Monday, December 31, 2012

What Is A RINO?

  • What is a RINO? 
  • Is the term overused? 
  • Are conservatives correct in not concluding that some Republicans are the equivalent of wolves in sheep's clothing? And 
  • Is there another acronym that more accurately connotes a Republican who is no longer guided by solid party principles such as defending and protecting the Constitution of the United States with forthrightness and without moral reservations?

RINO is the acronym meaning Republican In Name Only. Most conservatives apply RINO to members of the Republican Party who act as if they are working for the Democratic party or some other vested interests whose goals are in direct opposition to the platform of principles for which the Republican Party allegedly stands and its members are expected to defend.

It has long been my opinion that RINO is way overused. There are those who stray from the principles, yes.  But there are those who stray quite often and far from principles and yet they are still referred to as RINO.

What is to be done? Read on.

RINO is meant at least to be unflattering to the person or group to whom it is applied. It basically says "you are (or he is) failing to defend the principles for which Republicans are elected." There is often an implied: "Now that you have been alerted to our concerns, please reform your behavior and go in peace."

So the user wants to convey somewhat of an insult, a cautionary warning let us say, by using the term RINO.

But what if the target of the (at worst) epithet is not in the least offended? What if they have sought comfort with their dishonesty much like Bill Clinton did with his lies with the notion "Well, it depends on what the meaning of is is." The RINO finds comfort in the notion that "I'm still a republican elected to vote in the name of those who elected me even if I'm not a Republican."  So he laughs to himself at the person who calls him a republican in name only. Got it?

So what is to be done? Read on.

Many conservatives may declare someone a RINO or their behavior RINOish after witnessing their actions.  Yet they may remain reluctant to conclude that the person to whom the term has been applied has completely gone over to the other side. And that may happen even after repeated affronts. A good example was the case with Senator Arlen Specter who, when he switched to the Democratic Party, "shocked" many Republicans. In fact those who insist on seeing no evil even when confronted with a mountain of evidence to the contrary that the person or group has not merely strayed somewhat from the path, are opening themselves to the charge of RINO.

Liberals are known for claiming good intentions, and then upon making mistakes expecting to be forgiven by their fellows. But it is NOT so with conservatives for whom accepting consequences for one's actions no matter the intentions are the hallmark of responsible living. So for those who insist on seeing no evil in those claiming to be Republicans but not acting like one, there is some sound reasoning to call them RINOs or at the least RINO sympathizers, enablers, and protectors.

And let me address the dreaded charge of judgmentalism in the manner it needs. Those who claim to be Christian conservatives are well advised to turn the other cheek when someone strikes them. It should apply equally to Republicans who go against party principles. When they admit it, and ask forgiveness? Sure. Grant it. Once. Nothing in scripture says you have to take an unwarranted beating though. You are free to apply the following: Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Try to fool me thrice, I'm presuming you are with the enemy.

And so we get to the question: Why is RINO still used when referring to members of the Republican Party who have repeatedly violated the party stated goals and/or compromised away nearly every principle, and/or permitted the steady erosion of the limits on federal government trespass on state and individual sovereignty as the constitution was written to prevent? 

A couple of years ago this blog sponsored a contest. Reader Guy S came up with a new acronym.
There are a number of underlying words which fit the people to whom RINO has no impact upon and is indeed unfitting given their degree of violating their oath of office to defend and protect the Constitution.

Statist Knowingly Undermining National Charters
Statist Kneeling to United Nations Control 
(Both of these definitions fit the actions of politicians all over the world, but notoriously those in Western nations, especially the pretenders in the former British Commonwealth countries.)

Also there are the support personnel in the arts and education and the media (the Agency of Lies). These groups have been taken over through the relentless use of Critical Theory out of the Marxist Frankfurt School. The Verona papers and KGB defectors told us that long ago, but since our media and  educational establishment was already infiltrated, most of our fellow citizens are still unaware, and even worse, are unwitting and uncaring victims of it. The term SKUNC applied to these perpetrators means:
Statist Knowingly Undermining National Cultures.
So do yourself and your nation a favor and stop using RINO when referring to those who have gone so far off the reservation that there is clearly not a sign of patriotism left in them. They are SKUNCs.

Updated to catalogue where I've attempted to introduce SKUNC to RINO users
For 29October2013: when Grover Norquist joined with the Left to Alinskyize Ted Cruz.

