Today, the term “patriot” has been highjacked by those who bestow honor and virtue upon themselves simply because of their ability to push back on social media, blab away on cable news shows, and attract attention simply because they exist. Merriam-Webster partially defines who some of these people are….

Today, active fighting or resistance is not a requirement to being a patriot: a person only needs a strong sense of love for one’s country.

Over the last few months, there have been numerous stories of veterans making an additional sacrifice for their country.

They are running for office.

Five retired Navy SEALs running for Congress
Six former Navy SEALs run for Congress with one goal
Army veteran, GOP Senate candidate, accuses Twitter of flagging July 4 post of his salute in uniform

It seems clear some veterans have had enough of people who (either chose not to serve, found ways to avoid serving or) place their own personal interests above the best interests of the country. They appear to have had enough of those who sell out our nation to foreign powers and have no problem sending Americans to fight battles that are not vital to our national security, meanwhile look the other way when genuine enemies are empowered, at worse with our tax dollars.

In 1959, science fiction writer Robert Heinlein wrote the novel Starship Troopers. “Heinlein firmly endorsed the anti-communist sentiment of the Cold War era in his writing. Heinlein served in the US Navy for five years after graduating from the United States Naval Academy in 1929. His experience in the military profoundly influenced his fiction.”

One scene from the 1997 film adaptation sums up his sentiment on where he believed “democracy” was going and what was a possible solution.

Being a citizen and having a vote is something that’s been taken for granted for many years. Some people don’t vote because they believe it’s a meaningless gesture and others believe it’s a tool to be manipulated for political and/or personal gain. Most of those who play games with votes have never served to protect that right, among others. In fact, politicians have sought (and at times succeeded) to mute the votes of active duty servicemembers simply because they didn’t like a Commander-in-Chief they’d most likely vote for.

Many of these politicians who’ve never even considered protecting the nation with their lives are the very ones who are crying about the “fragile” nature of our democracy and were the first to cower in fear during the Capitol riot.

Is THIS how veterans would have reacted to the breach? Seeing how almost every conservative rally since 2009 has been totally peaceful (when no liberals counter-protested and brought signature destruction and violence with them), chances are veteran lawmakers would have personally gone to the protesters with appropriate backup, told them this was not right and go home. Running towards “danger” was what they were trained to do.

January 6 was hardly an event that would make a wartime veteran retreat.

A veteran would not have shed tears recounting an event where very few weapons were present. You wouldn’t see sobs from veterans who weren’t anywhere near the location in question and make it all about them.

Look at all those who interfere with our lives on a daily basis. Overpaid government health officials, state and federal office holders, Big Tech, legacy media pundits and columnists, social media trolls; how many of them have served and understand the value of the very freedoms veterans put their lives on the line to protect? Look at those who are quick to subvert votes so they can attain power over millions. Do these people appreciate that right and could the case be made they don’t deserve it because they never made the personal decision to defend it?

Of course, there are notable exceptions.

While Senator Lindsey Graham DID serve, he was commissioned as an officer in the Judge Advocate General’s Corps (JAG Corps) in the Air Force. He was never really in the shit and spent most of his service in air-conditioned offices. No responsible officer would recklessly, publicly call for the assassination of a foreign leader (no matter how despicable) because we understand how that could later be directed at our Commander-in-Chief.

Seeing how so many of us have been banned from Twitter for “hate speech” or something else intentionally vague, how is it this Tweet is allowed?

And do academics (with little if any real world experience) deserve the power they have, especially when they can play God with “science” to the physical peril of every man, woman, and child on the planet, especially when too many went to college to avoid serving? Do political media blabbermouths deserve the right to dictate how people should react to policies they prefer and be allowed to publicly demonize those they disagree with, seeing how most were too chickenshit to personally defend those rights? Do politicians, who are quick to restrict the free movement and assembly of those they claim to represent while disregarding restrictions that personally inconvenience them, deserve power they’ve never put all on the line to earn? It’s clearly past time to jettison and replace those who bestow the right to vote to those who aren’t even lawful citizens.

