Thursday, November 29, 2012

Govt Death Cults "Pas: You Were Right."

I received two emails from readers today. This is the most gut wrenching.

Here is ammunition for your argument.

This evidently is going on in the UK.  Just a short time until the Death Panels come to the US. 


Do you think starving and dehydrating a baby or a person until they die in 10 days is "more humane" than a bullet in the back of the head? 



Thursday, Nov 29 2012 

Now sick babies go on death pathway: Doctor's haunting testimony reveals how children are put on end-of-life plan

  • Practice of withdrawing food and fluid by tube being used on young patients
  • Doctor admits starving and dehydrating ten babies to death in neonatal unit
  • Liverpool Care Pathway subject of independent inquiry ordered by ministers
  • Investigation, including child patients, will look at whether cash payments to hospitals to hit death pathway targets have influenced doctors' decisions
PUBLISHED: 18:03 EST, 28 November 2012 | UPDATED: 19:54 EST, 28 November 2012

Sick children are being discharged from NHS hospitals to die at home or in hospices on controversial ‘death pathways’.

Until now, end of life regime the Liverpool Care Pathway was thought to have involved only elderly and terminally-ill adults.

But the Mail can reveal the practice of withdrawing food and fluid by tube is being used on young patients as well as severely disabled newborn babies.
Read the rest

Thank you for your support buddy. Our world needs many more of you..

Monday, November 19, 2012

So Few Yet Get Why The GOP are "Cowards"

Lately it has been hard for me to write stand alone essays. What happens is I react to the ideas that other people lay out. Not infrequently I am amazed at how so many sensible people (i.e., conservatives) skirt the one explanation that makes sense of all the evidence laid out before them.

Rather than write it out here, I will send you to Redbaiter's blog and see what I wrote in response to his post and his and others' comments. Essentially what I did was ask and answer the question "What if the behavior you call cowardice is not really that, but the deliberate sell-out of conservative positions? And it is playing out as it always has always been planned by the Progressives in the GOP."

The Time Of Cowards



It appears that there is no amount of rational explanation that will get even a friendly audience to discuss such uncomfortable explanations. It may well be because of what a troublesome nightmare is ahead of us if the analysis is anywhere near being accurate. We can certainly ignore reality. However we can't ignore the consequences of that reality forever. [Update: I'm told this last sentence is a paraphrase of Ayn Rand. Well it is an accurate observation. However, much like George Santayana's famed conclusion about those not knowing their history being condemned to repeat it, hers was surely not the first time a common human blindness has been commented upon. Nor will it be the last as idiots and those subject to revived evils endure again their history.]

Thursday, November 15, 2012

Who Briefed Ambassador Rice?

At the press conference yesterday, President Obama defended his ambassador to the UN by saying she didn't lie about Benghazi. She was just repeating the intelligence she'd been given.

How come no reporter asked him then, "who briefed Susan Rice?"

I think the answer can be derived (even by moronic journalism students) from the simple consideration of the unlikeliness in the arithmetic behind the charge of "30,000 emails in a year." -- Who Needs Western Union?

For those needing it spelled out more, I refer you to Joan of Argghh!'s both apt and slightly premature phrase. Them journolists do not wish to become members of the press corpse no matter where inevitable the road they're traveling leads.

Tuesday, November 13, 2012

Who Needs Western Union?

Like reports of a Russian reporter dying of rare isotope poisoning, reports of 30,000 emails in one year sends quite a stunning message.This right after reports of voter turn-outs as large as 141%. Is strained credulity the place to find an ostrich?

Observing tyranny on the rise is unsettling stuff. As Wretchard puts it at the end of “The Eight Shames and Seven Dwarfs”, “nobody knows who’s next.”

Tuesday, November 06, 2012

Political Cowardice and Social Security

Last edited 11:50 AM Nov 8, 2012

The point of this, part 5 of my exposure of the evils of our Social Security system, is to answer some questions raised in comments. One was "how would you feel about only withdrawing the amount you've been taxed plus interest?" The answer is, "still uncomfortable for me."

