War is brewing. War that pits neighbor against neighbor. A destructive war with nuclear armed-powers, poised to inflict utter destruction and devastation on the enemy.

Think I’m talking about India and Pakistan? Or perhaps North Korea and South Korea? Maybe Iran and Israel?

No. I am referring to the United States of America and a new and frightening civil war between Red and Blue.

The signs are all there. Neither side is willing to back down and give their "enemy" any quarter. No compromise, no peace talks, no compassion exists whatsoever. Partisan bickering and fighting escalates exponentially every day

The danger here is that by so thoroughly demonizing your opponent, you make it IMPOSSIBLE to work with that opponent, even if it's in the best interests of the country. How can you expect the American people to accept one day that “The GOP is nothing but a group of greedy pedophiles!!” and then the next day hear, “We will work together with the GOP to help this country?”. Once you define your opponent, you are bound by that definition. This is not the fictional world of George Orwell’s 1984 where you can mold the public into believing whatever you want them to believe. However you define your opponent, THAT is the definition you will have to live with.

On Huffington Post, political author Chris Weigant posted a very viable plan for the Democratic Party to regain complete control of Congress.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-weigant/toss-republ...n-anvil_b_31488.html

Its main foundation requires that the Democrats put aside their differences with the GOP and work WITH the GOP for the betterment of the country. I was surprised and amazed at the vehemence against such a concept that people displayed in their comments about the plan. It is becoming sadly, very clear that the “Neo-Dems” are more interested in vengeance and retribution than they are in actually working towards a better country.

This is not only very sad, it is also very dangerous.

We are, in a few weeks, facing our midterm elections. With the partisan finger-pointing and hysterical accusations at an all time high, there are several possible scenarios, but many of them lead to a very sad end.

Scenario #1
The Democrats lose more seats than they gain. Screams of voter fraud are rampant. In Cincinnati, Ohio an unruly crowd made up of NeoDems attack a voting station. Diebold machines are destroyed and many political volunteers are injured. Violence erupts into a full scale riot and Mayor Mallory sends an urgent message to Columbus requesting immediate assistance in the ever-widening emergency. Republican governor Robert Taft mobilizes the National Guard and sends armed troops into Cincinnati.

Democrats around the country view these developments as an attempt by Republicans to steal the elections, and supportive riots spring up all over the country. To deal with the mounting violence, President Bush declares martial law and federalizes the National Guard. Democratic Governors in Kansas, Montana, and Wyoming refuse orders from the White House and declare a state of emergency. Federal military bases in those states are overrun and occupied by the state’s National Guard. Missile Wing Commanders, sympathetic to the Democrats’ cause, turn over complete launch authority to their National Guard counterparts.

A new US civil war, complete with nuclear missiles pointed across state lines, is upon us.



Don’t like that scenario? Here’s another.

Scenario #2
Due to Republican missteps in the waning weeks of election 2006, the Democrats make massive inroads and completely dominate both the House and the Senate. The majority is so overwhelming that a successful impeachment of President Bush is all but certain. Democrats simply drop Iraq, stating, “We have our own problems here at home.” Massive troop movements are made out of the Middle East as the impeachment process goes forward. Hundred of thousands of troops are rotated stateside.

President Bush is successfully impeached and President Cheney takes control of the government. Taking advantage of the confusion of the military and the breakdown of the NCA (National Command Authority), terrorists strike in Los Angeles, New York, Chicago, Miami and San Diego, using every weapon in their arsenal. Terrorist cells operating within the US detonate biological and irradiated (“dirty”) bombs. The death toll is in the hundreds of thousands and climbs every day, as those who are injured succumb to death.

President Cheney, in an effort to quell the rising attacks, orders martial law and federalizes the National Guard. Democratic governors, while uncomfortable with this, see the necessity due to terrorism and grudgingly go along. So, as not to be distracted by internal strife and the threat of another impeachment trial, President Cheney issues Executive Order #15784 which effectively dissolves the United States Congress. U.S. Military forces are directed by President Cheney to secure the entire Capital Complex and invoke strict Martial Law procedures. The American public is furious at this Republican power grab. Protests erupt that are, for the most part, non-violent.

