WILL AMERICA BE A SERIOUS COUNTRY AGAIN?

Soufriere, St. Lucia.  Thirsty?  How about a cool one?  Will this place do?

I’m here on business (along with Chile, the Caribbean island nation of St. Lucia has the freest economy and lowest taxes in the Western Hemisphere), but who could resist taking a break at this place?  Looking out onto a view like this would certainly, I thought, give my brain a break from anxiety over November 2^nd.

No such luck.  Not even this place will shut my brain up, nor quell the disquiet.  I’ve been going around the world for two months now – and it’s caused me to think more than ever about America and her place among the nations of the world.  The one question that keeps reverberating in my head is:  Will America be a serious country again?

America was a serious country during World War II – nuking Hiroshima/Nagasaki was an ultimate in seriousness – and the 1950s.  It stopped being serious in the 1960s, starting with allowing John Kennedy to steal the presidency, then continuing with Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society and drug-addled hippie Marxist lunacy taking over the entire culture.

The abandonment of seriousness kept up through the 1970s with Nixon’s Watergate, and winning the Vietnam War militarily only to lose it politically because our leftist ruling elite wanted America to lose.  Demoralized Americans proceeded to elect a pathetic nebbish for their president, Jimmy "Malaise" Carter.

Then America became serious again in the 1980s.  Ronald Reagan saved our economy, won the Cold War, and gave back to Americans their long-lost pride in their country.  It didn’t last long.  In the 1990s, Americans got seduced into voting for a master seducer, then four years later in a perversion that matched Clinton’s perversions, voted for him again.

In the 2000s, s nano-thin majority of Americans voted for someone serious, George Bush, over someone actually demented, Algore (whom we now learn is a rapist just like his former boss).  After 9/11, America seemed sure to be a serious country once again – but no.  After finishing the job against Saddam his father failed at, Bush refused to go after Iran, refused to protect our Mexican border from illegal invasion, and refused to stanch an orgy of government spending.

So Americans disintegrated into a debauch of suicidal frivolousness by electing a hyper-left nonentity no one (not even in the media) would have paid the slightest attention to if he were all white instead of half-white and half-black.

This is not an inspiring track record.  Based on it – 10 or 11 cumulative years of seriousness over the last 50 – what odds would you give for the next few years?

Odd for what, you ask?  Just what do you mean by "serious," Jack, and could you provide some country comparisons and contrasts?

Sure.  A country is serious when it has confidence in itself as a culture and a nation, when it is determined to protect itself against its enemies and its citizens from impoverishment.  China is serious, ruthlessly so.  Israel is serious, brilliantly so.

(The Stuxnet "cyber-missile" computer worm destroying Iran’s nuclear and industrial facilities, and the destruction by sabotage of Iran’s Shahab-3 underground missile base that threatened Tel Aviv[1], are two heroic Israeli examples.)

Colombia wasn’t a serious country under Andres Pastrana (president 1998-2002), when he gave communist narco-guerrillas a sanctuary the size of Switzerland.  It became serious under Alvaro Uribe (president 2002-2010), who just about wiped the guerrillas out.

Brazil’s Lula – Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva – has made his country surprisingly serious, so much so Brazil is falling into the trap of hubris, the over-confidence that presages a fall.  Should Brazil choose Lula’s chief of staff, Dilma Rousseff – a Communist who was once a leader of a Marxist urban guerrilla group that conducted bank robberies, kidnappings, and murders – instead of Josè Serra (Governor of Sao Paulo and a serious guy) on October 31^st, Brazil won’t remain serious for long.

France is a country that is ridiculously unserious.  In order to avoid absolute bankruptcy, Sarkozy’s government is raising the state worker retirement age from 60 all the way to – c’est inpensable! – 62.   The whole country is coming apart with moocher-commie union violence – joined by rioting car-burning immigrant Moslems ("youths" or jeunes is how the French media translate "Moslem" in any story about violence in France today).

Germany under Angela Merkel, on the other hand, is starting to get seriously serious.  After turning Zero’s request down flat to "stimulate" Germany’s economy with deficit spending last year (result:  Germany’s economy is far and away the best performing in Europe now), Merkel this week unloaded a politically incorrect bombshell:  Multi-culti is a failure.

The cult of multiculturalism – multi-culti, also known as "diversity" – is a Religion of the Left.  It is sacrilegious blasphemy to question its doctrine of no-culture-is-better-than-any-other.  Yet on October 16, Chancellor Merkel announced in a public speech that "multiculturalism has failed, utterly failed."

Everyone knows exactly to whom Angela is referring:  Moslem immigrants by the millions, such as from Turkey, who refuse to assimilate into German culture, refuse to learn German, and constantly demand special treatment. 

Germany may on the verge of becoming more serious.  According to numerous polls, Germany’s most popular politician is not Merkel but her Defense Minister, Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg, expected to be her successor.  Keep your eye on him.  He’s really handsome, really smart, really classy, really pro-West with no apologies to Moslems, and really pro-free market.  He’s 39.

His family is from ancient nobility going back to the 1100s.  He’s a Baron, and his full name is Baron Karl Theodor Maria Nikolaus Johann Jacob Philipp Franz Joseph Sylvester Freiherr von und zu Guttenberg.  He’s married to a gorgeous blonde who’s the great-great-great granddaughter of the Iron Chancellor himself, Otto von Bismarck (1815-1898).

Remember the glorious pro-freedom partnership of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher back in the 80s?  It’s entirely possible that the 20-teens will see a similar pro-freedom/pro-West partnership between Germany‘s next Chancellor, Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg, and America‘s next president, Sarah Palin.  (OK, it may be with Chris Christie but that’s not as glamorous.)

