One Thing Will Save Our Republic

I posted this as a comment to Victor Davis Hanson's Thoughts from the Later Republic. I wrote it because so many other commentators were comparing Obama to Caesar, Pompey, Marius, etc.

51. Pascal (the derivative):

The significant similarity between Rome and US lay in our cultural decline and ossification of our institutions.

The significant disparity between Rome and US lay in that its leaders were also generals that had armies loyal to themselves, whilst our leaders are hardly close to the stature of any of theirs.

Our army, while ostensibly loyal to the constitution that is fundamental to our republic and not to any man, which sadly has declined along with our other institutions due to political inroads like affirmative action, PC, and long-standard CYA, could unseat any of our string of Marian-like socialists (Bush being the lite precursor to the heavy-handed Obama). But there really is no mechanism for them to do so without due process, and that is not likely coming from a gaggle of like-minded weak legislators and justices.

And Marius was deposed by Sulla, his long-standing fellow patrician-general but mortal enemy. Where oh where do we have anyone akin to Sulla politically let alone militarily?

No. No. NO! This is not the late Roman Republic. We will not get a temporary respite from a Marius/Obama socialist because we lack for a potential dictator/general like Sulla.

Now, you may say, but what if we could elevate a stately man into the more benign Cincinnatus dictator style of the early republic?

Sorry, Cincinnatus reigned as temporary dictator (twice) to repel external invaders, while Sulla had to overcome perfidy from the inside, which is more our situation. A scenario better fitting of a Cincinnatus would require that Islamo-fascist terrorism is anywhere akin to Parthia (who obliterated Crassus and his army) by the simple-minded proxy that contemporary Iran's locale is ancient Parthia, and the denial that traitors within our republic do not exist.

In my humble opinion — and very humble it is because I don’t see anyone here even giving me the time of day to respond in kind, let alone Dr. Hanson — the only thing that can save this republic short of a major upheaval is a major restoration of our great cultural heritage by majority agreement. Good luck with that project short of massive prayers that are miraculously answered.

IOW, short of divine intervention, we (~230 years) are on track for the appearance of our Imperator at a far faster rate than it took Rome (~500 years) to get there.

Radical Left = Sinister Wing

For the last few days I've taken to calling the radical left wing of our politics by the label – S I N I S T E R   W I N G – which they well deserve. It is guaranteed to be a label that namby-pamby "conservatives" will avoid out of fear of seeming gauche for stating the unpleasant reality.

With the deadly things that have happened under Marxism for the last hundred years, how can radicals – who still want to create a global government based on that proven deadliness – be thought of as not merely left but also sinister? It will be safer for all of us targeted-subjects to speak no longer of the Radical Left wing, but of the Sinister wing.

Please keep that in mind when you read the following comment I left at Eternity Road to an important Mark Alger thread a short while ago.

KG:

The danger from radical islam comes not from the shootings on home soil but from the insidious advance of this ideology by social means, by undermining the will to resist, by using our own institutions and insistence on freedom of religion and free speech to destroy our way of life.

Sinister-wing strategist Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals no. 4:

Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.

Any further questions? Please direct all who may have forgotten to this early warning (March 2004) from The Convergence of the Death Cults:

The signal danger of our era is that all the death cults, whether powered by pseudo-religious zeal, by Marxian economic nonsense, by environmentalist visions, or by the simple desire for power, are reaching out to one another. In their shared enterprise of subjecting Man to the will of an elite, they will suppress their parochial differences, at least until an inescapable yoke has been fastened upon us. -- Francis W. Porretto

The Radical Left has taken over the Democratic Party. They have been exceedingly and uncharacteristically accommodating to the most restrictive religion on the planet. That party now holds the reins of power in the Executive and Legislative branches of our government, and is still but a shaky (Kennedy) vote away from control of SCOTUS.

And the Justice Department is setting the stage to allow the planners of the 911 terrorist attacks to defend themselves with all the tricks I described in Victimoguery.

That is an awful lot of power in the hands of S I N I S T E R forces.

********Update: S I N I S T E R Media **********

Recovering from the Political Correctness Disease [Updated]

I was in the midst of writing what I consider an important essay titled "Reassessing Fundamentals" when news of the Fort Hood murders came to my attention.

Not only did I not finish it on 5 Nov, but I also had two other efforts I had started on 3 Nov and 1 Nov respectively with the revealing working titles "I'm sorry that I'm not completing my screeds," and "A Sign of Frustration."

I wasn't in a funk due to what was about to happen. No, I don't believe I was so clairvoyant this time. I was having difficulty because I feel that Orwell's warning, "the purpose of Newspeak is to destroy man's reasoning ability," required a more active counter-offensive. Before I could move on I wanted to reassess fundamentals of our language so that I could help lift the clouds on our minds.

Funny thing now that I consider it. Political Correctness is a form of Newspeak, with its inherent double-think of "better not say that." PC has long been in our schools and in our media (even much of "conservative" talk radio) and in most of all in our politicians. And now it is clearly at the very top of our military. It is what made the massacres at Fort Hood all that more inevitable -- and thus even more outrageous.

So I stopped writing what I was working on and moved around the web to add to the comments at various sites. I think I helped form thoughts at those places, and that's really what a writer hopes to achieve, gaining scarce credit or even no credit.

From the first my comments attacked the reports that had one voice after another calling the event a tragedy. I called it an outrage for a number of reasons, especially the gall of an army officer and presumed gentleman to act as if he were a cloaked spy; worse: an infiltrator bent on murdering enlisted men who were trained to respect and trust his rank. His act was so rank.

But in retrospect, as the role of the PC climate came to light, along with its diversity and multicultural aims, Political Correctness has finally begun to appear to be the worst element present. PC was the murdering Hasan's silent partner. Political Correctness was the institutional disease that was Hasan's great enabler.

That is the conclusion I hope all in America, the very many who still love her, will arrive at on their own. I give up trying to convince anyone who is viscerally unable to arrive at this same conclusion by using their own God-gifted commonsense . If commonsense and a core personal survival instinct cannot convince my fellow Americans, what chance do I have?

Here's how you will know when America is on the road to recovery from this disease. It could be very soon if Americans simply demand this first thing.

Even before Hasan is found guilty and executed, Political Correctness in our armed forces -- and all its concomitant poison -- must be executed long before he is.

*****Update*****

Michael Ramirez on Hasan's un-indicted co-conspirator downloaded from Townhall's archive.

The original ny post url image went bye-bye

For the Handful of People Smart Enough To Understand This, Not One of Whom Is "raygun"

They know how to bleat "death panels" with a guffaw, but haven't a clue that they're being led by Judas goats.

Thanks to Og for inspiring me to summarize his insight -- from our conversation.

Fair Warning to NY23

A combination of circumstances, attitudes on display, and personal experience compels me to offer this warning.

Expect widespread voter fraud in favor of the Democratic candidate for Congress, and expect the GOP to not only look the other way, but to obstruct any oversight, whether it be by Conservative Party leaders who have a candidate in this race (Doug Hoffman) or independents who wish to see some breaks in the lock the Democratic/Republican Parties have on everything from the electoral process to governing itself, or even lay Republicans dissatisfied with all leadership in DC.

