Friday, September 24, 2010

If Only The GOP Would Prove Me Wrong

Damn, Damn, Damn.

When I first conceived in 1999, and even when I finally commissioned in 2003, the following:
I really was hoping I'd inspire either a mea culpa out of the GOP leadership or a revolt by their supporters.

Well, the TP movement shows that Americans are sick and tired of lacking a real opposition party to the bipartisan, constitution shredding, power-greedy Statists in Washington.

And the GOP leadership has been showing some good signs of acceding to the will of the people as represented by the Tea Party.

But today all bets are off. It's all been lip-service my friends.

The following story by DrewM at Ace's place firmly reestablishes that our problem with the GOP is that they are just as much a part of the ruling class as the other disgusting party despite the presence of one or two good people still in the Senate GOP.

Murky: My Pals In The Senate Think I Can Win This Write In Thing

and

In other RINOrific news...Sources are telling Jim Geraghty that's it's 50/50 on whether or not Mike Castle runs a write in campaign for the Senate in Delaware.

DrewM goes on to note
"The GOP establishment would be going crazy if tea party candidates decided to run 3rd party campaigns in the general and rightly so. Now they need to show the same anger towards their own."
But they won't my friends. The Republicans and the Democrats have been getting along with each other since at least that time in the late 90's. The CSPAN cameras had just broadcast Senate Majority and Minority Leaders, Daschle and Lott (I forget which was which and over what) threw verbal brickbats at each other. Immediately after that was over, the same cameras happened to catch the two of them -- thinking they were out of camera range -- hugging each other.

I always imagined they were telling each other
"Good show -- the boobs at home bought our BS."

Are you still buying it?

Tuesday, September 21, 2010

Are They Still Jews?

Are they still Jews when they take up against God? 
Or have they fallen to the worldly side of Isaac, where they indulge in the world like Esau, or come to hate the world because it’s God’s creation as did Amalek?

So asks Spotter in the conclusion to his a comment at the provocatively titled The Death Wish of the Jewish Intellectual Left by Barry Rubin.

Spotter explores the reasoning to the conclusion of his comment in a manner that I approve, but using less words than I (sigh) would.

If you disagree, let me hear it. Typically the "Jewish" left will try to hide behind their Jewish origins, and will berate such distinctions as made here as antisemitic on its face.

But there is nothing antisemitic against calling out pretenders to a very specific ethic even if they don't realize they are pretenders. To be Jewish is much more being a promoter of the ethic from which Jew is derived than being from a race or tribe. Esau and Amalek were from the tribe of Isaac, but it did not make them Jews.

This sort of thing can be found in every Leftist designated group. For example,  blacks who think Jesse Jackson is their leader because the Leftist media calls him that are doing the bidding of the Left, favoring Jackson and not really themselves or society.

Women who let men haters dominate sexual issues, and make a mountain out of a mole hill, will see men not treating them as well as the majority would otherwise. That is because when men find they are damned if they do and damned if they don't, they rather keep their distance.

And so it is here. When other Jews let those among them who've fallen away from the God-centric ethic get away with still identifying with Judaism, they are being useful idiots to the Left which ultimately hates anything to do with God.

Now I know many Jews will be abraded by this post. Many because real antisemites love to make hay out of Jews having a very tough ethical row to hoe and often falling short; so Jews are understandably reflexively anxious about any criticism of any who call themselves Jews. Some because they believe once a Jew always a Jew, and one who has fallen away will be welcomed back. The prodigal son thing. But some who've fallen away will be thinking they're being insulted like a black might be for being called white. But a great deal of it is due to natural stubbornness when not due to more sinister reasons. The bible says you are a stiff necked people, and that is good to a point. Those who stick to the covenant with God, even a little, are doing what He expects. But once you've decided to go away from God, you can be just as stiff necked.

As Spotter points out in a very short space, if you have no need for God, or if you actually hate either Him or even the concept of Him, there are legitimate grounds to ask "are you really Jewish, or merely of Jewish descent."

Monday, September 20, 2010

My Boot Directory Has Gone South

I've been trying to resurrect it, but so far not so lucky. I've tried to fix it, starting with the simpler efforts like virus checks, to taking out my hd and installing it into a portable reader to check it's health (ok) to reinstalling windows XP with the repair facility.