Additional words for which SKUNC is a good acronym
Statists Knowingly Undermining our Nation's Constitution (Justices, Congress-critters, and Presidents.)
Stooges Konniving to Unhinge National Consciousness
(the Statists' useful idiots in the Soviet-Style Media (SSM) in particular.)

Wednesday, December 19, 2012

Denying Human Life Its Holy Imprimatur

When men think of themselves as gods, they invariably treat the common man as an animal. Hence the life of the majority is degraded and the individual is stripped of any rights not bestowed to them temporarily by the demigod. On good days they view as quaint our traditional Judeo-Christian ethics that sees innocent human life as something sacred and deserving of societal protection.The good days are growing fewer as the following stories suggest.

I've been warning of this for ages, but now Drudge headlines the advancing avalanche that has been mockingly called a slippery slope.
Belgium looks at euthanasia for minors, Alzheimer's sufferers...

France considers 'accelerated deaths'...

What more need I say at this point? You know this is where ObamaCare is headed. I have spoken with physicians who approve. I've read books that promoted this line of thinking while our leaders stood off on the sidelines and either said nothing or appointed the authors to higher office positions (at the CDC for instance.) There they have been establishing policies that has been quietly but detrimentally affecting what medical choices are available to us for decades. They are proponents of treating human beings as commodities and not as God's children, and -- in particular under Obama -- they are ever increasing in number and power.

You are either on the side of the ethics that gave birth to all of our modern advances -- the code derived from the variety of religions generally known as Judeo-Christianity branches -- or you've permitted yourself to be swayed into joining the camp of the new pagans (not progressives as they say, but regressives), the Sustainability worshipers. And it is sad to say that many of the heads of those religious institutions are among the Sus worshipers even as they play plausible deniability games with those who challenge them. "Sustainability? I thought that was only about conservation."

So many of you think the Statist demagogues are bad now. You have another think coming. For those who have never seen it, here is the scene in the 1939 classic, Gunga Din, where the Kali worshiping guru indoctrinates his thuggees* with a boiling, maniacal hatred: "Kill for the love of killing. Kill for the love of Kalee. Kill! Kill! KILL!"

Click here to run clip. This scene starts at 60 seconds.

As you see more and more of these stories there will still be friends and relatives who think what I'm saying is overly dramatic. If you are God revering, I think it is especially true that you try and awaken comprehension that this is the real face that is behind the Progressive mask.  Don't fear the fictional zombie hoards, fear that the Progs have so destroyed our culture that virtually all societal members have become desensitized. Consequent to their incremental cultural attacks, all of us have been stripped of some basic decent human sentiments, while some of us have been stripped of all. Fear that should you fail to provide sufficient countermeasures that your children may wind up looking at you with a face such as this and neither realize it nor care.

*Thuggee (Tug-ee') were a large gang of highwaymen that infested the mid 19th Century British Raj. They delighted in murdering whomever they plundered. It is from them that our term thug derives.The new movie "The Innocent Prophet" suggests that Mohammed set the standard for the Thuggee to copy.

Tuesday, December 18, 2012

Pascal Fervor's Razor

The razor you need is at the end. Let me show you first why you need it.

It has become habitual for people who notice that our culture has been staggering off its pins, step by step, due to Marxist aggression aided and abetted by the Agency of Lies, to say something like the following.
I've noticed that starting in the late 90's, many elements of "new age" belief systems started mapping pretty closely to the melange of stuff that one finds floating around in the collective heads of the progressivoeftist cluster.

While I had some sympathy for new agey concepts at that point in my seek, there came a point where the material started reading more like tracts from the Democratic National Committee/Mother Jones/Utne Reader and less like spiritual insight. 

My initial take was that this was part of a common, mutually reinforcing propaganda source but in the spirit of "never explain by conspiracy that which could also be explained by cockup", this offers an alternative hypothesis.... — Geek WithA.45 in comments to "15 Questions for Atheists."

This is the pattern for many a common man. And it is understandable, and maybe forgivable. I find this sort of cut-off to rationalization to be a conditioned reflex. People would far rather be killed than dismissed from the good opinion of society. It has been a process of insidious indoctrination that has been successfully applied to several generations of Americans.