I was hoping to explain why this is by providing one example of how Leftists used agitprop and political correctness to prevent meaningful discussion of reforms needed to keep the financing of Social Security in balance. Although we were tricked into abandoning our efforts, probably all across the country in a manner similar to the example at the second inset below, I and the others are still culpable for not finding ways to fight such obstructions so we could pursue reforms.

But first, before letting those tactics succeed again in distracting us from our main job, why the need for reform?
As shown in part 3, Social Security's funding and obligations have long been known to be out of balance. It cannot function that way for long because it is subject to Natural Law. That means it is analogous to why we cannot eat our cake and have it too.  In order for Natural Laws to function favorably, the need for balance is never eliminated. Financial balance is not achieved by bookkeeping tricks as the opponents of reform have relentlessly peddled, but only by real ledger balance.  We take responsibility for our expenditures or we leave a bigger burden to those who follow us. Rationalize all you wish, but there is only one responsible course of action, and that is especially true when you momentarily realize how you have failed as you grasp at new rationalizations. You have a range of options. On the responsible side, trying to take up some slack and relieve some of the burdens and chains from your posterity. On the irresponsible side, fall in with the easiest course of actions (typically go along with the crowd) and let your posterity deal with the consequences of your sins.

Simply because some clever scoundrels convinced our society as a whole to put off the reckoning, their success does not eliminate from our souls the burden of the responsibility for what pain may ensue.

Over a period of almost 80 years, a whole lot of morally guided people were derailed from pursuing reforms to Social Security by the combined activities of money-grubbing politicians and Leftist radicals. It may or may not be true that both scheming camps knew the consequences of their actions would steer our society down a road to destruction, but such an ultimately destructive goal to our way of life is now in sight. The moral concerns of earlier reformers may have been derailed, but the moral reckoning beckons to us now. Are we as a once morally guided society so far gone that we will permit every-man-for-himself to rule us? And does that alleviate the burdens on you if you think of yourself as a moral individual?

From what I have witnessed so far, this question is one few seem willing to face. I personally have decided that I cannot ignore the consequence any more. The Ten Commandments say “Thou shalt not steal.” It is not any different if the government steals in my name because they say my claim is legally on the books. I and my generation stood by while they collected FICA taxes and then spent them to pay for other programs for which our politicians did not want to risk their reelection by openly raising taxes to explicitly pay for them.Instead they chose to raid the Social Security fund and leave IOUs behind to be paid back, with interest, by future taxpayers. That is, future politicians had to risk raising taxes while in office or risk letting the system collapse. AND. WE. LET. THEM. SET. US. UP.

We should have hung those scoundrels from lampposts, but we didn’t.

So now we are faced with the burden of not having done our jobs as watchdogs to keep those damnable foxes out of the hen-house. A penny here a penny there, pretty soon you are facing 16 trillion dollar deficits and maybe a quintillion dollars of unsecured debt buried in doubled bookings.


As I promised the commenters in part 2 and part 4, I will recount a single embarrassing incident that helps explain one way in which those who were financially aware were derailed from pursuing the reform of Social Security. The younger generations need to know of the forces that worked against me and my generation to prevent us leaving them with a huge debt. If this recollection of agitprop is recounted multiple times and in multiple voices by those who, upon reading it, recognize that it happened to them too, we will have a societal lesson that won’t soon be forgotten.  It may help them fight off the continuing war on them by the Leftist radicals and the Statists hiding amongst those on the Right.
In the summer of 1994 I attended a public “meet the candidates” forum. It was held in an austere concrete block building on Eagle Rock Boulevard in the L.A. neighborhood known as Atwater. This community center mostly serves the more affluent neighborhood of Glassel Park in the hills immediately above it, but was placed where the land is cheaper.  One of the candidates I knew was from GP, and I also discovered that many of the participants were from the even tonier community of Mt Washington (with better vistas) that is on the Eastern slopes of the same hill cluster as GP.  Many of L.A.’s elite then lived there behind gates; some still do. (Google terrain will give you a good feel of the layout if you care.) 