Maybe this is why we see a conscious effort (by those who didn’t serve) to dilute the intestinal fortitude of those serving and who’ll they’ll be once they leave: patriots who’ll unquestioningly obey the cowardly.

The case could be made that it’s time for those who literally put their lives on the line to take charge. For whatever the initial inspiration to join, only a veteran understands the seriousness “duty to country” took once they voluntarily signed away their own personal freedom and made their own lives subject to the whims of those whose motivations may or may not be what’s best for the country. Maybe it’s time for veterans to no longer be props for top-heavy nonprofits and indifferent government contractors who use them for self-enrichment or government agencies whose employees tolerate their presence because they simply represent a paycheck and pension.

Maybe it’s time for the real patriots to “save our democracy” because those who are in charge now know nothing about sacrifice and that’s the problem.

But when it comes to their possible involvement in the events of January 6th, either they don’t know or won’t say….

Senator Ted Cruz seems to be on a rehabilitation tour after his slanderous comments about the conservative “violent terror attack”, but all will be different with these unelected, don’t-know-nuthin’ law enforcement officials like Matthew Olsen, the assistant attorney general for the National Security Division and Jill Sanborn, the assistant director of the FBI’s national security branch once Republicans run the House and Senate.

Maybe as soon as November.

What Democrats and their media fail to include are previous attacks on the Capitol, not going back as far as the 1814 burning by the British army, but more recent attacks with perpetrators who armed with more than deadly flag poles. Those committing the acts of violence were liberals and their causes, either to protest the “oppressed” or wars, and they either shot elected officials or caused significant damage by explosives in the Capitol and other federal government buildings.

President Jimmy Carter commuted the sentences for all of the Puerto Rican terrorists who bombed the Capitol in 1954. Bill Ayers, a leader of the Weather Underground went on to become a “distinguished” academic/author while one of the members of May 19, pardoned by Bill Clinton on his last day in office, is now a fundraiser for Black Lives Matter.

The Biden administration is creating a new unit in the justice department to counter domestic terrorism following the deadly US Capitol attack by supporters of Donald Trump, a senior official said on Tuesday.

“We face an elevated threat from domestic violent extremists,” Matthew Olsen, assistant attorney general of the national security division, told a hearing held by the Senate judiciary committee.
— The Guardian, 1/11/22

Liberals can shoot senators and bomb the Capitol numerous times, but it took a one-time riot during a conservative rally for Democrats to get serious.

Unarmed knuckleheads who entered the Capitol on January 6th are either languishing in solitary confinement in a DC shithole or are still being hunted down by Biden’s FBI. Liberals who actually shot up and bombed the Capitol are celebrated and get to influence the next generation as to their way of progressive activism.

That is, if their prior activities are even brought up.

Those of us who’ve attended Tea Party rallies since 2009 have observed consistencies. They were mostly attended by older demographics including senior citizen retirees and children; hardly the make up of the violent prone. Police were on scene as is the custom with any large gathering and more times then not, they were chillin’ near their cars, smiling and being thanked by rally-goers for their time and service.

NONE of them were disruptive, destructive or violent.

While there have been a few incidents that the media tied to the Team Party, Tea Party rallies have not (as far as I can tell) been involved with any arrests, any allegations of violence or any run-ins with law enforcement.

A claim liberal events can’t.

The Occupy movement has not been so lucky. The number of arrests made at Occupy movements seems to be near 2,500 and still growing. There have been many times when police officials felt compelled to react and control the crowd (most notably in Oakland, as one HeadCount blogger has discussed). Perhaps worst of all, there have even been reports of sexual assault at Occupy events.
— Headcount.org

Meanwhile….

At least 5,513 Black Lives Matter protests and other demonstrations have been held in the past 2,398 days.
— elephrame.com

And there’s a distinct difference between BLM protests and Tea Party/conservative rallies.

The Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED) analyzed more than 7,750 Black Lives Matter demonstrations in all 50 states and Washington D.C. that took place in the wake of George Floyd’s death between May 26 and August 22.

