Now go read part 1. Done? Porretto paints a none to flattering picture of our Professional Pols, but it is accurate. It is the reason that when I vote, and if the guy I vote for wins, I plan to continue to watch him like a hawk. He seems like a nice enough guy, but there is that nagging doubt about anybody who seeks high office.
With that out of the way, check out part 2. Done? Porretto takes us on a slight detour, but correct again. A quote:
Before I proceed, allow me a word of caution, which I hope will also serve to energize. In a political struggle such as the one we face today, the side that first reaches for violence will lose. That's as true of the suggestion of violence as of overt violent acts. For example, if any prominent Democrat -- Obama, Reid, Pelosi, or any of the better known Cabinet secretaries -- were to hint that the Administration had made provisions for imposing martial law should the elections result in "disorder," public sentiment would turn so completely against the Democrats that they would be guaranteed to be swept from office.This is why Mike Vanderboegh keeps insisting "No Fort Sumters." No matter the provocation, we can not be seen to throw the first punch, or fire the first shot. During the riots on the campus of Kent State University, the SDS and Weather Underground provocateurs had stirred up the anti-war students who were throwing rocks and taunts at the National Guardsmen. They had already burned the ROTC building, and cut the fire hoses of the firemen with machettes. They were clearly armed, and meant to cause harm. Had this been a self defense situation, a jury would have seen that the Guard had ample reason to fear for their lives. No one can ever resolve to every one's satisfaction what happened next, but in any case, the Guard did fire, a teenage girl was killed, and the establishment lost the hearts and minds of the American people for the war in Vietnam. In this war, and it is a war, our side must be seen as the victim of aggression, not as the aggressor.
Porretto is also correct about trolls to Internet sites. I have wasted tons of time at the Smallest Minority watching Unix, JD and others take apart the laughable arguments of their pet troll Markadelphia. Kevin Baker, the proprietor of the Smallest Minority presides over this because he thinks it is instructive to bring out arguments for our side to convince those who may be sitting on the fence. Kevin pulls it off with aplomb, but everyone can not be a Kevin Baker. In general, Porretto is correct-don't feed the trolls. I was reminded of this when someone asked me what I thought Glenn Beck meant by "restoring honor." The question surprised me, in that the gentleman was older than I was, and should have known. But when I tried to explain what I thought it was, someone who styles himself a "liberal" kept interrupting. This is the way trolls work. I finally just ignored him and went on with my explanation.
In part 3, Porretto takes us back on track and uses Shakespeare to illustrate how Professional Politicians try to divide and conquer us, magnifying our petty differences, and spreading fear and suspicion. Don't let them. We have, in what I call the Liberty Brigade, a collection of Classical Liberals, Fiscal Conservatives, Religious Conservatives, Libertarians of all stripes, and probably some I can not think of right now. What we all have in common is our desire to restore the Republic to its proper foundations working the way the Constitution originally intended. We can argue later about specifics; now is not the time. Don't let them divide and conquer the TEA parties.
I can't wait for part 4.
Update: Mr. Porretto informs me that part 4 is up here. Part 4 is a very good illustration of the "divide and conquer" idea in actual practice. Go read it, and see if you don't perhaps see yourself in there somewhere.