At least now it gets as far as the windows home edition screen, where it quickly switches to a flash of blue with white words on it for a split second that I can't make pause to read. And then it reboots. On in finitum.

I'm trying to avoid using the repair function fixmbr on my partitioned harddrive cuz I'd hate to lose all my programs just like that. The warning sounds ominous. (Update: fixmbr done, but to no avail.) I've saved my data files, but programs and drivers are such a pain to reinstall when I can find all the disks that windows asks for.

My plea for help at Belmont Club resulted in the following advice:
Pascal,

I’m training to become a computer forensic examiner and I think this is a pretty good explanation on how to remove a boot sector virus: http://www.wikihow.com/Remove-a-Boot-Sector-Virus

Four things the wiki leaves out: 1) Depending on the os, it is possible to boot from a flash drive instead of a floppy; 2) you should be very wary of saving any executables but if you do, scan them for viruses; 3) There are third party wiping tools available including (free) dban from sourceforge.net; 4) your computer may have been compromised by removable media – scan all that you own for viruses.

You must consider all your internet passwords compromised. Reset them. Going forward, use firefox with the keyscrambling extension as your browser – everyone should. If you need help have someone post it here and I will try to give you a timely response. Good Luck.

-Veneto

I can't easily post at BC right now, so I'll respond to Veneto here in hopes he sees it.
I'm not certain my problem was caused by a virus. My virus checker hasn't found anything. I'm not certain if it CAN search the boot sector until it goes through the process of rebooting, and, of course, it's not been able to do that.

The thing about the fix at the link you sent me to is that it recommends doing a complete low level reformatting of the disk. Why not just throw the disk away and buy a new one? It would save one hell of a lot of time and grief.

The whole reason to save the harddrive would be to try and save what is on it and is still usable, no?

Friday, September 17, 2010

Taunting Us With Shadows On the Wall

Plato and later Hegel told us we’d see nothing but shadows cast on the wall. Plato warned of the Sophists who taught those who ruled how to get away with it. They’re still at it. It’s only their useful idiots who taunt us for not being able to name them.

Thursday, September 16, 2010

"There Is No Such Thing As a Left or a Right"

You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right. Well I'd like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There's only an up or down: up to man's ages-old dream, the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order, or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. And regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motive, those who would trade our freedom for security have embarked on this downward course. -- from Ronald Reagan's 1964 stump speech.
These lines are probably familiar to many Americans of my age, though a good number may have forgotten them.

About twenty years later during President Reagan's first term, while riding in my car, I heard Mr. Reagan add a compelling visual image to these lines. What he said was that the false political spectrum of left and right was [I don't exactly recall, but I'll say he said it was] like a see-saw of a platform.

The Left would gain control, and they'd pile up programs on their side of the platform. The foundation beneath the platform would begin to sink from the weight of their efforts. This resulted in the platform being tilted noticeably. It made the voters feel uncomfortable. So the voters would turn to the Right to straighten things out. 

Well the right might try to prop up the left side a bit, and refill the foundation, but in doing so, they'd dig a hole under their side of the platform next. Those who gain power always have interests who want something back -- usually in the form of legislation that favors them or taxes their competitors -- for their support. Thus the weight of these efforts and favors repaid cause the platform to tip to the right this time. That sinking feeling leaves the voters uncomfortable again.

So the voters would then put the Left back into power. And the Left would begin to fill in the hole under the right, but pile up more programs on their side and drive their side of the platform even deeper into the foundation of America's liberties.

And so it would go on, back and forth, Left and Right, Left then Right. Pretty soon the citizens of this great nation would find themselves in a pit of despair; a pit dug by the machinations of those who built up the oppressive weight of government. Government has been built up incrementally, one law after another, ruling upon ruling, practice becoming entrenched policy. And it was all done under the guise of representing a left or a right side, but both headed in one direction -- into the pit of tyranny. All those vested interests would insist it stay that way. Worse, as they'd get even more demanding. It's always painted about fairness too. They were owed all that they'd "earned" for their efforts to gain "their people" power in the past.

At some point the vast majority of Americans will insist on climbing out of the hole dug for them by this political machine -- that single minded and ruthless incremental see-saw of power-seeking achieved by eating away at the foundation of our liberties. Taxes and regulations and busybodyness that is in no way justified in a nation dedicated to individual freedom.

