Western Rifle Shooters Association

Do not give in to Evil, but proceed ever more boldly against it

Sunday, November 16, 2008

Vanderboegh: Question 59 and the Myrmidons

Editor's Note: I first learned of the Obama staff questionnaire and its gun questions from Spartacus, who noted that there appeared to be no legitimate reason to be asking those questions in that manner.

Mike Vanderboegh now gives us some insight into the possible story behind the questions.

Question 59 & the Myrmidons

Vetting The Ant People for Our New Ruler

by Mike Vanderboegh
15 November 2008

The Myrmidons (or Myrmidones) were an ancient nation of Greek mythology. They were very brave and skilled warriors as described in Homer's Iliad, and were commanded by Achilles. Their eponymous ancestor was Myrmidon, a king of Phthiotis who was a son of Zeus and "wide-ruling" Eurymedousa, a princess of Phthiotis. She was seduced by him in the form of an ant. An etiological myth of their origins, simply expanding upon their supposed etymology— the name in Classical Greek was interpreted as "ant-people", from murmekes, "ants"— was first mentioned by Ovid, in Metamorphoses: in Ovid's telling, the Myrmidons were simple worker ants on the island of Aegina. Another common variation had King Aeacus of Aegina, father of Peleus, pleading with Zeus to populate his country. Zeus said his people would number as the ants on his sacred oak, and from the ants sprang the people Aegina, the Myrmidons. . . The Myrmidons of Greek myth were known for their loyalty to their leaders, so that in pre-industrial Europe the word "myrmidon" carried many of the same connotations that "robot" does today. Myrmidon later came to mean "hired ruffian" (according to the Oxford English Dictionary) or "a loyal follower, especially one who executes orders without question, protest, or pity; unquestioning followers." -- Wikipedia.

During the first debate between John McCain and Barack "the Lightworker" Obama, there came a moment that revealed, unintentionally I am sure, far more about the candidates than they wished to show us. It also illustrated how far we have come from the Founders' republic. It was this:

Jim Lehrer, PBS: Before we go to another lead question. Let me figure out a way to ask the same question in a slightly different way here. Are you -- are you willing to acknowledge both of you that this financial crisis is going to affect the way you rule the country as president of the United States beyond the kinds of things that you have already -- I mean, is it a major move? Is it going to have a major effect?

Now when he asked this question, I sat up straight on the couch. I said to my wife, "Did you hear that?"

She ignored me, as is her wont.

Obama went first, saying "There's no doubt it will affect our budget," etc., etc., ad nauseum.

When he finished, I said, "McCain's got him now."

"How?" my wife Rosey asked.

"Listen," I insisted.

But then it turned out McCain had missed it, too. His answer was a similar prattle of programs and budgets. I couldn't believe it and I raged at the television screen.

"You IDIOT!" I yelled, "You stupid moron! You could have knocked that out of the park!"

My wife cautioned me that I was scaring the cats, and then asked what I meant.

"Didn't you hear the question?" I demanded. "Old Jim 'Proletarian Broadcasting System' there asked them how they'd 'RULE' us. All McCain had to do was to wait for Barack to stick his head in that trap, which he did, and then say, 'Jim, I want to back up to how you phrased that question. You asked how this crisis would affect the way we'd 'rule' the country. Jim, the President of the United States doesn't rule the country, he serves it. I'm astonished that Senator Obama would take such a question at face value. America doesn't have a king who rules. I can't speak for Senator Obama, but I'm not running for the office of king.'"

My wife looked at me and said, "OK, I get that, but you still scared the cats."

Well, the cats can always use a good scaring, but that's another story. The lesson this little exchange taught me was that both men thought they had the right to rule the United States of America. I wasn't surprised that they thought that. I WAS surprised that neither man saw fit to reassure the American people that they didn't intend to do so, if only for appearances sake.

All this came back to me when I read about Question 59.

In the "Miscellaneous" section of the Obama administration's 63-item questionnaire given to prospective myrmidons, er, ah, I mean, job applicants is Question 59:

“Do you or any members of your immediate family own a gun? If so, provide complete ownership and registration information. Has the registration ever lapsed? Please also describe how and by whom it is used and whether it has been the cause of any personal injuries or property damage.”

Now this is a question worthy of a king, or a dictator. Only kings and dictators worry about the possession of legal firearms in the hands of the people.

This is not an Alice's Restaurant draft board "Have you ever been arrested?" question. Note the phrasing, "has it been the cause of any personal injuries." There they go with that anthropomorphizing of inanimate tools again.

What they are really asking is, "Do you own any evil guns and have you realized how much you need professional help for doing so?"

Presumably someone who answers "no" to this question will be in much better shape to lock down that really choice bureaucratic flunky job than someone who says "yes" and then has to explain himself.

This is indeed a question worthy of a "ruler." Which should tell you all you need to know about what's coming.

Make ready.

Your would-be ruler and his entourage of willing myrmidons cometh...


Anonymous Anonymous said...

What I failed to point out was that this question sensitizes the ant people to stay away from guns, and to be suspicious of those who don't. It is obviously a sensitive subject to your prospective employer. Even after they get the job, do you think they will go out and buy a gun no matter how much they might have their mind changed for them by events? Or will they do what they are expected to do, which is count on the guns of the government to protect them. This binds the ant closer to the colony, doesn't it?


November 16, 2008 at 3:37 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The above-referred debate was not the first time that McCain misspoke about "ruling."

During the 2000 primary campaign, IIRC after he had won the Vermont primary, McCain said that he was uniquely qualified to rule America.

That use of words was never picked up on. I thought at the time that it was a pretty good Freudian slip, and confirmed my distrust of him.

Watch yer topknot. PF

November 16, 2008 at 12:56 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What was John McCains pay off for purposly throwing the election? Maybe, it kept his wife out of prison for drug charges. Rember Johnny fighting tooth and nail, as if his wife depended on it, for the RNC's nomination. Remember John Boy fighting like a new born kitten for the POTUS spot. Including flattering coments reguarding BO at the most critical times. Am I stupid or blind. Chicago Rules III's

November 16, 2008 at 4:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I sense a slightly different angle from the question, one that may stem from Codreas' "Only One" work.

One of most grievous blows a leader can receive is to be publicly and rightfully labled a hypocrite. Obama is known to be hyper-sensitive to criticism.

To me it seems the Lightworker may be laying the groundwork so that anyone associated with his regime who may own a gun will survive the scrutiny that will inevitably come when he tries to take everyone elses away.

November 16, 2008 at 7:45 PM  
Blogger Santander said...

Let the myrmidons come... they won't have a gun. Everyone in my family will have one and I'll have others to start handing out.

November 16, 2008 at 11:55 PM  
Blogger Anniee451 said...

I've heard the words "lead" and "rule" a lot during the last two years. I wonder why free people (or people who are supposed to be free) desperately want a leader or a ruler for, anyway? The presidency isn't supposed to be some exalted office like that. He's not an elected king, though they all seem to believe they are, and the sheeple seem content to have it so.

November 17, 2008 at 9:46 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home