I don't have a foolproof solution for you watchdogs. The best advice I can offer is to be very certain who you trust, and to watch your backs in any event. If your candidate is a good one, and you do the right things, at least you will feel Him by your side when push comes to shove.

USA Sovereignty: It's Been At Risk Since 1789

Last week I highlighted a segment of Lord Christopher Monckton's speech wherein he warned us of the threat to our sovereignty. Then I gave you a glimpse into how dismaying was his comment.

Since then Mark Vande Pol has put together a thorough review of how much treaty law affects our nation's constitution, and the federal power over the states and over our personal rights, the Bill of Rights notwithstanding.

In Patrick Henry, “Ratified”: The Treaty Power, Its Perils and Portents, Mr. Vande Pol (a recognized land restoration expert and author) provides us with several troubling observations and conclusions. One quite startling is:

Virtually every major Federal environmental law cites treaty law as its source of authority, simply because extending Federal police power within the States exceeds the enumerated powers the Federal government was granted in the Constitution.

He provides the records of the founding fathers during struggles to ratify our US Constitution so as to contrast for us the arguments between the Federalists and Anti-Federalists. It was clear that the anti-federalists spotted the dangers inherent in the proposed constitution from the very start. Still, the Federalists poo-poohed those concerns, but not very convincingly, as shown. However, the forces clamoring to fix the then current financial crisis were so great that the majority of states representatives were willing to at least temporarily give power to foreign governments over how we governed ourselves as a form of guarantee for the loans they would then provide us (viz.: treaty law as the justification to pass federal taxes so as to repay national debt.)

Somehow, in all the years since 1789, the USA has never ratified an Amendment to our Constitution that would rescind that power of treaties. Not even after WW II when we were providing loans to the world through the Marshall Plan did we seek to amend that clause in our Constitution.

Mr. Vande Pol argues for and demonstrates what such an amendment would look like:

Whether to limit the treaty power in Article VI is one thing, but there should be NO disagreement about Amending Article II, Section 2, Clause2 of the Constitution as follows:

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present three quarters of the legislatures of the Several States concur;

Treaties operate at the Constitutional level. The same standard should apply to treaties as to amending the Constitution itself.

So this change at least goes a short way toward restoring some of the benefits of federalism without the bulk of its historic complications.

It is a very simple amendment that should brook no argument, so fire any representative who resists. It is that important.

He even provides us with this stunning observation:

"Now you know why George Bush’s administration was instituting programs to cut greenhouse gas emissions despite the fact that the Senate had rejected the Kyoto Protocols 98-0 -- Clinton had signed Kyoto."

I bet most of you are surprised to learn that. Mr Vande Pol shows it to be a consequence of another treaty ratified by the Senate in 1969 that allows the spirit of any international agreement signed by one of our Presidents to be followed even when our Senate fails to ratify the treaty.

This, my review of Mr Vande Pol's important work, is only a sketch. Please go and read the whole thing.

It will serve you and our nation to learn and understand how urgent it is that we prevail upon Mr. Obama not to sign the Copenhagen agreement. Copenhagen's provisions will be onerous far beyond what most all Americans have been informed.

We were woefully ill informed, that is, until today.

Thank you Mr Vande Pol.

Weathervane Politicians No More

Politicians have often been called weathervanes because "they move in the direction that the wind is blowing."

That remark was always meant to be disparaging because it implied that they would move in the direction that would get them reelected rather than the right direction.

Well, thanks to Lord Monckton, we have a new metaphor for the tendency of our politicians.

Lord Christopher Monckton speaks on October 14th, 2009 at a climate skeptic event sponsored by the Minnesota Free Market Institute. 

In the clip above, at about 1:28:40, after he quotes Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger pumping Global Warming, he says

"that's the traffic light tendency: they call themselves Green because they're too yellow to admit that they are really Reds."

Personally, I preferred them when they were more like weathervanes. There they exhibited more humility and tended to act more like public servants and less like rulers.

Will BHO Cede the USA to UN Authority?

What am I talking about?

“An unlimited power to tax involves, necessarily, a power to destroy,” -- Daniel Webster (1782–1852), arguing against the taxers in 17 U.S. 327 (1819), a fact conceded by US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshall even as the court decided in favor of the taxers. More at the source.

Keep that in mind as you listen to this:


If you believe that there are many more big hurdles to overcome before BHO's signature becomes constitutionally binding law (putting aside what the UN thinks his signature means), and that we may still be relatively safe from foreign control since the Senate still would have to affirm it with a two thirds vote, or that your rights under the constitution are protected even if it passes, you are horribly misinformed.

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur. [emphasis added]

all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land;

There is a chance you still fail to see the imminent threat. The above extracts from the United States Constitution are fully sourced at Treaty Law: The Constitution's Original Trojan Horse. I urge you to go there and read it. You will find a clear discussion of the relevant consequences of how treaty laws have, in the past, superseded our constitution and your rights.

And remember that Supreme Court ruling at the top as BHO blithely signs that "global warmimg" treaty at Copenhagen in December.

Statist Tools: Victimoguery

Most of us are willing to live and let live.
They could care less as long as they get what they want.

If the media and its journalists and opinion writers were truly independent, this word, or one that means the same thing, would have been invented long before now. Also, add this to the reasons for doubting that those whom we have accepted as  "leaders" of the Right opposing Statism are all that we need them to be. In that we are lacking leadership in this, I have stepped in to fill the vacuum.

Yesterday I spoke of one of the Statist tools that are used to divide us that I call tripwires. I went on to explain that there are phonies out there who act wounded by pretending that a tripwire has gone off and harmed them. I saw that they deserve special scrutiny. Every day that we lack focus on what it is they are doing, that is another day we permit them to continue their charlatanry. It is another day they succeed in stirring the pot of divisiveness. I referred to them yesterday, for want of a better word, as professional victims. I simply could not think of a word that accurately described these despicable people.

So I turned to my old friend, Francis W Porretto of Eternity Road, to see if he could provide me with the word. He quickly likened the scenario to which I'm referring to that of a professional staked goat. I interpreted that his simile suggests one who makes their living as bait to entrap an innocent target who has the misfortune to say or do anything with or related to them. He promised me he would think about it. That was days ago. When Fran cannot come up with a word, I am pretty confident it does not yet exist.

So here we are.

I am proposing to call such highwaymen, victimogues. They are either the setters and beneficiaries of such traps or the goats who bait themselves.  

victimogue (vik' tih mog): from victim + demagogue; one who masquerades as a victim and exploits the alleged harm in order to achieve personal gain. In the process they create real victims of the individuals, institutions, or whole communities who have been ensnared by the victimogue. Their practice is called victimoguery (vik' tih mog' uh ree).

Although I do not remember the names of the principals involved, I recall an incident from a few years ago that provides an outrageous example – or at least it was outrageous then. One man, upon hearing the word niggardly used properly to describe cheapening behavior, reacted as if the speaker had said the N word, and his reaction, though mistaken, still subsequently cost the bewildered speaker his job.