Inside was a small proscenium stage, empty but for a podium center front. The audience area was filled with neatly arranged folding chairs. The whole arena was fairly well lit, much like a high school gym rather than an auditorium, and even exuded the same sort of mustiness. There was a small open area between the stage and the front row of chairs as one would expect. But it contained a wired microphone in a stand. It looked like it was there to allow participants to ask questions. As events unfolded it turned out that this area was reserved as a forestage.

From the stage the moderator – of whose personage I have no recollection – introduced each of the candidates running in the primaries for elective office and had them come up to speak.

We had candidates for a variety of local seats for the state assembly and senate as well as two democratic candidates for Congress. Well, actually the sitting freshman congressman, Xavier Becerra, was in DC, so he was only represented by his local campaign spokesman. There was a Venezuelan doctor by the name of Oscar Valdez looking to give voters of that Congressional seat a more conservative choice in the primary.

I do not recall exactly how the incident began. So I will fill it in with an educated guess.

When Dr, Valdez was speaking, he spoke of the need to take a more realistic approach in Washington. That the current wave of spending and efforts at bringing us Hillary Care was way outside what was good for the democratic majority. So you can see this guy was definitely playing into what brought about the Gingrich revolution of 1994, and was attempting to moderate the Democratic Party in an effort to reduce the coming loss of Democratic control of Congress. In retrospect, this was quite far-sighted for a Democrat, right?

At some point Dr. Valdez must have said that even Social Security was on a collision course with reality – or some such fact centered on the need to eventually pay the piper argument.

Well, almost immediately members of the audience started to interrupt him. “What are you, some kind of Republican?”  “Yeah. Only Republicans attack Social Security.” Things like that. If the term “talking points” were around then, I’m sure they would have accused him of using Republican ones.

The next thing I see, out of nowhere a little old lady appears in the forestage area and starts whining and it’s not too clear what she is saying. The moderator on stage points to someone on the floor and that person gives the lady the microphone from off the stand. And then we hear how she can barely make ends meet now on the little Social Security income she has. That is would be awful to cut her back anymore. Etc., etc, etc.

Several people in the crowd apparently agree with Oscar and tried to say that nobody was looking to cut off current recipients, merely to alter the way Social Security operated and who could expect some portion of it. (And that is still the GOP position even today, same as with Medicare.) I don’t know if anyone used the phrase means testing (I don’t think that phrase either was then current), but it didn’t matter. Any reasonable argument was drowned out by the hooting and howls by the biggest Lefties in the crowd plus the old lady with the microphone who had gone on to sobbing openly in terror.

Well, after a while the moderator called a halt to what I have since become convinced was staged agitprop, and allowed Dr. Valdez to end his moment on stage. (Amazingly enough he got about 25% of the vote in the primary.)

What I witnessed was completely under the control of the stage moderator. As cool under such pressure as anybody you’ve ever seen. And the discussion of the reform of social security, even in that banner year of 1994, was over! Political -correctness, -cowering, -cowardice – whatever you accept as the fact of the matter – had won the day. Who could be so heartless as to terrorize a frail, 75 year old actress lady?
“But we aren’t threatening her.”
“Shhhhh, Not another word, you hear!”

I was witness to this. I knew the fact of the case about the need to reform SS. And I went along with the silence – as has nearly every conservative I’ve met over the years.

How many of you have been through this? The Glassel Park community center can’t have been the only place this has happened.

You could ask me how I am so certain. Well, also at this meeting was the young Anthony Villaraigosa. He was running for his first time election to the California assembly – unopposed. I only met him as I was leaving.  He was wearing a tan suit with pastel yellow shirt and a muted tapestry tie, and couldn’t have been a nicer looking young man. Except he was smiling to beat the band, and that did not yet mean much to me. He would eventually move on to California Assembly Speaker, and (soon to be former) Cheshire Cat Mayor of the City of Los Angeles. He was there only to make an appearance in front of some very powerful people.

Very powerful people Pascal?  Yes. You see this area of Los Angeles is home to the Northeast Democratic Club. Nobody who is anybody in Democratic circles in California moves on before being blessed by them.

Recall that the community center was on Eagle Rock Boulevard. About two miles to the NE of there is the campus of a private college where a certain president attended for a few years and who has only been vetted by the most radical political members of this country. It’s the site of a major lefty power base.