Americans were passed a birthright containing the fresh air of freedom. It is what  our Founders had envisioned, and it is what our fathers fought to keep. And it's pretty much still been available to most Americans for around 200 years. If we do not stop the digging soon, somewhere along the way, Americans will demand to be let out of this pit. May God bless them then as He has in the past.
I think the Tea Party movement is the realization of Mr. Reagan's vision. We will no longer limit ourselves to the thinking that we must choose to accept a Left or a Right. We are seeking freedom from the tyranny of those tired old partisans who claim to working for our common good but are enthusiastically enslaving us and our posterity,

Savage: Home Invasion of America

"It's as if America were dying from an auto-immune disease."

Save this podcast of the Michael Savage Show to your mp3 player and listen. Just today, put aside your prejudices for the messenger, or that you cannot stand the man's voice, or you believe him to be self-promotional in the extreme. You need to hear it so you can relate the key elements of it for the benefit of those you care about.

The theme -- reflected in the title of this post -- of the first two thirds of the show is laid out in the first 38 minutes of this tape (Wednesday, September 15 2010). At about 21 minutes, Mr. Savage switches from a single horrific example to the national aspects of the crime. Listen up to about one hour and 15 minutes and you will be better prepared. Mr. Savage analogizes what is happening to America to a horrible home invasion of a few years ago. The trial for first -- an allegedly least -- of the fiends is only now transpiring. Listen how he relates the small home invasion and the police response to the current threat to the nation and the response of our leaders.

IMO, this segment is better than classic Michael Weiner. If he stuck to this sort of programming, he'd surely remain a favorite target of the left and the less bold on the right, but he'd also be the topmost of the talk-radio hosts -- the ultimate spit-n-the-eye of our decadent establishmentarians.

Sadly, nobody could do this well every day.

Tuesday, September 14, 2010

Dana Carvey or David Spade?

Is this MSNBC news reader really Dana Carvey or David Spade?

Or is this the product of their unholy union?

Now Demonstrating the Self-Satirizing

Dear Pascal;

I received the following comment from an in-law whom was conservative leaning in earlier days.

"the stuff(shit) you send is always misleading and half truths of theatrical garbage and that I do not have time for."

Had he told me that to my face, I'm sure I would have laughed. The last time I visited him he religiously watched AND taped the Daily Show*. Theatrical garbage and misleading half truths "that I do not have time for."

And tonight I read your post. I think that sort of dangerous nonsense parading as news helps explain my in-law.

Do you have any recommendations for breaking through his self-imposed barrier?
[* The Daily Show, features Jon Stewart mugging (lowest form of theatrics) for the camera as he delivers misleading half truths meant as satire. ]

Oh the irony! /s

I see why you wrote to me my friend.

I wish I had a good recommendation. That "self-imposed barrier" is made possible because of crap provided your in-law by the same old media whose nationalizing I warned about yesterday.

I keep trying to find new ways to express my own alarm so that people like you can help me come up with ways to break through. That is the primary reason why I've increased my output here. Writing, for me, comes neither easily nor joyously.

I pray that other readers have an answer for you. And maybe they'll cone up with one for me too.

Monday, September 13, 2010

Self-Satirizing? -- Maybe not

 "Because you don't watch TV, you need to know what your neighbor is watching." -- from memory of an Ad for TV Guide that appeared some time in the late '70s or early '80s.

My memory of that advertisement needs not to perfect for you to fully comprehend its implied warning.
"TV is influencing your life whether you watch it or not, so you need to know what that influence is." 
 With that same thought in mind, I recommend that you watch the following video (h/t Wretchard) for its jaw-dropping bias and stupidity -- and warning. I initially thought this was a skit on SNL or The Daily Show.


[The above video was terminated by youtube, its original address http://www.youtube.com/v/J_JtHwK7Yys. Being prepared for when YouTube might remove it, I left here the key words to Google: "Morning Joe refuses to interview pastor." I subsequently found it at LiveLeak]

Most troubling: I have heard words from extended family members that echoed those uttered by the moron (Donnie?) who dominates that last segment of the clip from MSNBC.

If ever there was an unfair, one-side-censored fight for the minds of the American people, I don't believe I've seen one that was worse -- yet.