It is not clear who played out the incident to its despicable end. Someone involved acted as a demagogue, making a mountain out of a molehill, and rode out the incident to the extent that it made the speaker a victim of political correctness. Whether it was the reactor who played the victim or it was the speaker’s boss who chose to see the listener as a victim in order find cause to fire his employee, this is an example of what I propose we call victimoguery. 

Someone who discovers that some words used by others can grant them sudden and great power, and then chooses to ride it out despite a commonsensical explanation that should have ended the issue, that person is acting as a victimogue, and deserves as much societal reproof as any demagogue.

In insurance fraud cases, there are people who have been known to throw themselves into the path of cars and subsequently sue the actual victim of the staged event. Frequently the perpetrator is allied with a lawyer and a doctor to carry out the scam to the detriment of the real victim, all while playing the victim himself. It often takes a lot of detective work to uncover a racket ring like that. But the victimogue often employs his shtick in the broad daylight, counting on political correctness to stifle any support for the real victim.

This has gone on for so long because our media has not served its purpose and cried foul when indeed it is a foul deed. Instead they give one of the biggest perpetrators a slot on FNC. I doubt that is the kind of "fair and balanced" that Fox's favorable viewers have in mind.

Their "success" -- that is lack of real resistance -- led to this travesty inflicted upon Rush Limbaugh that really harms all of us. If Rush can be harmed simply by orchestrated charades and the perpetrators suffer no consequences again, what's to stop them from harming any of us? The victimogues couldn't make hay with what he really says. They resorted to libeling him with false reports of him uttering the type of words that keeps victimogues in business.

So I decided a word for their practice finally needed to be coined so their game could begin to be shut down. Had this been done sooner, the opinion of an Al Sharpton would carry no weight at all.

To aid us from allowing such nasty people to continue to acquire any degree of respect, our culture needs a special pejorative name that aids us in quickly identifying them. Whether anyone takes up my suggestion, victimogue, or chooses another more eloquent, I pray it be done. Such people need a name for their chosen profession so that everybody understands how damaging they are to comity. Most of us are willing to live and let live; they could care less as long as they get what they want.

Statist Tools: Tripwires

• "The evil Boosh. Bush is responsible for everything bad according to you."
• "STOP with the death panels stuff. It's just not true."
• "You third party boosters are nothing more than Democrat shills."
• "Sarah Palin? [Sneering laughter] My God man, there's nothing more you can tell me." [Walks out]

I suspect I am not alone in hearing similar exhortations erupt in the midst of an otherwise reasonable discussion. In each instance that I heard these, what I would call a "tripwire" had been triggered. What are tripwires? Where did they come from? What may be done about them?

In the incidents above, the tripwires were, respectively:

• The first mention of any of GWBush’s errors (reaction from a variety of conservatives who’ve been conditioned by the untrue attacks on W to defend him for nearly everything);
• After receiving a news story about QALY (reaction from a captive of the statist media);
• After anyone threatens to leave the GOP unless its leadership stops demonizing lower party members (reaction from a party hack);
• Any mention of Sarah Palin (reactions by any Dem and many RINOs).

When, upon hearing some words or phrases, a listener launches into a rant or other unbridled action, we may say metaphorically that the words acted as a tripwire.

As with someone who triggers the tripwire of an antipersonnel mine, most people who are set off by a tripwire (the 'sploder if you will), or a speaker who inadvertently sets one off (the tripper), are not pleased with the result.

But what of those who gain from the tripwires being triggered? Are they simply the beneficiaries of the tripwires naturally sprouting up as do weeds after spring rains, or do they have some role in setting or keeping the tripwires in place?

Deliberately speaking such words in the presence of a listener known to respond explosively is clearly a ploy that is seeking a repeat of that explosion.

• In the case of a joker, we see it done purely for entertainment, especially when applied to someone known to be strung too tightly.
• In the case of a trainer, the reason is to callous the listener so that they become inured to hearing the words.
• The more Machiavellian hit tripwires to derail the listener from whatever course or thought in which they are presently engaging.
• The worst are demagogues who use them to enrage mobs.

Those who engage in such manipulations can clearly be seen as provocateurs or, at the very least, tools of provocateurs. So clearly, some people gain from the setting and maintaining tripwires.

Then there are those who respond angrily to some words, as if the words were their tripwires. They aim to cause many speakers to curb their speech in the interest of maintaining comity or avoiding sanctions. Such a manipulator may become known as a censor or tool of a censor. Clearly, such people enjoy a degree of power from this situation than they would otherwise experience. So they benefit to from the setting and maintaining of tripwires.

Included in this group would be those who we should recognize carry around a chip on their shoulder and are ever ready to respond to any utterance that even vaguely sounds like a tripwire. For lack of a better word now, let's call them professional victims. I will provide an example of this tomorrow because this is a special case that may be the source of great damage to our society. At any rate, this sort of person helps provide justification for the promulgation of the tripwires and thereby aiding both the of the two previous types who set and maintain the trips.


Conclusion:

I have provided but a few examples of what I call tripwires and their consequences. You probably have more than a few of your own. You may call them hot-button items instead. Consider sharing some of yours in the comments. What is important to recognize is that our society has been put on edge by these items. And who is the primary culprit who has pressed them upon us by constant repetition of issues and items that promulgate them? Why it’s the media that most of us – as revealed by their financial collapse – have learned to mistrust in the extreme.

If you wish to be able to join with your fellow Americans to counter the Statist push we all recognize at least to some degree, you have got to find ways, train yourself if needed, to stop from exploding when someone trips your wires or pushes your hot-buttons.

Don’t let the scoundrels win. They who constantly lay landmines that harm our society and culture will continue to succeed until you get wise to their manipulation of you and your neighbors. Get together with your neighbors and discuss how it is that tripwires exist and shed light upon each and every one you can perceive.

Each tripwire is a little thing. Uncovering them one at a time will help you keep from triggering them and maybe, hopefully, defuse the bomb-like issues that divide us to begin with. Any success from each small but cumulative effort will serve you and America very well.

Memory Hole 101: Obama Worship Hidden Away for Now

********* UPDATE 10/17/09 to my post Not til 1909 published 9/24/09***********

The notorious "mmmmm mmmmm mmmmm, Barack Hussein Obama" School-Children Indoctrination Worship Song was blocked. Little doubt this was due to the extreme embarrassment it brought the President just as the heat from a previous gaffe had cooled. The poor baby was just recovering from the grief he brought on himself with his outrageous "I am God's Partner in matters of life and death" declaration that had been overheard and reported when this worship session turned up on the Internet.

So here is a new version of the video. If anyone notices that this one is also removed, please inform me. Thanks.

As If In Answer to a Prayer

I apologize for my extended absence. I have not abandoned my pledge, going back to early July, to increase my participation in the fight. I had good reason for silence -- I was seeking advice from some knowledgeable and talented friends before publishing about what I consider to be a very important issue.

A couple of days ago an idea struck me as if in answer to this prayer.

Dear Lord, lead us in the paths that will thwart those who divide us.

Since I still call myself agnostic, this probably is no miracle, but more like a sudden awakening to a purpose. However, it may be proper for you to offer thanks to Him should you find my efforts at all beneficial.