But then there are our ostensible leaders of the opposition to Statism.
People are always telling me what so and so wants to do and why he wants to do it. And I say look: I can’t look into a man’s heart. I can’t peer into his soul. I have no idea why he’s trying to do what he’s doing. All I can evaluate are the results. All I can evaluate is the output of his behavior. Whether he intends it to come out that way or doesn’t intend it to come out that way is immaterial. My obligation is the same: to defend the republic.— Scott Ott in the video that asks "Is the looming economic destruction of America deliberate?"
I cry horseshit. This is akin to the definition of insanity: doing the same thing over again and expecting a different result. It’s the same SKUNC line about not behaving like the Left who calls us names without foundation, so therefore we shouldn't even when we have good reason. (It is as if nobody ever taught us that silence will be understood to be agreement. Arrgghhhh.)

Listen Mr. Ott: you cannot effectively defend the republic if you discard good intelligence, whether it comes from facts and reports you can trust or from the preponderance of evidence played out before you.To fail to do this is the utmost ineptitude, and to counsel others to do so too is plain bad teaching. IMHO it is so bad as to place the speaker’s bona fides in question.

I, Pascal, cannot stand by in silence while a trio of apparently sharp guys tells me and others (who I am counting on, expecting them to stay cool and use their heads under pressure) the exact opposite of what we need to hear.

This is what honest leaders should tell me: "Think about and struggle with all the evidence you have and then prepare our defenses accordingly."

Listen my friends. We are at the beginning of some very very dangerous times. Anyone who knows of my concerns for humanity as a whole knows that I do not trust those in power because of their consistent silence against some of the worst actors on the planet.

Similarly I do not trust those who respond to the beckon and call of those in power. The KGB had infiltrators and moles; who in their right mind thinks our powermad don’t have their equivalent nomenklatura employed to teach us not to think fully?

Pascal Fervor's Razor* observes that no matter how much evidence accumulates to inform many individuals that the State has murder on its mind, most will sadly go to their graves muttering the equivalent of "If Stalin only knew."

The razor portion of this is that individuals who insist you deny the stinking pile of the obvious be identified as soon as possible and cut off from contact with those who know what needs to be done.

Put simply (the metaphorical razor), whomever consistently avoids the elephants threatening to wreck your room, he's not your friend.
*Regarding the older razors upon which this one draws. When it comes to highly visible speakers who rationalize away mountains of evidence, the time has come to discard Hanlon's razor entirely and moves on past Heinlein's.

Saturday, December 15, 2012

Govt Body Counts >> Lone Gunmen

As the Agency of Lies and Statist politicians continue their onslaught on the individual's right to protect himself, never forget the title of this post and the facts which make it true. For those who do not know mathematical notation, the title to this post says

Government Body Counts are Much Greater Than That of Lone Gunmen

Mr.  President, Mr. Mayor, why do you want to leave me defenseless? Given the history of police states (where only police were permitted arms) in the last 100 years, why should I trust you when you and your ilk
  1. go out of your way to protect those who have murdered before.
  2. let mentally unstable people run loose on the street.
  3. are more concerned about hurting peoples feelings than seeing they are well informed.
 I am sick and tired of those who hate America and Americans doing everything they can to enslave us and, to ensure that the enslavement goes along smoothly, want us ruled where only the police are armed.

May God have mercy on your scheming souls.

Friday, December 14, 2012

Dominion Bank Layabout Gloats at American Debt

The following"anonymous" comment to old post, The Genius of Blaise Pascal, came in 2 days ago.:

December 12, 2012 10:59 AM
Still enjoying the fruits of guns and drugs and AMERICA TOP SECRET Kultur? The Chinese and Muslims will eat away at your power. Like the Ottomans, you will sink into the mire.

Well the troll who left this thinks he's anonymous. Except for the fact that he left his tracks: 
from Toronto, Ontario, Canada 
at an ISP belonging to Toronto Dominion Bank

For forensic purposes, here is the a copy of what Stat Counter is showing for his visit to leave the above comment.
Click to see full size
 As you can see, since then he has posted 3 more smarmy comments from the same location.

It must be nice for "Anonymous" to be paid by a respected Toronto bank to send out malicious comments to various blogs. 

What the public needs to know is: 
  1. Why does the head of Dominion Bank approve of this work?  And considering the comment  carries in it a note of gloating...
  2. Just how much interest does Dominion Bank MAKE from arranging the debt now carried by China and Saudi Arabia? 