President Cheney, thinking he has to assert control, responds to the protests with overwhelming and unnecessary violence. Armed riot police square off against unarmed protestors. A suicide bomber in the protest crowd sets off a bomb killing dozens. Protesters see this as an attack by riot police and set upon them. Dozens of police are killed or wounded, and hundreds of protestors lay dead in the streets. Protests in hundred of cities turn violent and for the first time in the War On Terror, U.S. military weapons are turned on fellow Americans. Many commanders balk at this and are jailed by President Cheney. Democratic governors all over the country (who were simply uncomfortable before) rebel and declare their intent to secede from the Union. Sympathetic Military Commanders turn over all bases and weaponry (including nuclear missile fields) to Democratic leaders.

A new US civil war, complete with nuclear missiles pointed across state lines, is upon us.


Don’t like THAT scenario? Feel free to run your own. And no matter WHICH way you go with it, no matter HOW you start it, if you do not have Democrats and Republicans working together, if you don’t have the Democrats getting rid of their virulent hatred of anything Republican (and vice versa), if you don’t have the Republicans get rid of their greed and their lust for power, if you start ANY scenario that doesn’t address these fundamental issues, then ANY scenario will always end the same. With violence, with bloodshed and with this country torn apart.


Now, people will say, "Awww, that can't happen. Democrats and Republicans have been going at it for decades."

And this is true. However, when you examine the groups, a dangerous pattern appears.

The Liberals of the 60s and 70s were pacifists. With the exception of a very few violent radicals, liberals by and large sought peaceful pursuits and protests. However, in the 80s and 90s this began to change. I believe that the liberals of yesteryear looked at the
Radical Right and incorrectly assumed that it was their aggressive and violent tendencies that was the cause of their success. So the Liberals morphed into what can only be described as Neo-Dems. They use the same methods of personal attacks, deviant
undermining and overall nastiness that was until now the exclusive domain of the Radical Right. Gone are the days of the REAL liberals who preached understanding and compassion and open-mindedness and compromise.

Now, the Radical Left bears almost ZERO difference from the Radical Right, as far as methods go. Where there used to be just Neo-Cons, now we also have Neo-Dems.

And therein lies the danger. Basically, we have two sides who are equally nasty, equally aggressive and equally ready to throw away the etiquette book and FIGHT.

It's a powder-keg waiting to explode. All it needs is a trigger.

And I am sorry to say, the trigger which would bring us to the edge of the abyss just may be the upcoming midterm elections.

I have just this morning had an epiphany..

During the 9/11 week last week, the HuffPo was full of commentators and comments. All about how the Terrorist threat really isn't all that big of a threat. That the Terrorist threat has been over stated..

Now, it seems that the conventional wisdom is that Terrorism is a LAW ENFORCEMENT issue, not a military one. That it could be solved by using conventional law enforcement techniques..

Then it hit me...

The Democrats are trying to redefine the problem. THAT is their "plan"...

You see, they simply CANNOT come up with a plan to fight terrorism. Because ANY plan they come up with will be identical to what the Bush Administration is doing. Because THAT is how you fight Terrorism. And, of course, the Dems can't have a plan that mirrors what the Bush Administration is doing, right!??

So, the Dems are in a quandry. They cannot come up with a plan to fight the issue, so they are going to have to REDEFINE THE ISSUE.. And THAT is what they are trying to do..

The Dems are trying to REDEFINE what terrorism is. That way, they can come up with a DIFFERENT plan to fight it.. The problem for the Dems is twofold..

1. Terrorism has already been defined for the American Public. They have watched airplanes fly into buildings, have seen thousands of their countrymen and women killed, have seen live on their TVs, the FIGHT against terrorism in Afghanistan and Iraq... NO WAY will the American Public believe that terrorism is not a military problem. Simply no way..