I began putting together what may be a multi-part essay, but I am trying to keep it to a single entry and powerful. I'm told that much of what I'm writing about is not really new. However, I've searched for others who have dealt with the topic, and I don't see anyone suggesting that you might consciously take note and do something about it, and for you to seek out and get help from others who are like minded.

If I complete it soon, it will be the next entry in my series "Statist Tools."

Statist Tools: Do Not Love Your Brother

STOP with this Death Panel stuff.

It's not true. 

In response to this plaint from a loved one, I offered the following video.



I do not yet know what response I will get. I am not hopeful. At some point it must become clear that an ostrich likes to stick its head in the sand.

In general I am forced to come to the following two major conclusions about those who back ObamaCare despite all the dangers inherent within it.

First, there are those who ideologically like the idea of government running of all things. As you know, I am convinced that those at the top of this ideology see Statism's threats to individuals not as a bug but a feature.

And then there are those who  have a problem or expect a problem or have been made to fear a problem for themselves or others under the current system and are expecting the new arrangements to bail them out. They fail to see the role of government is bringing about the current problems because those in government place all the blame on "the free market." Those who believe our current health care system is "free" of government regulation, and not see that the problems as consequences that are significantly tied to those regulations, cannot be that ignorant. They had to be "educated" to be that blind.

a despot easily forgives his subjects for not loving him, provided they do not love each other. -- De Tocqueville

Dear Lord, lead us in the ways to thwart those who divide us.

The Left Hand of Statists

Where merit and valor are sneered at, you get less of it.

That is the ending to the last comment at the Belmont Club thread about awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to Barack Hussein Obama.

Wretchard, ever proving to be one wise cat, chose that line to cut off further comments to his post that began with this sentence The Nobel Committee thinks that President Obama is advancing the cause of peace. 

Today, this item by Just A Grunt helps explain further what the Left leaning world means by peace.

Aiding Persian persecution

Last week Barack Obama decided to defund an organization called the Iran Human Rights Documentation Center and it hasn't taken long to see the effects. Yesterday the Iranians announced the sentencing to death of 3 people who participated in the street protests in the wake of the recent elections.

In fact, about the only complaint I have with Just A Grunt’s presentation is that he underplayed the role of he who must by now be the leading vote getter for the Heisman trophy.

I've said it before in various ways, and sadly I'll continue to find news that exemplifies it and provide me new ways of saying it:

Global Statists believe you and those you love are members of a herd overly large in numbers. For them, the only real peace comes after a rapid increase in graves.

Borrowing from Wretchard's observation and taking it one step further: Within the halls of our mutually elevated elites, expressing any real love, pity and sorrow for individuals is sentiment beneath contempt.

This is the consequence of there being no well organized opposition to what Thomas Sowell called The Vision of the Anointed. Inflated egos have carried too many souls into that inhuman condition of which C.S.Lewis warned in The Abolition of Man.  Made ever more brazen by baseless accolades of those who rule the media, those at the helm of state are being encouraged to act as rulers. "You own the White House and both houses of the legislature, so ram your will through." From a perch that is above humanity, what rights does a mere human possess that megalomaniacs will recognize?

That's the Left hand of Statists. The Right hand doesn't want to ruffle any feathers, so they work incessantly to still your concerns. "Just shut up and take it."

Speak out whilst yee still may.

Sitting President Accepts Big Money Gift

[Updated]As this is the Age of Obama, I am sure President Barack Hussein Obama's acceptance of the Nobel Peace Prize is legal.

How do I know? Because in the few hours this has been bandied about I've not yet heard anyone raise ILLEGAL GIFTS as an issue.

That is all for now.

*********Update*********
I just Googled and came up with

 No results found for "dilbert principle presidency".

For those unfamiliar with the Dilbert Principle, it states (roughly): Take the Peter Principle one step further: the Dilbert Principle is exemplified by someone being raised all at once to his level of incompetency without ever having experienced a level of competency first.

I think in our crazy postmodernist world, this is my favorite explanation for how those crack Norwegians could bestow their Nobel Peace Prize on BHO: they eagerly recognized one of their own. /sarcasm [tag added for the incompetent.]

*********Update 2*********
Posted at the comments to The Smallest Minority 
10.09.09 - 10:14 am | # 

It's slowly dawning on others too. If Congress allows the gift (which I think they can and only they can allow -- how did Barack accept so quickly?) will that be Obama's Augustest moment? All hail Cæsar.

*********Update 3*********
I posted the text of this thread and its link at the Belmont Club as post 109.

Later, JM at post 130 provided me a reason to follow up

132. Pascal Fervor Oct 9, 2009 - 12:11 pm:

jim Nicholas @ 130: he was given the prize in an attempt to influence geopolitics.

To be fair, that IS inherent in the name of the prize.

That’s why I raised the issue. Money given to the American top dog (are we to believe it was not given to affect his policy decisions?) is what makes an issue of it. The money should not have been offered directly — that is if anyone in world politics still gave a damn about appearances.

APPEARANCE of corruption was once enough to drive a leader from office. What a joke! When the media is in the government’s control, expect two minutes hate to be directed at those who spot the conflict of interest.

I’ve been informed [Thank you Ed Bonderenka] that Obama will pass the gift off to charity. It was still given to him directly so he can choose the charity. Gee, I wonder what "charity" he’ll pay off? Rev Wright? Planned Barrenhood? ACLU?

Then 134. Tcobb (12:36 pm): spotted Bama's most favorite: ACORN most likely–probably through the back door.

Yep.

Left and Right: Not What You Think They Are

Left and Right are not what most people think they are.

I've tried to write on this many times. I usually get sidetracked. So before I get bogged down in my attempt to lay this out, here is what I am trying to prove.

1. Neither the terms Left nor Right represents a camp that speaks for the majority of Americans.
   
2. The two main parties, Democrats (Left) and Republicans (Right), are scripted opponents.
3. For the rest of this exercise, Left or Right will be referring to the the leaders of the respective party. 
   
4. It is not true that one of the main parties is as bad as the other. One will take us where most Americans will disapprove faster than the other.
   
5. However, both parties are headed in the same direction: larger government and lessened individual liberties. (How personal freedom diminishes as Statism increases will be examined later.)
6. The Left pretty much accepts its extremists (avante garde, shock troops, selected victims of some ism) as it rarely, if ever, speaks against any of them. (In fact, Leftist media never uses the terms "radical" or "Left-wing extremist," making it clear they don't believe someone can be too far left.)
   
7. The Right condemns and marginalizes as extremists any person or group who question the party leadership, and thereby trashes its most impassioned forces that easily could counter balance the Left's extremists. The Right even gets angry with any of its "moderates" who call for plain common-sensible slowdowns. (In fact, Leftist media always uses the term "right wing" or "extreme right wing" for any person or group it does not recognize as left of "center.")
8. Both parties are determined to drag the rest of the country with them whether you like it or not.

Those in control positions know what Left and Right effectively means. All eyes are on the professional wrestlers in the ring while the promoters have been slowly moving the arena in the direction of the Soviet Union.