I suspect that what I witnessed that night in that community center was a command performance of the kind of street theater for which ADA and SDS are notorious. And they performed it in their own backyard for their biggest up and comers to marvel at.

You dear readers can tell me if you also witnessed such stunts.  Did you, unlike me, see through the bovine excrement and organize your own group to drown out the PC enforcement squads and Lefty actors? 

If not – and I surely would have heard of you if you had –  you too share some guilt with letting the Left and the SKUNCs continue spending all the FICA taxes for other programs while borrowing to pay off current retirees. You too are contributing to the chains of your posterity if you accept your full SS retirement “entitlements.” 

I’ve come under some heat for taking my current position. Some friends have ceased talking to me out of disagreements that arose as a consequence of my first announcement. It is not easy trying to steer an ethical course when there are so many others who kinda, sorta, feel as I do, but are not ready to admit: “We have seen the enemy, and he is us.”

The enemies of and threat to the survival of this republic are all who will steadfastly refuse to cry out “ENOUGH ALREADY.” Yes, the money I’m “entitled to” could be put “to such good use.” There are always people who love money more than principles. That has rarely been me, and I am determined to stick this out. Next month will it will have cost me $6600. And you would like a piece of that would you? However, I’d be using the government to take it from working citizens – perhaps you – to give to me (plus interest on the debt and salaries for the gun-bearers) so I could give a portion back to you. The only ones who win are those out to destroy America! Got it yet?

Next argument.
Yes the money was taken from me under false pretenses. But I knew it. And so did a whole nation-full of you too. I did not get off my butt and gather a lot of like minded folks around me and fight back against the thieves. My penalty – or maybe more accurately my penance – is not allow myself to file for moneys for which I allegedly legally have claim. I understand how the system operates as a form of thievery, leaving a deficit so large that it must destroy our financial foundations; and with it, turn our unique liberties into servitude once again.

Help me fight this. Advertise this idea. Help me advance the understanding of how it was permitted to get so bad and by whom. Help me help the next generation fight the pigs at the top and the as yet unaware takers in my generation.

The point of all the above is that we of the retiring generation have some obligation to those who follow us to help alleviate their burdens. Means testing is not that hard, but full financial collapse is. The radicals on the Left have engineered this in order to destroy our hugely successful society. Review the Cloward-Piven strategy and you know I’m right on that. Force the schemers into the light can come about if just a few of you try to shame the leadership by pointing to my example. Why can’t politicians forego their huge pensions and huge healthcare plans in retirement if a little retired engineer like me is willing to forego his relatively piddling $2200 per month?

President Obama keeps pointing to those making over $250,000 a year as targets for his tax increases. But that is chicken feed compared to what many in Congress and in pseudo-governmental entities like Fannie and Freddie took home and have retained even after the failures of those organizations. Pigs are equal, but some pigs are more equal than others? C’mon folks shame them to the rafters. Make their own people turn on them.

I am sorry I did not write this before the election. Not that this is a big blog with a big following, but I sense it carries some useful information that many on the Right can finally use to derail the Left for a change.

So now Bummer has won reelection and he and the other piggies will try to destroy us for good. It is not too late. Help me spread this shame. Make it stick to them like they deserve.

Monday, November 05, 2012

The Liberal Brain Is Still In Denial 2

As they go to the polls using expensive gasoline when they can get it, they will take no heed of how Bummer's stated intentions are connected to this chart. He kept a promise.

Price of Regular in Los Angeles
That huge spike in mid-September coincides with Benghazi, but there's nothing that Bummer did or didn't do to affect that either. /sarcasm

Saturday, November 03, 2012

The Liberal Brain Is Still In Denial

I was just speaking with a couple who have been out of power and heat since hurricane Sandy. They are uncomfortable, but making due. Gasoline is available, but there are very long waits. Those they know who have a generator are finding it difficult to keep it running and so use it sparingly.

At my mention that this was how our leadership intended it to be (without my going into Obama's promise about bankrupting coal fired power companies and driving gasoline prices to the level of the EU), I got a "I don't want to hear it."

