Listening to the rhetoric from the left lately has been interesting, very interesting. It’s nothing new, same old same old as they say – but, when put into context, it could be taken as, ominous.

First, one has to realize what it is the liberals fear most. Liberals always focus their actions and words against what it is that threatens their hold on power. It they don’t perceive it as a threat, they simply just leave it be.

Liberals always try to make what they fear the most, what they feel threatened by seem vile and they craft their rhetoric to emphasize that viewpoint in hopes of rallying their base toward some sort of action.

Liberals resort to name calling. It’s the last resort of discourse for many and a non starter for most capable of using truth and fact to make their point but for liberals, it’s often the first volley.

Liberals tend to ignore the will of the people believing they know better what the people deserve than the people know what they want. Liberty is not high on the list of liberal thinking. What liberals want is for the people to be reliant on government for their every need.

A good liberal leader is nearly always oblivious to the plight of the people. Liberal leaders enjoy the lavish trappings of their power while the people they represent struggle day to day.

Liberal leaders will employ propaganda to further their political ambitions.

Liberals will ignore defections from their base and claim all is well when clearly, those once loyal to them are running for the tall grass. Liberals will always blame others rather than take any responsibility for the ills they face.

Okay, now, let’s take a look at what exactly has been the focus of liberal rhetoric, at what it is that they feel threatens their chances of reelection.

Is it the economy? The economy is dismal and our nation’s credit rating has been downgraded. We have inflation, and staggering debt. Nope, it’s not the economy.

Could it be unemployment? Under Obama, unemployment has risen from roughly 7% to nearly 10% – and the future doesn’t look bright. No…it’s not unemployment.

The national debt? No…Liberals want more spending believing the best way out of a deep hole is to keep digging.

Hmmm…The Tea Party?

Bingo!

Liberal rhetoric has been laser focused on the Tea Party!

Lately, it’s been clear that to liberals in power, the Tea Party is the biggest threat, the Tea Party scares the pants off of them. The Tea Party is what stands between liberals and reelection. Liberals have called the Tea Part all sorts of things. Angry mob, racists, dangerous, insane, and when that line of rhetoric didn’t work, they ramped it up.

Liberals called the Tea Party terrorists, hostage takers and suicide bombers.

Liberal rhetoric aimed at the Tea Party also has employed the use of minions trying to quell the threat. Harry Reid has stated over and over that the Tea Party is fading away and will soon be gone. Maxine Waters said the “Tea Party can go straight to hell!”

Hmmm…why “straight to hell?” Well, because that’s where evil goes – so, the Tea Party, to a liberal, is pure evil.

Rhetoric…silly, right? Baseless words…right? Ominous? Well, that depends on what you compare it to doesn’t it?

Now, scratch your head and look for a comparison…what do you find?

Well…in Libya, over the last 7 months, what scared the pants off of Qaddafi? The media has labeled them rebels – and while we don’t  know who those rebels really are or who’s been backing them, they are Libyan people, for the most part with mercenaries thrown in who want their current leaders OUT of power.

Qaddafi has undoubtedly used propaganda for years to boost his own standing with the Libyan people. Obama is set to use Hollywood propaganda in the guise of a movie about the killing of bin Laden to boost HIS standing just 3 weeks ahead of the 2012 election. Interesting.

Qaddafi was, at first, dismissive of those who were rising against him. So were the liberals in regard to the Tea Party.

Qaddafi then ramped up his rhetoric against the uprising calling those who defied him, vermin, rats, drug addicts and delusional.

Qaddafi, in the face of reality, claimed the forces fighting for freedom would soon fade away, be quelled and order restored. Qaddafi was saying these things while those around him were defecting.

Certainly none of the problems in Libya were caused or exasperated by Qaddafi. Just ask him. He has for years blamed everybody else for his country’s ills…The West and America were his standbys.

While his people clamored for a better life and suffered accordingly, where was Qaddafi? Living the lavish life in compounds and resort villas at the expense of his people. He entertained his friends extensively and enjoyed the trappings of royalty.

Qaddafi, now nowhere to be seen, is sending others, his minion sons, out to do his talking. They are talking a big game but those to whom their rhetoric is directed are paying little attention.

Now then, if one is to compare Obama and Qaddafi, should one not also compare the Tea Party to the rebels? Perhaps there is some comparison but just as there are differences between the Tea Party and the Libyan rebels, there are differences too between Qaddafi and Obama.

The rebels have reclaimed their country at the point of a gun – and that differs from the Tea Party in that here  the Tea Party will reclaim our country at the ballot box. Libyans never had that opportunity. Qaddafi attempted to maintain his hold on power at the point of a gun and killed thousands of his own people who defied him. Obama has not nor will he – despite what some may believe possible. Our military would never open fire on the people nor do I believe Obama would ever issue such orders as it would mean the end of his political party. If it ever came to that, would the American people take up arms against their own government? Believe it – but it would take a great, great deal more than what we are experiencing now to force that equation.

On the other hand, the Tea Party IS an American populist uprising and as populist uprisings in north Africa are causing dictators in THAT region to drop like flies, perhaps the liberals here, who intend to dictate THEIR policies to the people should show more respect.

Should Obama and the liberals be directly compared to a brutal murderous dictator? No. While tactical rhetoric has been employed by both, the comparison ends with the war of words and we have the Constitution to thank for that.

The people of Libya, the rebels, whoever they are, used the only means available to them to take their country from the hands of a ruthless dictator. We The People will use the means provided by the Constitution to take our country back from the hands of a party bent on tax hikes, ignoring the will of the people, skirting the constitution at every opportunity and the creation of a complete entitlement society of large government, in November of 2012.

Only time will tell if a new government in Libya will change the course of that country for the better; and the same can be said of our country after the next election.

So… Ominous?

Yes but not for We The People. It’s Ominous for Obama and the liberals.

While both leaders use rhetoric and propaganda, Qaddafi backs his with murder while Obama backs HIS with hollow promises and empty scare tactics.

While dancing in the streets may well be seen after the rebel victory in Libya AND after the 2012 election here, there will be a major difference. We won’t dance to the beat of gunfire.

The biggest difference between Obama and Qaddafi can be found in the difference between bull crap and bullets.

Bullets didn’t save Qaddafi’s hold on power – and bull crap won’t save Obama.