MSNBC has definitely earned its lowest of the low ratings, but it does not mean that others are not parroting what they are saying due to feeds from other less off-the-wall sources. That they are still broadcasting and paying high salaries to these nuts is proof enough that they are being heavily subsidized at a loss by GE and Microsoft at whatever level each is on the hook to pitch in. Where Corporate Statism is helped in its advance by tax law, it isn't a long way from the existence of MSNBC to an overt creation of and direct Govt payments for an Orwellian Ministry of Truth. [In later years Pascal Fervor began using Agency of Lies because he saw that we were not an Orwellian world quite yet, and felt it best that he speak the truth while he still could. He also used the acronym SKUNCs instead of RINOs for much the same reason.-- ed.]

I am speaking out as I have never done before, and take a pounding as a result. The overall pounding will be worse down the road if I don't speak up now.

Saturday, September 11, 2010

Before We Were Dehumanized

We had to be given a clever vision of our origins that was disparate from God before our Conditioners could dehumanize the bulk of us.



Who could forget the ape-inspired scene after having seen it? Zarathustra indeed.


I hope you enjoy the following trailer despite my regrets over how I was once greatly influenced by the original film. The trailer is for a documentary that shows us who the creative but useful idiots were and how they did it.

Wednesday, September 08, 2010

Authoritarian Auto-destruct

Authoritarian adj:
  1. of, relating to, or favoring blind submission to authority.
  2. of, relating to, or favoring a concentration of power in a leader or an elite not constitutionally responsible to the people.

I am convinced some of you elected officials are not yourself authoritarian. The question you need to consider after November 2 is "will I stop being the tool of authoritarians?"

At the moment of your most bitter defeat in November, during Congress' lame-duck session:
  • Will you entrench in power further those who have used you thus far to gain power over decent, hard-working fellow Americans?
  • Will you tear down the last vestiges in the American Constitution that restrain government excess?
  • Will you permit the ruthless to drive you into auto-destruct mode and kill the American republic for them?
  • Or will you come to your senses and rebel against those who've shed their facade of creeping socialism so they can rush headlong to seize tyrannical powers?

Many of you have been made promises by those who claim to be your leaders and benefactors. You know from working with your leaders how they are two-faced liars. Will you proudly remain useful idiots and thus prove you are also stupid? Do you not know that it is far safer for you to trust the American people to treat you as former sinners begging to be forgiven?

One more thing. Many on the Right do not trust the Republican Party to behave like true conservatives. The GOP leadership has compromised itself with Statists in their ranks. It was Statists (allegedly on the Right) whose government growing failures helped bring into power the last two Leftist Congresses headed by the hated Pelosi and Reid, as well as ushering in the most Leftist President in American history.

If you give in to the power grab of the current "leaders" who will attempt to exploit your bitterness at having lost your Congressional seat, have no doubt that they will seek to harm you after they get what they want. First of all, because you are former leaders, you will be a potential threat to their leadership. Second and third, you know what they did to twist your arm and you know what grasping scheming creatures they really are. Thus you --  even more than those other useful idiots (on the Right) -- will remain a threat to those who have risen to authority.

So
  • Start thinking today about rebelling against the Statist agenda. 
  • Plan to resist the temptations and the coercion to force the Statist will on America during the lame duck period. 
Again, resist the temptation to aid the authoritarians with your own self-destruction. Real Americans will forever be in your debt, and I am certain if you also turn to God and ask His forgiveness for previously being so blind and deaf, He will forgive you too.

Monday, September 06, 2010

Wisely Learn from Others' Mistakes

In How to Fight Them, Michael Ledeen offers three suggestions on how to turn back the Islamist threat to America without using the courts because "we want to maintain our 1st Amendment rights."

His second and third suggestions were clever non-standard issue, calling for us to use immigration law in the manner that we have in the past, and to prosecute for financial limitations and rules that many Islamic movement leaders appear to be violating.

But it was his first suggestion, "to openly contest their odious doctrines and practices," that has already ignited Americans who feel betrayed by our dhimmi if not kafir politicians.  It was where Ledeen referred to actions of the French though, that prompted me to add my 2 cents.
"Indeed, we should emulate the French and forbid women to cover themselves in public."

The French are about to go further than that. They are taking the position that those who practice in-your-face Islam are acting as a political party whose agenda is to install Sharia in France via fait-accompli.

For more about that, go here (h/t Selwyn Duke):

I'm Being Censored at PJM...