Lately the promoters are convinced they can't be stopped. So they have begun rushing the changes. As a consequence, many more of us are feeling the earth move beneath us. I hope that is reason enough for you to read more of what I have to say on this topic and pass along the ideas to those you speak with.

Jotting all this down without too many excursions is tiring, and I tire easily. With much help from my friends, I hope to continue this soon.

In the meantime, here is Ronald Reagan agreeing with the message I aim to convey to you.

Choose between left or right sound bite

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 age-old dream, the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order, or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism.

Typical RNC Response to Conservatives

Conservatives and libertarians. Let the following prepare you for the response to expect of a serving Republican, particularly a Senator, when you request they act more conservatively.

Click to see your senator's response to your request.

Whereas I've seen Democrats respond like that to Republicans, I've only seen Republicans respond like that to their own constituency.

The Sound of Rulers

Should we Americans not find the key to the lock that moneyed influence has on our primaries and elections, we better get used to hearing: "Whether you like it or not!"

Pleasant Predictions

Stick with this thing until the last 20 seconds.


Better yet, fast forward.

For the lighter side, try this.

Forced By Swine to Vaccinate

Where are the all those loudmouth activists who insist on labels on just about everything we consume? Just about?

How come with all this commotion to force us to get vaccinated, there are no labels on vaccine contents?

Is that because you swine at the top are trying to force down our throats what you would never allow private companies or lower level governments to do? You are going to try and get away with this even though Constitutional powers do not give you the authority.

Why? Are you trying to kill us?

Following on with this thought.
You pass laws requiring manufacturers provide every bit of information on food packaging from soup to nuts. Similarly for fabrics used in underwear to curtains to mattresses; even for most pharmaceuticals, including prescriptions that are delivered with fine print a mile long. On everything. Except! Except for those questionable vaccinations you've been forcing kids to endure for years before being let into schools.

I am appalled that it took me this long to notice.

Boy, you guys are good!

But you, like so many of the power mad who came before you, are blowing it now.

For now we are seeing another new wrinkle in this total lack of disclosure.

Doctors and nurses have been trained at great expense to them in time and money. They are very valuable assets to us individually and as important societal elements. If anyone knows how badly people can react to whatever is in vaccines, they would know.


Let me put aside your threats to our school children and their parents if they don't knuckle under to you (link1) and to our military personnel (link2) -- as if the connections between gulf war syndrome and squalene were easily whitewashed.

Our doctors and nurses are being threatened to be shut out of their trades (link3) They are put in danger of being bankrupted by not being able to pay back their investments in education, insurance, equipment, etc., unless they give up their rights and accept a top down demand to be vaccinated. It is allegedly for swine flu this time. But it could be in answer -- your answer -- to whatever new crisis you self anointed swine at the top dream up. Is that why you don't want us to call it swine flu, but rather H1N1 -- by official edict? Too negative? Too close to Orwell's depiction of you?

Who among us are better suited to understand that many recipients of vaccinations are injured or killed from what is in the vaccination? And you swine don't even want to disclose what's in it? Once again, all your secretiveness makes you suspects in my book.

So, I'm with them should they offer you all a collective "up yours." You want a national strike? You will surely get one.

You swine at the top: who the hell do you think are fooling? We know you love power just because you have it. You love that you are on the brink of stealing the ultimate power -- the statist power to control every aspect of life -- and you simply cannot contain your joy.

Let me remind you how your Napoleon disclosed what you all think

"We are God's partners in matters of life and death."

I got it. I got it. What -- you think you're something new? Throughout history more people have been put to death by their own governments than all the minor criminal activity that ever existed. So your dealing out death is really no big deal. What is a big deal is that you think you are gods... Boy, you really are that stupid.


**** Update ****
So you power-mad pigs know that many of your subjects are on to you, and you want to mute our warnings. You weren't satisfied after the moron at MSNBC, Ed Schultz, charged only the GOP with what I'm charging you. You saw you weren't making any headway in stifling the charges? So, for your next attempt at muting the truth, you let loose a freshman congressman from Florida, Alan Grayson, to level the same charges on the floor of Congress against the GOP alone. And that still wasn't enough -- because that's viewed only on little watched C-SPAN. So you had your Left-wing Ministry of Truth give Grayson fuller exposure to attack the GOP alone.

After all this, your rotten plans are still crumbling. Why? Because in trying to force vaccinations on us unwilling free men, you power-mad pigs remind us that this flu "crisis" fittingly bears your name -- SWINE.

Restoring the Joy "Watermelons" Steal From Our Kids

If you have kids who come home from school terrified and turned against America, it may be due in no small part to a Marxist agit-prop video (likely blessed by Bill Ayers) making the rounds at about the fourth grade level.

Or even if you don't, you may still love watching this.


(Thanks to The Smallest Minority for spotting this.)

Has anybody seen a similar video demonizing American health care? Quick! Send it to this fisker and lets see what he can do to pee in Obama's punch. (Unless he's already too busy demolishing Algore's Academy Award winning toxic effluent that's a full-scale partisan promo for cap and trade.)

Public Employee Unions Grip Our Politics

The lack of responsiveness of politicians and the parties to which they belong was brought up at Eternity Road Saturday. One solution -- the banning of parties -- was whimsically suggested by Mark Alger.

I intruded with my wet mop.

"Whatever we might do to prevent political parties, it would infringe on the first amendment’s free association clause."

I then allowed that perhaps limiting the free association of those working in government might supply us the answer.

"So would it only be in government where free association would be not allowed?"

Well, I revealed that my last question was clearly rhetorical with my next question:

"Then wouldn’t there be a de facto party formed outside—which is kind of what has happened now given the power of vested interests?"

You might well ask: "Well, wasn't it due to concerns about the power of vested interests which brought about, over a period of about 40 years, the various laws passed under the label 'campaign finance reform?' Why didn't that fix the problem?"

Well, considering it was politicians -- already working under the influence of various special interests -- who passed those laws, whatever gave you the impression that any laws would be passed that would exclude those who were already wielding the strongest influence?

Who wants to bet me, with you taking the position that it was better angels who were permitted access under the new campaign finance laws? I'll try not to laugh -- promise.

Anyway, I made the observation that there was one kind of special interests who have more access to the politicians than any other. And somehow they are constantly overlooked as lobbyists all together. It's the public employees unions (PEUs).

Their members are scattered in all arms of government. Where they are not actively talking with elected members, their eyes and ears are collecting information about everyone. Some are certainly innocent of being moles, but it is a certainty that their union reps know how to find out what the rank and file knows or they are not long for their jobs.

How could such a spy system go on for so long without anyone ever making mention of it? Well, they did. Back in the 1950s, public employees could not be unionized. The inherent conflict of interest between being a public servant and making demands on the public was a primary reason for preventing it.

Here is how I put it at Eternity Road:

"SEIU (Service Employees International Union), though a late-comer to political power brokering, has proven to have great power—little doubt by dint of it posing a relentless threat by proximity alone—to sway both parties. They are lobbyists with muscles and omnipresent.

In fact I believe we started to see party differences narrow even more, especially regarding government growth, when the public employee unions recognized their power and started acting.