Monday, December 10, 2012

Despicable Union-Govt Alliance

Three stories near the top of Drudge demonstrate this today. What makes the situation I highlight despicable are all the claims of protecting freedoms in the first amendment.

Right to work laws are designed to prevent unions from creating monopolies on who gets to work and where. Otherwise we will find ourselves back to the tyranny of guild-style work arrangements.

The first story is:
Federal judge finds NC 'Choose Life' plates unconstitutional...

and the second and third stories are a pair about the Michigan right to work law. 

 Obama backs big labor bosses...

  Michigan schools close so teachers can protest right to work law...

Story one tells us that a Federal Judge has ruled for the ACLU against North Carolina. He agreed with what I imagine was the ACLU's phrase "view-point discrimination." He found this violated the 1st Amendment.

Story 2 is what we've come to expect from Bummer who will back any communistic POSs who helped him get elected.

But it is story 3 that is the real outrage in light of story 1. Tax payers and school kids get screwed so that the Teachers union can get free mobs to threaten the state legislature -- paid at tax payer expense. (And God help any teacher who does not participate -- kinda like card check if you know what I mean. Screw freedom of association.)

Where's the "view-point discrimination" ruling there? There will not be one. Because the school board is part of the problem too. They have to play along with the teacher's union because it's their money and goons who helped get the school-boards elected. Screw fair treatment of both sides of the equation when the govt only wants one side to prevail.

You, the individual, are screwed when you don't rally with others like you to discuss such outrages openly. Yes the union goons will turn out and threaten your side. But you can be ready when you need to be. And do not expect any form of media -- The Agency of Lies -- to be on your side.

Tuesday, December 04, 2012

Big Government Tells Us

California Teachers Union Video Features 'Rich' Urinating On 'Poor'

What I'd like to know is where is our video showing the California Teacher's Union urinating on its students? Spare us form these collectivist fictions and instead give us the facts that could really fire up a nation.

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.

Tuesday, October 30, 2012

Just A Reminder

Drudge: Gore blames 'global warming'... for Hurricane Sandy.

This is the same "man" who is nowhere to be found on February 2, the day we remember he is always scarce when it is cold out.

Monday, October 29, 2012



GALLUP MONDAY: R 51% O 46%...
Spinning Polls, Obama Campaign Gets Testy with Reporters

"We're winning this race," senior political strategist David Axelrod insisted

Saturday, October 27, 2012

More Breitbarting Please

I imagine many of us who miss Andrew Breitbart would really wish that initiated more projects such as its founder was known to get into. No, not find someone on staff who is as ballsy as was Andrew. Probably impossible even to hire someone who is both as bold and as intellectually honest and consistent all perhaps only exceeded by his courage.

No, what I'm thinking is along the lines of what I did with that billboard in Cleveland in which the billboard company, Clear Channel, caved to the demands of the radicals who apparently don't want voter fraud suppressed. What Clear Channel did in the end was worse than caving actually. They put up 15 new billboards that read "Voting Is a Right, Not a Crime."

As it turned out, after I posted here what I thought should have been Clear Channel's response to the city council, I went back to the post and added my comment along with a link and a thumbnail jpeg of my altered billboard. It is now the 88th of 88 comments, the last one. It still got 6 likes It's slowly grown over the 3 days since I posted it.
Thinking about how Breitbart might have reacted to the suspect motives of the Cleveland city council and (take your pick) the fear or complicity of Clear Channel, he might have come up with this billboard to show how Clear Channel should have responded to the political pressure.
  • Like
  • Reply
If hope you like what I did too. But more importantly: if you wish the folks at to present more editorial comments like the one I gave them, then please go to the comment and click on "Like." Then hopefully the current editors will get the idea that they ought to do more of that sort of thing. You could even add a comment that says so explicitly. To find my comment, simply go here and then at the top right of the comments click on "sort by newest first" so that mine is at the top. Then click on "like."

Thank you.

I'm pretty confident that putting up a real "in your face" billboard such as I suggested is what Breitbart would do. He relished that sort of thing.  Doing virtual stuff on the web site that bears his name seems like fitting homage to its founder.

Wednesday, October 24, 2012

Social Security and Family Lore

My late father related to me countless years ago the following story about his younger brother John (the same uncle I quoted in a post this last Sunday).