I said but you still have to vote. I got back "I don't even think I'll get to vote."  And I said that is probably how it is intended (I was thinking but did not say that the revenge would most likely turn against the Left for those who are not in denial). I got back "well, I gotta go." And I said that I wished them well. And I did get a thanks.

And this is NOT a person who is flat-out liberal. They did vote for W in 2000 and 2004. But they have been so busy trying to make ends meet the last five years they really don't spend any time on anything but with TV on in the background -- a good portion of that was listening to Jon Stewart before he found fault with Bummer. They did not tell me specifically, but they implied that they turned him off because they did not like his new snark material.


Look, I know Romney is a "Progressive." Nobody on the internet has been as consistently warning about those SKUNCs in the GOP as I. And I have suffered for it too. But we really do need to buy time. Bummer reelected will mean totally instituted voter fraud from here on in. You will not restore this republic short of outright rebellion. I know of a good many conservatives who have planned for that. In fact, some are actually anarchists in disguise. The most clever of them will never say so outright, but they've made a huge investment in planning for the conflict and they'll be damned if they don't get some opportunity to use a good portion of it. Coming out of the end of open rebellion, if you believe that you will have a restored AMERICAN republic, you are as brain dead as these liberals.

The only chance we have at all is to buy time by seeing that Romney, to best of our ability, is elected. Then we work to either get him moving to the Right or work hard to raise the TEA Party on the ash-heap of the GOP.

And that is possible ONLY if the voter fraud I've seen around me in my state and community hasn't served as an effective working example to get it installed in Purple states. Such an project just may well be fully implemented in enough Purple states to get the Bummer reelected. I pray it is not so.

Do not be brain dead. Do not be in denial. The only real chance we have to preserve our chances is to see that Bummer is overwhelming voted against. Then they won't have enough cheating in place to defeat the majority.

***Update** Question for conservatives and other anti-Obama indees in Sandy ravaged areas.

Are you experiencing still as I did over the phone? Or can't you even get close enough; dare you even get close enough to ask "what do you think now?"

Possible Email Compromises

Late last night I checked my yahoo email account. Some time mid-day I received two strange emails.

The first was from an old friend from whom I'd not received emails in a very very long time. And I could not imagine from the subject why he chose to send it to me. His short note was not clear as to what prompted his sending it.

The second was from a current friend telling me that the last email he received from me had a link that took him immediately to some gaming site as he opened the email. Subsequently I found out that it was NOT the email I last sent him a couple of weeks ago -- that this was new and came in only in the last 2-3 days. He'd already deleted it so he couldn't tell me much more.

I checked my outbox and there was nothing I'd sent that was new. But an email virus would delete any sign of its activity I'd imagine, so it is impossible for me to figure out much more on my own.

What I have since done was change my password.

Still -- which of the email services can be trusted? In the waning days of this campaign, and given the rumor of what Valerie Jarrett has warned -- all those who are not for Obama will be treated as having been against him -- be careful with your emails. Disinformation could be the least of the tactics to expect. Man against man, friend against friend, brother against brother is always the aim of the despots.

Open blog. The best defense against misinformation is an open forum. Lies cannot withstand the light of day in most instances.


Thursday, November 01, 2012

This Post Cost Me $4400

This is the second month since I turned 66. Another month where I have not filed for accepting a payout from the Ponzi scheme disguised as a legitimate entitlement known as Social Security.

This is part 4 of my series that began here.

I predicted that I would be the target of hatred once my efforts became known. The news has not gotten out much, so I've so far been spared that. But I have been subject to a variety of charges that attempt to dismiss any notion that there is some virtue in my efforts. The most troubling thing to arise from that has been some shunning.

I think one of many reasons for this can be found in an explanation penned by David Mamet.



I am not demanding that others follow my lead, but Mamet suggests that doesn't even matter. Since I'm not master of others' feelings, there is little I can do except make it clear that this effort is my penance for not having done more in the past to at least ameliorate this theft by our government.

In subsequent segments I've some rotten leftist stage-craft to tell you about that I'm reasonably sure has played out all across this country every time anyone tried to fix Social Security.