We are discussing how parties are bad because they constrain outsiders and become gate keepers.

Well, the PEUs are determined to keep it that way; we witnessed them being bussed (we suspect while on our clock) to many venues, and most notably at the congressional town halls in August, where their strong-arm tactics were no longer merely threatened."

Government growth becomes nearly impossible to check when PEUs became legal. It is clear that the two political parties, as I pointed out in Self Preservation, are both statist parties. Their primary difference are one of speed to statist tyranny, not direction.

And as an added bonus, one nutcase at the Huffington Post actually helps make my case. He knows that PEUs are apt to come under attack, and the most prominent one of these is SEIU due to its strong-arm tactics we witnessed at congressional town hall meeting during the month of August. In his sophistic whine today, this is how he began:

First ... they came for ACORN, and the Democrats did not speak out—because they were not ACORN.

Then they came for SEIU....

This is the nothing more than Leftist projection mixed with chutzpah. The statists are telling us where they are most vulnerable by trying to depict their most fascist elements as—victims of fascism.

With public servants well on their way to becoming despotic rulers, only a statist lapdog media would have the gall to label as fascists any citizens on the verge of rebellion.

Political Parties with the Humility of Henry Ford

"Our leaders come with any color heart you want — as long as it's black."

Moral Considerations

Due to my reviewing an important new book that will be published shortly, I had cause to contemplate all that the word morality implies. ("This could be entertaining." think the moral relativists .)

I hope to finish shortly. Consider this in the interim.

Everything you do has consequences. What have you chosen as your measure of yourself?

How many of you, after having risen to heights that even surprised you, regret how much you sold yourself short?

Pity.

Not Til 1909

Coinage honoring kings and tyrants were relics of the Old World, something foreign to these shores. This was a constitutional republic, one that respected laws and not the public servants who administered that law.

Before 1909, not a single coin put out by the U.S. Mint contained the image of an actual person.

In 1909, the first year of the Taft presidency, the Lincoln penny made its appearance. But the wheels had been put in motion for the design years before during the administration of that most "Progressive" of Republican presidents, Theodore Roosevelt. No doubt Teddy, a man who nurtured the lore about his own-self, would have loved the coin to have been of perhaps another president. But these were the days of decorum and avoidance of shame, and so it simply would not have been proper for that sort of presidential deference if not reverence.

Over the years our coins started to lose the images of Liberty and American Indians in various poses, to be replaced by respected presidents and founders. So it's not too surprising to see that the notion that we were a nation of laws and not of men started to become a foreign concept to the children of today -- or even those my own generation. Those of our coins that carried that implication are now essentially out of circulation.

Is the noble concept they implied now also lost to antiquity?

Look how far you have "progressed" America. It's not about coinage and dead presidents any longer. Aren't you proud?



********* UPDATE 10/17/09 ***********

The notorious "mmmmm mmmmm mmmmm, Barach Hussein Obama" School-Children Indoctrination Worship Song was blocked, apparently due to the extreme embarrassment it gave to the President who was simultaneously just overcoming the infamous "I am God's Partner in matters of life and death" that he had been overheard saying.

So here is a new version. If anyone notices that this one is also removed, please inform me. Thanks.

Rot, More Rot, and the Totally Deaf

Pascal just took a call from the leading conservative non-profit.

They thanked him for his membership, and wished him to continue this year.

P asked: "Well, now that we have a completely radical White House, when are you going speak to them in language that is fitting to that reality?"

Voice: "Oh we hear you sir. We have to get the economy moving again so that all these other issues will take care of themselves. Would you....?"

P: "Take care of themselves! Even if by some miracle the economy started chugging along again tomorrow, the "Green" legislation and the healthcare bill alone would torpedo any nascent recovery."

Voice: "Oh we hear you sir. But we need to fund our economists so that they are available to the White House when they...."

P: "And you still believe the White House gives a damn about anything you have to say? I'm not convinced many Republicans even give a damn about you or us. And that's the problem right there. The Democrats and the Left-wing media have been dragging the whole agenda left, and the GOP and your organization meekly follow along in the same direction rather than get angry and force a showdown. The majority of the country is to the right of every one of our institutions, and that includes yours. You know we're angry because we know that we can't play nice with radicals because they view that as license to walk all over us. We are waiting to hear you get angry too. Are you even aware of how angry we are out here?"

V: "Oh yes. We hear it all the time. You know we would like you to renew your membership at $500. We need...."

P: "Your needs will be filled when you start showing some spine. I'm looking for a new organization that is not going to stand still while those in power drag the country down into this all-controlling tyranny. Are you going to force me to start a new organization of my own?"

V: "[Laughs] Yes sir. We would like you to renew...."

P: "[sigh] You're wasting your time."

V: "Thanks for taking my call."

Cut Off His Nose to Spite His Face

Troll says: "I want a public option, because I am tired of getting screwed by health insurance companies."

Holy mackerel.

After the fold in "Self Preservation - pt. 2," I showed how the UN's World Health Organization could rank the USA as 37th in health care: their criteria gave favorable ratings to any social democratic regime who forced workers to pay for the health care of the indolent and destitute. But for quick access to aid when you need it, the USA is second to none in health care -- using the UN's own criteria.

That is, the UN biased ranking system -- undoubtedly hanging a facade that proclaims "better than the Americans" on something the rest of the world's people are victimized saddled with -- smiles favorably upon heathcare as financed along the lines of Karl Marx. How could anyone be surprised? (I can answer that too if asked).

Troll did not disagree. In fact, said troll says he's a working stiff and doesn't favor such handouts.

However, troll "wants a public option" because one must presume he believes he'll get less screwed by Uncle Sam.

Virtually nothing the government provides today that is also available from private sources is better than the private sources. Be it mail services, or schooling, or roads, or medicare without medicare gap insurance. So is he nuts?

Why would he want a public option for himself knowing that however disappointed he is with his current CHOICE of medical insurance provider, he has more choice now -- and probably better coverage -- than he would ever have under "government is your only choice" system?

So I have got to conclude that he so hates his current CHOICE of insurer, he'd rather take a sure-fire worse option as long as everybody else (politicians and family excluded of course) has to suffer too.

Trolls are renowned to be ugly and ill-tempered. So it should be no surprise that our troll would like you to cut off your nose to suit his face. Misery likes company.

Self Preservation - pt. 2

For no apparent reason other than what passes as normal trollicity (to distinguish from troll idiocy), a troll threw out this factoid in the midst of his response to something unrelated.

Why are 37 countries ranked as having better health care than we do?

For those unfamiliar with this factoid, it arose from a study, World Health Report 2000, produced by the World Heath Organization (WHO) of the United Nations.

Of course this is a conclusion favorable to those who wish to use it to push for health care reform insurance destruction in the United States, a factor that ought to promote inquiries as to who helped fund the WHO study.

But that is not the point that is arousing my Pascal fervor today. The instinct that is reflected by the title of this thread -- self preservation -- is driving me. Are you listening troll?

