which they live will just have to move. Insentives should be created to encourage such moves. This is the only approach that I see short of a shooting war that will work.

On another note, it appears that George Soros is up to his old tricks by engaging in market manipulation in order to have an economic crisis that helps the socialist democrats.

That won't work because the blue socialists will immigrate to whereever they get the most pay, then steal that country from it's inhabitants by mass of votes.

Just look at Europe, being overrun by a mere 5% of muslims. Yet the submission is nearly complete. Yes the muslims would still lose a warm civil war. And they'd lose badly. But they haven't lost an election in years.

The same would happen in America. The conditions for business and economy would be much more favorable in the constitutional part, resulting in higher wages and immigration. So much immigration that it would kill their membership of the constitutional government.

Blue states don't merely want to be socialist by themselves. They will not do any less than force it on everyone. Every last human being on earth must submit, or they won't be satisfied.

Obviously it'll end in war. They do not have reasonable demands, therefore no attempt at compromise is ever going to work (for long).

Bahaha, this is classic. A Republican, when faced with the imminent defeat of McCain starts to lose it and claim that the country is going over to the European Socialist weenies! It seems to me that everyone has gone socialist. Wasn't it a Republican white house and treasury secretary that just pled for the bailout package? Hasn't entitlement spending ballooned under the Bush presidency?

As for the Democrats being weak on defense, I think you fall back too easily on stereotypes of Democrats being naiive hippies. Your beloved Pentagon will still get funding under an Obama presidency, and terrorists will continue to be killed in the pursuit of your safety. The world didn't end under Clinton, JFK or FDR, and Obama will look after Americas interests abroad. It's not like he has a hard act to follow after Bush overstretched our power, put us up in debt to our eyes, and alienated our allies.

It's true that people have differences about politics in America, but the country isn't going to split just cause your side loses an election. If you're going to have a pity party, have the decency to do it somewhere where the rest of us can't laugh at you.

"Your beloved Pentagon will still get funding under an Obama presidency, and terrorists will continue to be killed in the pursuit of your safety."

Geez, Brian, you say that like it's a bad thing. You also sound like an overlord from outer space.

"Your beloved Pentagon will still get funding under an Obama presidency, and terrorists will continue to be killed in the pursuit of your safety."
Speaking as a person currently serving, who enlisted during Clinton's first term, I do NOT want a repeat of what went on at that time. Squadrons having to keep 3 or more jets grounded as spare parts sources to keep the rest flying, running out of money to pay for gas in mid-August, having our budgets slashed to enable the government to give away even more money.
I also agree that terrorists will continue to be killed, but not overseas, like they currently are, but in the streets of America, and not until after most of them have completed their missions.

The world didn't end under Clinton, JFK or FDR,

I wonder what thought process, if any, gave us this list of three presidents as somehow equivalent?

Brian is a fine example of why this will become a hot war. I can guarantee him that in the end he will not be laughing, he will be curled up in a corner crying bitter tears.

I like the cut of your jib, madam.
What the Brians of the world expect is that we just roll over and play dead. Game over, so to speak.
Nahanni comes close to my feelings. Any logical projection into the future can only result in one side totally abandoning their goals.
I too would fight.
Patrick Henry said "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"
Til lately, I really never understood the sentiment for his quote.
But as I watch more of our freedoms erode, I have ,at least, a partial understanding.

Wow, I just got my jolt of the morning! Ed Driscoll linked me and Instapundit linked his post linking me. I'm not used to all this attention. :-)

Thank you for the comments (yes, even you Brian). I will try to respond later as time allows.

There is a point at which the proper application of violence can prevent more extreme and extensive violence.

"As for the Democrats being weak on defense, I think you fall back too easily on stereotypes of Democrats being naiive hippies. Your beloved Pentagon will still get funding under an Obama presidency, and terrorists will continue to be killed in the pursuit of your safety."

I suppose it would be lost on Brian to point out that the irony dripping from his second sentence, tends to undercut his first sentence.

The major part of the problem is that people like myself (no interest in any cultural products put out by the left, really, since I don't find them aesthetically pleasing, no need for government welfare because I'm "rich", at least according to them) have absolutely no need whatsoever of the masses of people I consider freeloaders who vote for the Democrats and I don't find the analyses of their "intellectuals" convincing (especially in their present emphasis on "identity politics", which seem to be at the center of the Leftist world at this point), so it's not as though they provide me with a framework with which to view the world, either. They are all "drag" on me from a monetary, cultural and intellectual standpoint. Pray tell why shouldn't I want to split off from any conceivable political order they'd like to construct? Not splitting off is to substitute "rhetorical" benefits (I get to be part of Obama's "Hope and Change") for "actual" benefits (under Republican and more Constitution-centric administrations generally, I get to keep more of the fruits of my labor). This is true for almost anyone who is a member of my "class" (i.e., people who went to graduate school for professional and technical degrees, not liberal arts, although I have a degree in that as well). It's not as if I'm one of those "country bumpkin" Republicans of stereotype. I've got an IQ measured well into the triple digits and make well over six figures per year and originally from the Northeast. I'm quite capable of understanding the Left's positions and ideology, but I find it unconvincing so I've applied myself in a different direction more in line with my worldview. Bottom line, to the "Brians" of the world, you need me to fund your programs and I've got the tax returns to prove it, but I don't need you. Can you convince me that I do? Because if you can't, a splitting of the country becomes that much more likely.

Quite honestly, only people who are gung-ho into politics on either side feel this way right now.

Don't get me wrong, I've felt this way for years now.

But regular folks can't be bothered.