For that to happen, though, America has to regain its seriousness – and let’s face it folks, we have a light years to go.  The example of the week is the krytocratic (that’s rule of unelected judges) attempt to homosexualize the US military.  It is the latest evidence that America does not have a serious judiciary, that it is not a serious country determined to defend itself with a serious military.

Nor, obviously, are we determined as a nation to defend our borders from illegal invasion. 

But these examples could be multiplied endlessly, yet not reach the core of the problem.  A clue to that core can be found in the Rasmussen (the best pollster there is) Obama Approval Index History.

With the occasional blip, Zero’s total approval/disapproval rating with the American voting public has stayed the same – high 40s approval/low 50s disapproval – since the beginning of the year.  It is remarkably stable.

It is tempting to conclude that this reflects the moocher-producer/taxtaker-taxpayer gulf that divides Americans:  those who want protection from freedom and responsibility, those who want to be taken care of, versus those who don’t want such protection and want to take care of themselves.

The results of November 2^nd may indeed reflect that gulf.  If efforts to prevent Democrat cheating are at all successful (a big "if"), then we’ll see a GOP House Majority for the 112^th Congress (although a Senate Majority is more doubtful).

The question for many is then:  Will this new crop of GOP Congresscritters have the moxie to be as ruthless and relentless in cutting back government as the Dems were in expanding it?

Pessimists predict they won’t, and point to stories like this in the Wall Street Journal about Pub leaders eager to "cooperate" with Dems.

Or they predict they can’t, because the only way to really cut federal spending is to cut the massive "entitlement" programs like Social Security and Medicare – and that would cause a "civil war" between Americans facing each other across the moocher/producer gulf.

But that’s not the question that keeps nagging me as I nurse my Piton beer in St. Lucia.

That question is:  Suppose the new Congress throws the RINOs aside and actually guts hundreds of billions in spending, fires hundreds of thousands of bureaucrats, eliminates entire federal agencies, and does what it promised to do.  Will this cause a "civil war" not between Americans but within them?

Let’s take farmers as an example.  Most are salt-of-the-earth pro-American folks.  A lot of them are Tea Partiers.  What happens when their subsidies are gutted?  What happens when the obscene ethanol mandate ripoff is eliminated?

So many businesses, so many industries, so many companies, so many individual folks are hooked on subsidies, special government concessions, or outright entitlement payments.  A lot of these folks are Tea Partiers, folks demanding "limited government" and will vote accordingly on 11/02. 

What happens if they actually get what they demand – and their bank accounts are limited thereby?  When Democrats laugh in their face and remind them of the old Chinese chestnut, "Be careful what you ask for ‘cause you just might get it"?

Here’s the cold truth.  The jeopardy the American economy is in is dire.  Most people, most voters, haven’t a real inkling as to the horrific danger our economy is in, and thus have no clue as to the gargantuan measures required for its rescue.

I’m not worried about November 2^nd and I’m not worried about wimp-out RINOs.  I think the GOP victory will be monumental in the House, a 60 to 70 seat net gain, with enough new fire-breathers to mop the floor with pussy RINOs.  I still don’t think the GOP will take the Senate but it will be close.

I think that the 112^th folks will open their eyes to the extent of the danger, explain what needs to be done, then do it. 

What happens then will be the true modern test of American character.  Are we made of the same stuff of our forefathers or not?

The libs, leftie-moochers, the professional victims and their media enablers will whelp and yowl, of course.  Forget them.  What about all the millions of good folks who got what they wanted politically and now have to do without government assistance of any kind – even cutbacks in Medicare and Social Security?

It’s time for America to be a serious country once again.  Time for Tea Partiers and everyone who votes the Dems out of office a few days from now to not just talk the talk but walk the walk. 

It’s going to be a very rough ride.  Trillions of dollars of government debt have to be wiped out, defaulted upon. 

The Dems’ way to do this ensures the complete destruction of our economy – via confiscatory tax levels of say, 90%, and hyperinflation which wipes out everyone’s life savings.  The GOP way of eliminating vast swathes of government spending, entitlement programs, and entire agencies, plus selective defaulting on foreign-owned government debt (sorry, China!) will be demagogued to Mars by the Dems and the media – resulting in lots of moocher violence.

But the GOP way is the only way our nation is going to survive – and that way’s only chance is for the majority of voters on November 2^nd to gut it out and man up.

It’s going to be dicey, an iffy thing – but I think in the end Americans will come through.  I think the majority – perhaps even a substantial majority – will quickly learn how much better it is to stand tall on your two feet and take responsibility for your life than to be on your knees with your hands out begging some two-bit bureaucrat for favors.

You couldn’t ask for more exciting, more historical times than those America is about to embark upon.  They will try our souls.  But in the end, American character will triumph – and then we’ll really get serious.  Our grandkids will be proud of us.  And they’ll be just as serious as we are about to become.

---

[1] .   The mullahs spent hundreds of millions on their underground "Imam Ali" missile base in the Zagros mountains of western Iran.  Last week (10/13) the base blew up, killing at least a score and perhaps many more Revolutionary Guards, destroying much of Iran’s Shahab-3 ballistic missile arsenal.  Skye on the TTP Forum gave us this insight on how the sabotage may have been conducted:

"The Shahab-3 is a liquid fuel missile that uses unsymmetrical dimethylhydrazine and nitrogen tetroxide as propellants. I’m professionally familiar with this propellant system. Both chemicals are very toxic. This combination is hypergolic, meaning that there is instant ignition when the two chemicals contact each other. All that it would take for a catastrophic accident to occur would be the opening of a few valves and the turning on of a couple of pumps, and those underground tunnels would become a giant crematorium."

Cf:  http://docs.ewi.info/JTA_TA_Program.pdf and http://www.missilethreat.com/missilesoftheworld/id.107/missile_detail.asp