When looking at the study, one finds that five factors went into WHO's calculation:

• Health level, as defined by a measure of life expectancy, which shows how healthy a country's population is. This factor gets a 25 percent weight.
• Responsiveness, which includes factors such as speed of health services, privacy protections, choice of doctors and quality of amenities. This factor gets a 12.5 percent weight.
• Financial fairness, which measures how progressive or regressive the financing of a country's health care system is — that is, whether or not the financial burdens are borne by those who are economically better off. This factor receives a 25 percent weight.
• Health distribution, which measures how equally a nation's health care resources are allocated among the population. This factor receives a 25 percent weight.
• Responsiveness distribution, which measures how equally a nation's health care responsiveness (which we defined above) is spread through society. This factor gets a 12.5 percent weight.

The choices and definitions of the weighting factors clearly have a qualitative bias in them. That means someone, or most likely a select group of someones, chose the factors and decided what weight to assign to them. Of course that has provoked controversy. Yet that also is not my point today.

To advance the cause of self preservation, I am highlighting a single point that was raised by PolitiFact.com:

For instance, judged on responsiveness alone, the United States ranked No. 1 in the world.

What I am suggesting is that if you understand how health care and insurance operates in the United States, and if you make provisions to address what it takes, it means that you can get the quickest and most certain care here -- in the United States -- as it now stands.

That seems to me to inhere the essential aspect of "self-preservation." No third party can currently get between you and your chosen solution. Your healthcare provider is free to say: "the color of your money looks fine to me."

Are there other issues currently in play? Yes. But has self preservation always been your goal? That means you are not now a johnny-come-lately to that realization and are not now demanding others pay for you squandering your earlier opportunities to make proper arrangements. Then one happy circumstance remains true. It is even now true for emergency room care even if you were a foolish youngster. And it even is true if you are an illegal alien. That is, for the most part, you are in the number one place on the planet to get a quick response in your moment of need.

Key word: SELF Preservation.

Oh, and one more observation and a question for my readers below the fold.
MORE....

Government is the Solution

Really?

(hat tip to ΛΕΟΝΙΔΑΣ at Eternity Road)

Tell me how impressed you are with the Fed's inspector general.

Now go on from here to explain to me how you think the federal government is the best all around solution for health care, and environmental management, and education and a whole host of issues.

Maybe -- just maybe -- the men who intended for our federal government's powers to be strictly limited were a wee bit smarter than our contemporary politicians megalomaniacs?

Click here for follow up.

Self Preservation

If what you seek is self preservation, and I mean that in the longest sense possible, then start planning to abandon the concept of Left versus Right, and start thinking in terms of tyranny versus liberty.

The concept of Left and Right was derived from the fact that opposing factions in revolutionary France were seated on either side of an aisle. Now both sides of the aisle have become dominated in various ways by forces that are dragging our government relentlessly towards total statism; i.e., every aspect of your life under control of one government bureaucracy or another. Essentially there is no "side" that takes the position that government growth favors top down tyranny and government dissolution favors individual liberty.

You town hall and "Tea Party" participants and supporters represent the individual liberty faction that remains in our society. Were you to continue to get scant respect from either side of the aisle, it becomes pretty clear that there is no aisle. Government becomes clearly of and for itself, and not "of, by, and for the people."

It is safe to say that the Left includes the vast majority of shock troops. Either those on the dole, or those who pass out the dole, provide bodies, and usually while they are being paid by government. They come out at your expense and demand more and continued government payouts at your expense. (It is only this year that we are seeing tea-partiers turn out in record numbers.) So the large numbers of Leftist shock troops, aided and abetted by Leftist Media, have generally led the Left further left, and dragged the Right with them.

This has been going in one way or another for all of my long life, and at a variety of speeds at various points. But today it is happening at alarming speeds, and more and more of us who are targeted to become subjects are seeing it. What we have not heard yet is language sufficient and clear that identifies the problem so we can fight it adequately.

Instead of a constitutional republic which allows government among men to exist only under limiting constraints, power seeking forces seem now to feel pretty comfortable that their creation of a Platonic republic of mutually recognized elites is now beyond prevention. That is, they believe that there is no way any resistance to them can succeed.

These wannabe rulers will succeed if you continue to think only in Left or Right rather than freedom or slavery.

The Only Remaining Liberal Things...

about "Progressives" that I can see is their application of government to "solve" everything; their brazenness in lying about what they have done when caught; and their gall at projecting their own lies and misdeeds onto their critics.

Not Taking Anything For Granted...

When troll "Reaper" (surprisingly? diffidently? jealously?) asked me:

GD, how many trolls do you have?

it required a bit more information before I could answer:

Including The One in the White House? [rimshot]

****Update****
Including this one too?
Be forewarned. One reader said they were sorry they clicked on the above link! LOL

Bama Bummer Bumper

Which is your favorite font?

Boomers Cum Obummers

^♫Talkin' 'bout my generation.^♫

We are the people who ^♫try to put us down.^♫

^♫Talkin' 'bout my generation.^♫

We did sing ^♫hope I die before I get old,^♫ dint we?

^♫Talkin' 'bout my generation.^♫

Well, our ObamaNation brings us ObummerCare.

^♫My Generation! My generation, baby.^♫

We've laggard so that ^♫Things they do look awful cold.^♫

^♫Talkin' 'bout my g-g-g-g-generation.^♫

^♫Why don't we all just f-f-f-f-f-f-f-f-f-fade away?.^♫

^♫Talkin' 'bout my my my generation, baby.^♫
♫my generation, my generation, my generation,
my generation, my gereration....^♫

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't thank me folks. Thank my troll -- Ms Ann Thrope -- for the inspiration.

At What Cost Comity?

Our dilemma is well known and appreciated by the bastards at the top of the heap. They know because they have been active in its building.

The despot cares less that you love him provided you don't love one another.

Oh he provides alright! Money buys influence and attains power. And once attained, it then can use your money to deploy distractions and discord as the need arises. A.C.O.R.N. anyone?

But that is relatively easy where factions are naturally occurring. But what of infighting within a faction? What then? As Mark Alger reminds us:

In-fighting is invidious. Let's have a little less of it.

Knowing of the tyrant's wishes to sow discord where none exists, and to nurture it into open warfare where it does, finding agreement when we can, comity, is certainly a preferred outcome. We have a bigger fish in need of frying.

However, what about balance?

On one hand, we all know the ludicrous tale of the boy who murdered his parents and then begged mercy on the grounds that he was an orphan. On the other hand, none of us would have faulted George Washington what he was apt to do had he captured Benedict Arnold. These are easy cases. The harder ones need more care. After all, we encumber Justice with her great and omnipresent scales for good reason.

I found cause to disagree with a couple of likable fellows, Roderick Reilly and Life of The Mind, at the Belmont Club early today. They had commented favorably on a well heeled, well spoken, often diplomatic but always partisan Democrat, the late senior senator from New York, Daniel Patrick Moynihan.

Never, never, never, revere any politician too much, because they all have feet of clay.

Moynihan said many nice sounding things which made him seem well-anchored in principle, such as his famous “Defining Deviancy Down.”

The Tax Reform Act of 1986, pushed by Reagan, was very popular, and pretty much remains so today except by the Left. As head of the Senate finance committee, Moynihan shepherded the bill through very well. Sounds like he was uniquely bipartisan and had the well-being of the country in mind right?