The only difference I can see will be once this struggling economy comes under the control of a Democratic President, House and Senate. LIke FDR, they will regulate us from a Recession into a good old fashioned Depression. They'll snatch defeat from the Jaws of victory on the war on terror, making American sacrifice in the war for naught.

Only then will any poop hit the fan. Folks will only start caring once the have nothing left to care about. Democrats destroying the country could be just what we need to go our separate ways.

So in some way, I'm taking a bit of cold comfort in McCain's impending defeat. The country may be saved in the process.

This is exactly how I feel. I wish I didn't. I look upon the left wing half of the country, and I see little in the way of decency, I see little that I have in common with them.

The rise of Obama just fills me with shame for my country and my fellow countrymen. I have great difficult feeling any loyalty to a people who would support a man like Obama.

And I come from a Democrat family. Midwest Irish Catholics. And I am fine with my older relatives. They are traditional Dems. They are pro-union and pro-America. We disagree on many issues, but we both love America.

It's the younger, richer generation of "Progressives" that I find to be ... almost evil. We don't just disagree. They constantly bash the ideals I hold to. They attack America, religion, the free enterprise system, and white people (even though they themselves are white.)

I grew up with a sense of reverence for our Founding Fathers. When I talk to "Progressives" they cannot contain their contempt for men like Jefferson and Washington.

I don't see how I can work with such people towards any common goals. I grew up a Democrat, but am horrified at the anti-American radical turn they have taken. I don't understand it. And I wish I didn't have to share a country with such people.

Hey, if half the country wants to live in Europe, let them just move there! There already is a Europe in the world but America is unique. We don't need to recreate Europe here.

The left will resist any attempt to divide the country for two reasons..

1. The model of social organization that they seek relies on productive social classes to finance the necessary governmental and state organs.

2. Their culture requires an enemy to prey upon, by which they can justify their depredations. If you are familiar w/ the culture of the Left, you'll recognize that it creates nothing, it is only critical and deprecative. Without an alien adversary, they will turn on each other. This has occurred in most socialist societies and typically resulted in democide and widespread oppression.

I agree that those who want socialism should just move to a country where it is already the system of government. Our country is so unique that it seems wrong to destroy our system of government just because some people want to be like everyone else. Of course part of the problem is that some of the people who want socialism are of course the ones getting a free ride already. Another country would probably not welcome those who are likely to only be a drain on their resources. We would also need to recreate the shame that getting "handouts" went with. I suspect too many people are proud of their ability to live off of others, or at least far too ready to accept it.

Congratulations on the Instalance, Susan!

Thanks, Barb! :-) I have to admit that I got a bit freaked out by all the attention. But I'm glad the attention was on a post like this. I've been really thinking about the divisions in this country lately and I have to say it's dismaying. I really do hope I am wrong and that, whatever happens in this election, this rift that has occurred will mend itself.

I appreciate all the comments, everyone. In a couple of days, I'll write a follow-up post to highlight some of the things brought up here.

I really wish people would wait until the next president makes ONE decision before they start tearing their hair out about socialism, etc.

Conservatives, one of the reasons that you are losing this election is that you spent so long setting the bar so low for Obama (he's a crypto-muslim! he's a chicago thug! he's a peacenik! etc. etc.) that all Obama has to do is show up and not be a raving madman to look really good.

If you could moderate your emotions a bit, it will be good for you personally AND good for the country.

P.S. Trust me, if I could survive Bush being reelected in 2004, then I think you can survive Obama I. My sincere best wishes; try not to let it affect your blood pressure, and channel your opposition into productive pursuits. Hey, you have a party to rebuild!

Well, all Obama has to do is show up and not *look* like the raving leftist he actually votes as, supports, and has the background of being. This is why the left is so insistent on 'the issues'. 'The Issues' consist of campaign talking points and promises devoid of any actual content other than promises.

They do not consist of attending to Obama's past, actions, and associations. The 'issues' do not allow for examination of his background and actions and work history. The 'issues' do not allow open discussion of his work for and endorsement by the New Party and it's marxist allies.

The entire *point* of arguing as if 'the issues' are all that matter is to keep the focus on the unprovable of promises and off the background, actions, and beliefs of the candidate. No open leftist this radical (most leftist voting in congress) ever makes it this far, and they know it. This is why discussion of his actual life, actions, and beliefs is attacked...they cannot be open about him or he will not win.

If the US military can work out the differences within Iraq between Kurds, Shia, and Sunnis, all who had a history of killing each other one way or another, then why can't we apply the same principles behind counter-insurgency to the Left's domestic insurgency here in America?

We don't have any external power capable or willing to invest time, resources, and talent into America to solve our own problems. We have to do it ourselves, but as Iraq has shown us, and it is perhaps the primary reason why it is valuable to America, differences of opinion can be solved in many different ways even if those differences contain death squads and political corruption.

Gravatar.com

P.S. Trust me, if I could survive Bush being reelected in 2004, then I think you can survive Obama I.

That's just another example of Leftist illusion there. If everything said about Bush's patriot act was true, you wouldn't have "survived" as you term it. The fact that you did survive and Bush is not going to drop out and be the power behind the throne like Putin has done, means that the Left was incorrect on the Patriot Act and incorrect when they said we were wrong about the Patriot Act.

Which means it is far more likely that when we say that Obama's laws and current actions will degrade Constitutional protections that we actually mean it and that we actually have the record of getting these things more right than wrong. Unlike the Left.

Just wanted to thank all who commented and apologize for not yet writing a follow-up/response. I've had some brain vapor lock that I explain in my latest post. I hope to at least get something together before election day. I will say that whatever happens, that day and the following days are going to be a doozy.