Their report states that more than 2,400 locations reported peaceful protests, while fewer than 220 reported “violent demonstrations.” The authors define violent demonstrations as including “acts targeting other individuals, property, businesses, other rioting groups or armed actors.” Their definition includes anything from “fighting back against police” to vandalism, property destruction looting, road-blocking using barricades, burning tires or other materials”, the report says.
— Time Magazine, 9/5/20

Using the convenient caveat to distinguish the obvious, “mostly peaceful” was deployed by Democrats and their activist media to diminish the wanton disruption, vandalism, damage, injury and death caused almost every time they congregate.

ALL of the above were liberal Democrat riots; not ONE was a conservative, Republican event. In fact, conservatives have the reputation of leaving any area where they’ve gathered cleaner than when they first arrived. Liberal Democrats are the exact opposite.

However, the only instances where violence did occur at Trump rallies was when liberals infiltrated with one sole purpose: to create mayhem, violence and with the gleeful assistance of the media, smear. When the 2016 election produced a result they didn’t like, liberal Democrats took to the streets and the rest is what we’ve come accustomed to.

For the third night in a row, anti-Donald Trump demonstrators took to the streets in several big cities and on college campuses across the United States. About 4,000 protesters assembled downtown Portland late Thursday chanting “we reject the president-elect!” the Associated Press reported. Some among the crowd vandalized 19 cars at a dealership in Northeast Portland, according to a sales manager, Oregonlive.com reports.

The protest was mostly peaceful until demonstrators met with an anarchist group, after which demonstrators vandalized buildings, kicked cars and knocked out power, KGW-TV reported. On Twitter, Portland police said many protesters were “trying to get anarchist groups to stop destroying property” and that “anarchists” were refusing to do so. Demonstrators repeatedly chanted “peaceful protest.”
— USA Today, 11/11/16

It defies logic that there could be no “arrests, any allegations of violence or any run-ins with law enforcement” when Republicans gathered from 2009 through 2021 but one sunny Wednesday in January, Trump supporters decided to run amok and invade the U.S. Capitol in what opportunist Democrats call an “insurrection”. The media selectively turned the normal political speech (how many political commercials do you remember where a candidate says he or she will “fight” for you?) into hate speech.

Trump’s campaign rallies have always been incubation grounds for violence, sites where Trump spewed hate speech that encouraged physical harm against dissenters. And as president, he has used his platform to encourage violence against American citizens, whether through the police and National Guard or militia groups — unless those citizens are his supporters.
— Vox, 1/9/21

Of course, when liberals use violent rhetoric after their supporters commit violent acts, the media looked the other way.

The context is obvious, but imagine where the leftist media would go with such a montage if this were Republicans.

As Biden’s election caused a disruption in their planned disruptions, a January 6 pivot became their next cause….

As it’s well documented that conservatives, Republicans and/or Trump supporters are not violence prone and that liberals infiltrate what may have been initially intended to be peaceful rallies and turn them violent and destructive, they plotted before the 2020 election to create “the post-election phase in the streets”.

It’s not beyond sensibilities to assume these people saw the January 6 Trump rally as an opportunity to not only bring on their signature violence but to have that violence blamed on his supporters for future marginalization. It’s just a question who knew what was going to happen and how much blame would be assessed.

There is significant evidence beginning to emerge of three things. One, that the Capitol Police, the NYPD, the FBI all had prior warning there was going to be an attack on the Capitol. How did the leaders of Congress react to this intel? Did it get to them? Did Nancy Pelosi know?

Secondly, if this was a planned attack, you can’t be a president of the United States being accused of inciting a spontaneous attack when it was planned days before. From an impeachment perspective and a factual security perspective, we’re learning things and we shouldn’t be in the posture of making final assignments of blame until we know what the facts are.
— John Solomon, 1/13/21

Again based on the documented reputation of conservative and Republican activists, the January 6 Capitol riot was 100% uncharacteristic of President Trump’s supporters and 100% characteristic when liberal Democrats assemble. Rioting and committing random acts of violence and destruction are things conservatives have never done prior to. It IS what Democrats do almost every time they “peacefully protest” in the streets or storm state houses.

But looking into past patterns and practices just takes too much work for the media and anyone with a modicum of common sense.