...or at least so it seems.

I frequently post at Belmont Club, a blog that became syndicated at Pajamas Media a few years ago. I sometimes do more posting there than here.

But lately I've been forced to email Wretchard, sometimes several times for the same comment stream, to free my post from the spam queue. It's been happening over the last several weeks roughly 3 out of every 4 submissions. Despite Wretchard's agreeableness and rapid response when he's around, it's more than troubling that my comment is delayed -- sometimes for hours -- and thus made untimely. It also creates referencing difficulties. When Wretchard finally frees it, it's introduced to the comment stream late, but in its time-stamp order. That messes up the numbering of the comments. It screws up everybody else who has already referred to a comment that appeared after mine before mine has been inserted.

But it's even worse at other PJM sites where my comments NEVER show up at all. There I don't have the long history I have with Wretchard, nor even the email address of the author.

For instance, when I attempted introduce this highly relevant item A Tool for Beating the Ministry of Lies at this PJM post by Charlie Martin, Glenn Beck Rally: How Big Was the Crowd?, it never showed up at all despite several attempts. If it were not for a reader of this blog, a link to my contribution would never have appeared there. As it was, it did not show up until very late in that comment stream (107 out of 115 unique threads, with almost 400 total comments). That means it was not seen by many others who could have seen it had it been permitted timely admission. Thus, whomever at PJM has put my name on the do-not-publish list prevented my work from reaching more eyes.

That, by hook (sloppiness) or by crook (deliberate but unannounced), is censorship folks. 

Now, this morning, I attempted to contribute to Michael Ledeen's thoughts on Islamists, How to Fight Them. As happened when I tried to post about the Glen Beck Rally, I didn't get the "your comment is awaiting moderation" that I used to get at most PJM sites. So it aroused my concerns that the following important bit of information would not get a chance to appear there.

Here it is my so far aborted entry:
"Indeed, we should emulate the French and forbid women to cover themselves in public."
The French are about to go further than that. They are taking the position that those who practice in-your-face Islam are acting as a political party whose agenda is to install Sharia in France via fait-accompli.

For more about that, go here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1fG2oO2X8s

I do not know or understand why I'm having this difficulty, as I'm no troll. Thus I thought you should know I'm having this difficulty.

I have added this comment to my "Be Wary" keyword list. Be wary of PJM as they seem to have something in common with The New York Times: They print all the news they deem fit for print.

Friday, September 03, 2010

Statist Tools: Restricting the Rational

Two examples how rational, comparative argument has become restricted:

1. Those who invoke Godwin's Law for the purposes of censorship. They've expanded Godwin's observation from implying that "listing key points of an issue has been exhausted" to declaring that "there has been a breach of what may be considered a legitimate argument." It is a fact that Hitler and his NAZIs started off as less outrageous and increased their powers incrementally. When some group begins to follow a path similar to Hitler's, and reports of such behavior is forbidden, rational argument has become restricted simply by barring the introduction of such comparative evidence.

2. Those who reflexively shut down their brains when something sounds conspiratorial. The repeated airing of absurd conspiracy theories (a persistent campaign by Michael Medved) serves as a preventative to rational discussion of plausible conspiracies. An excessive parade of the former type, of groaners easily ridiculed, sets up in the reflexive thought "not another one" whenever a latter type appears. Statists are thorough and operating in plain sight if one would only recognize it. The upshot of it all is that in most cases, the person who introduces a conspiracy is dismissed as paranoid or simply nuts. Yet it is a fact that the Roman republic was undermined by contractual conspiracies between powerful men who, it turned out to be, were mortal enemies of each other. They are known to us as the First and Second Triumvirates.

Avoiding comparisons of what transpires now with what transpired then is evidence of either the irrational or of self-restricted rationality.  Where it is self-restricted, we are either witnessing reflexive action or the willful practice of double-think.  Whatever the cause, rational thought has been dimished.

That MSM and fellow travelers did not do that to Hillary Clinton when she introduced the phrase vast right-wing conspiracy tells you all you need to know.  Progressives and their conditioned idiots legitimize "attacking a conspiracy nut" selectively.

Bottom line: The charge of “conspiracy theory” presumes that there is no possibility of any such thing, which, given history, is obviously ridiculous. Thus, the exclusion of real evidence, review and discussion of conspiracies is itself irrational.