2. NO WAY will the American Public believe that Terrorism is not a threat. Pundits quote the odds ad nasuem.. You have more of a chance of winning the lottery than to be killed by terrorism.. Yea, ok fine.. But the odds were the same or LOWER on 10 Sep 2001.... And we all know what happened next... So, the public will NEVER believe that there is not a terrorism threat. Or that the threat has been overblown..

Democrats will have to face the problem as it is currently defined.. No amount of Bait And Switch will work with the American people.


Michale....

Hello and how are ya'all this fine morning??

My name is Michale and the first thing I should say is that I will probably piss a lot of you off. No, it won't be intentional and no I won't be trolling. It is simply that I firmly believe in things and don't pull any punches about it. I am not shy about sharing my opinions. While I'll be the VERY first to admit when I am wrong (should that unlikely event ever occur ) I am also ferosciously outspoken when I am right. If anyone would like to try and label me a dittohead, Bush lover, Neo Con, Talking Points Lemming or any other type of right-wing label the left likes to dream up, you do so at your own peril. I truly enjoy explaining to such labelers how very very wrong they are. I am not above name-calling, but never resort to it initially. I do my best to refrain from such childish antics, but I have been known to jump down into the mud if a debating opponent ends up there first. I don't like to do that, I try NOT to do that, but every so often I cannot help it. The best rule of thumb for dealing with me is that I treat people how they treat me. If people wax, discuss, debate and argue with me in an adult and mature manner, I will respond in kind.. If someone gets hysterical and starts sensless bashing and name-calling..... Well, I can do that to... I usually don't, I try not to get sucked into it, but sometimes kaa-kaa hits the fan...
To sum things up, I am probably one of the most arrogant pricks ever to blog. I try to mitigate such arrogance by actually knowing what I am talking about.

So, now that we have the pleasentries out of the way, let's get down to it.

IRAQ
Iraq is a front in the war on terror. This is a bona fide fact. It doesn't matter HOW or WHY this came about. It just IS and we have to deal with it. And we CANNOT deal with it by running away. Capitulation and surrender is NEVER a good plan. It simply invites more of the exact same thing that is trying to be stopped. So, if you advocate a CUT AND RUN plan to the issue of Iraq, you are wrong and such actions would NOT be good for the US...

VOTE
My vote is available. I do not automatically vote for a candidate based on party affiliation. I try and vote FOR people and not AGAINST people. My vote criteria is simple:
*What plan do you have to keep my family safe*
No plan.... No vote...
Bad plan... No vote...
Good plan.... Vote...
It's really that simple... I then move on down my criteria as needed... Past performance, etc etc etc.. My (nearly) ONLY campaign issue is National Security. Any other factor is moot if we are all dead.


GLOBAL WARMING
Global Warming is a POLITICAL issue, not an environmental or scientific issue. If you want to discuss Global Warming with me, you first must read this site: www.junkscience.com
Global Warming is politics, not science... Plain and simple...


TORTURE
This is the issue that brought me to this forum. First off, let's use the term "Coercive Interrogations" (CIs) because that is actually more what the President is pushing, rather than outright torture. There is NO VALID REASON to halt CIs and VERY VALID REASONS to continue them.


PRESIDENT BUSH
Please note that, with the exception of ONE ISSUE, I disagree (usually vehemently) with the President on nearly EVERY ISSUE. However, as former military (USAF and US Army) I respect the office of the President. Yes, even when Clinton was President. Let's try to avoid hysterical Bush Bashing. Of course, Bush is not a moron. You don't get to be elected to the Presidency (TWICE) by being a moron. Bush is not satan, Bush is not Hitler and Bush is NOT Bin Laden. He is the President of the United States, freely elected by the people of this country. In that, he deserves the SUPPORT of every American. You can disagree with him (I do all the time), you can express dissent at his policies, but you should not undermine him. By doing so, you are undermining this country. There is a huge difference between rational dissent and irrational treason.. Unfortuanatly, many of the left usually end up in the latter category..


So, that's me in a nutshell... If I come across too strong or too arrogant, Dragonfly, please feel free to delete this post and I will go on my merry way, no harm no foul..

Michale....