Well, he inserted into the tax code, at the last minute of conference committee sessions where committee chairs are rarely challenged, words written by lawyers at one company that hugely benefited that company.

That section of tax code solely targeted every engineer and programmer in the country, while costing the taxpayers more as well. That company was run by his wife’s family. Anyone who thinks he didn’t benefit directly from that is beyond hope.

And then there are those who will know or accept what I just said is true, but will be members of the apologist brigade. Their line is “So what? They all do it.”

There is the problem in a nutshell. It’s similar to those who defend RINOs when they help the GOP attain a majority (no matter how Pyrrhic a “victory” it be).

When personal gain and betrayal of principles become acceptable in any republic, even long after the fact and after so many others have followed the same path to personal gain (via passing law that restrict liberties and eradicate constitutional restrictions), how do you ever hope to regain order? You should remember your acceptance of betrayals when you later bemoan threats to your personal liberties.

Betrayal, too often dismissed, will be costly. It should have been costly to the betrayers, but instead it costs the acceptors of the betrayals and their posterity.

The evil that men do lives after them; the good is oft interred with their bones -- Shakespeare

How especially true it is (because others watch and see no downside to perfidy) when we remember too kindly such men.

I chose to record this exchange here at my blog because it touched on a very important aspect about seeking justice when we find someone has betrayed our nation -- as did Senator Moynihan when he chose to carry his own water albeit in "expected" fashion. He knew we knew he knew better. So much more the shame to whatever good may have been a part of his legacy.

Such shame is certainly not lessened when we find someone in our own faction has been aiding and abetting the other faction a bit too much. Another reason we so distrust MSM is that it frequently bestows a glow of approval to the word bipartisan. But it is horrid to the individual who discovers -- as if burgled by a thief in the night -- that the sum total of his liberty has been diminished due in great measure to his very own representative agreeing, in the dark of some committee, to allow power-seekers to override limits on our government that had been written into our constitution for the good of all time -- solely because someone demanded that each "crisis" not be allowed to be wasted.

Bottom line? At what cost do we gain comity? Do not for a moment deny to yourself who pays.

Betrayal, too often dismissed, will be costly. It should have been costly to the wicked as justice would discern. Someone will pay. When wrong-doing is too easily (or shortsightedly) forgiven, the costs are shifted to the acceptors of the betrayals and their posterity. Indeed, that is the greater crime.

So Much to Say That Focus Suffers

Even though you've picked up the pace of your blog entries in the last two months, there are times when there is quite a bit of news and yet you don't seem to publish. Why Pascal?

I really haven't been idle these past few weeks. The thing which has troubled me is: "to whom should you address your thoughts?" I find that I'm not that far ahead of many people, and indeed sometimes lag. Thus it may be less effective if I continue to address my essays to the ordinary person. I could write with scorn directed at those who think and -- what is worse -- behave as if they are better than ordinary people. I've done that a few times already, and it is not without effective precedent. If you look at the introduction at the top of this blog, you can see that I believe we may achieve some relief by writing in that manner.

The question arises: Will anyone in higher stations notice such an affront to their self assessment? In at least one instance, I know I have pierced those who afflict us, so I know it is possible.

Here are the working titles of incomplete essays (often because Mr. OCD is not satisfied) and the dates I started on them, along with a short synopsis.

1. The "Progressive" Sneer - Aug 16 - The stage that follows brazen.
2. Repression Viewed As Progress - Aug 28 - Going over a comment I made in 2007 about the film I Am Legend that foresaw our present political state.
3. "Reactionary" -- A Reorientation - Sep 6 - Now that they own the Establishment, it is a designation that better fits "Progressives" who wish to retain their power rather than the "conservative" individual who merely wants to be left in peace.
4. Know Your Role - Sep 8 - One cannot rely on professional politicians to preserve your rights.
5. America Once Viewed Egotism As Disqualifying - Sep 9 - I suggest we need to restore humility and gratitude as a key cultural value: the meaning of Thanksgiving. Perhaps if we demanded more humility of our leaders we might actually receive better government.
   
6. The Ruling and Subject Parties - Sep 9 - The professional politicians versus the rest of us. Betrayal is too often dismissed when it should be costly. This involves reviewing and reworking one of my very oldest analyses of political reality in order to understand what it is that is fighting us.
   
7. What Convinced You That the Death Cults Were Going Mainstream? - Sep 9 - Reviewing the earliest months of GWBush's presidency.
   

In many ways, each of these topics overlap many others, some not listed above; individual ragged-edged pieces of an immense jigsaw puzzle. If anyone gives a damn what my opinion is on one or more of these subjects, please leave a comment or contact me by email. Maybe you will help me focus on what is most important -- at least in your opinion.

"This is MY Townhall Meeting"

More evidence of shamelessness, although somewhat less brazen given this Congressman's closing lines.



To his constituents attending the meeting:

"This is my town hall meeting for you. You are not going to tell me how to run my congressional office. The reason I don't allow filming, because usually the films that are done end up on You Tube in a compromising position."

Compromising position congressman? Damn, facts sure are stubborn things; wouldn't want any hard evidence of them now, would we?

This is not the language of a public servant with very much humility. This sounds more like a member of a ruling class.

Apologize to your children: "America never had a ruling class before. I am very sorry that I allowed one to spring up during my generation. Please forgive me."

Hat tip to DrewM

Dinged By Webdings

A couple of days ago I published this entry. Somehow, possibly because I had added ♫ to the video screen subheading, the Blogger editor invoked webdings font into its style designation -- automatically. I did not know that this had happened because my version of firefox does not respond to such font designations. I suspect many other firefox users have a similar non-response.

But if you use IE, you saw half a page of gibberish instead of this ^♪♫ Cuz they're power hungry and malicious. ^♫♪ Where letters should have been, Webdings sprawled unintelligibly across the page under the video screen instead. The "Progressives," whose behavior I was declaiming, could not have been more pleased. (IE is a product of Bill Gates --- hmmmm.)

Anyway, thanks to the concerns of helpful readers who use IE (I don't normally), it has since been fixed. Thank you very much.

I hope you all have seen it. Tim Hawkins' The Government Can is humorous and dazzling.

More Brazen

Here is more evidence of what I say is true.

I keep telling you folks to reveal these things to other folks: the "Progressives" facade has moved on to the brazen stage. This sample I've presented today reveals more than simple hypocrisy.

In order to get them to do their classic "two steps forward, one step back" dance, you must be the one to apply pressure, cuz Minitru ain't gonna do it unless the particular hack is out of favor with the higher ups.

Where you don't get them to back off, they move on. You will not like their next stage.

• Do you think you'll have the nerve to fight back then?
  
• Are you absolutely sure you'll still be able?

The Government Can

^♪♫ Cuz they're power hungry* and malicious. ^♫♪

Hat tip to Ace.

*As I've labored for ages to convince the gullible (as only the government accredited skooled can be), this has always been what drives the "Progressives." Their drive is so insatiable that, left unchecked, it must lead to deaths in such massive number that most decent individuals are unwilling to believe such megalomania exists.