As a sophomore in a NYC high school civics class in 1935, uncle John noted that taxes taken for Social Security were not put into a special fund. It was put into the general fund. It will be spent and then you won't have it when you need it. The upshot was that his teacher kicked him out of class and sent him to the principal's office.

My Dad related what transpired when my grandmother had to come to school. "I know my son. When he says something it is usually true. Was he wrong?" The answer came back in a fashion that implied "No; but that's not the issue." Grandma said "Then it is not my son who should have been sent here. Your teacher should be in here begging to keep his job." .
For this post I asked Uncle John for more information.

He filled in the gist of what he said in class. He says he received two hours of detention. He couldn't attest to what my Dad told me because he doesn't recall it. He admits his mother was forced to come to grade school many times, but never when he was in high school. However he also says my Dad was not known to embellish stories.

It's possible nobody ever told John about what his Mother had said so as not to further encourage him. But they told Dad because, John being much smaller and less intimidating than Dad in every way, everybody in the family was proud of John's courage and feistiness. My Dad saw a lot of Uncle John in me. And I did become an engineer like John, and I do notice flaws that others miss or choose to ignore.

I always thought my Dad thought I was enough of a PITA, so I can hardly imagine why he'd encourage me more in that direction by telling me of this event.

For Part 1: This Post Cost Me $2200
For Part 2: Part of the Reason for Shunning Social Security

Tuesday, October 23, 2012

Fools Think Their Vote Is Worthless

As an aside to my post earlier today, only fools could think their vote is worthless. There are city councils in many liberal cities that are pulling one form or another of that stunt I highlighted in the earlier post.

Look: They wouldn't be doing this if they honestly thought they had any chance to win enough votes from legitimate voters. Since legitimacy is harder to find in big city halls than a virgin in a brothel, they naturally fear it; it's a primal fear of the unknown.

If you read the rest of that story about Cleveland, it was a councilwoman by the same name who was at the crux of converting the billboard message from a warning to potential felons into one that encourages voter frauds.

My dear readers. Find a nice way to wake-up your "it doesn't matter" acquaintance how this proves that his anti-city hall sentiments really do matter. If nothing else his extra vote drives them to cheat harder so that they increase their risk of detection and imprisonment.

I recommend trying something a little nicer than Pay attention moron. But make sure you hit him with some 2x4 first just so you are sure you got his attention.

Clear Channel Caved, So It's Up to You

And me. So here's my part where I demonstrate what Clear Channel should have done instead.
Nature abhors a vacuum, so fill it. It's been left up to you and me.

Thanks to Breitbart. The story on how it was bad and made worse is here:

Cleveland City Council Pressures Clear Channel Into Removing Anti-Voter Fraud Billboards

Sunday, October 21, 2012

Credibility Limit Test for Liars

My uncle John (>90) recommends the following guideline limit for categorical liars who wish to retain some credibility.

Ask yourself "would my mother believe this?"

If the answer is: "Not a chance," then don't even think about.

In Uncle John's opinion, Obama has long ago exceeded that limit – repeatedly.

Monday, October 15, 2012

A Win: Taking On Ace for His Pushing RINOs

I depart from my current larger campaign to make an important point.

[Late note in case anyone gets the wrong impression from the blogpost title: I am still voting against Obama. Romney in office may still buy the republic some time. Whether or not Americans get wise enough and in numbers large enough to use the time effectively is still in doubt.]

You all know I have a problem with larger institutions. Primarily because, for celebrities or for littler people working at the institutions, making a living, sometimes a very good one, gets in the way of actually defending our constitution.

So when Dextrosphere talkers or larger blogs, who have a reputation for being conservative, display questionable behavior by aiding and abetting the "progressive" side (the conservative-hater side) of the GOP, it rests with us who have less of a following and not so much at stake to hold them to account.

At Ace of Spades today, Ace published Pat Caddell: NYT Engaging In Near-Complete Suppression of Libya Story To Shill For Loser President.

It was actually pretty good; it even demonstrates how Caddell is still a Democrat in that he held Republicans and independents responsible for the excesses of the Obama administration for not fighting hard enough. Like the Democrats are at our mercy. I can almost see Caddell's point. I do complain about SKUNCs regularly. But isn't there really a whole lot of fault to pass around? This may also be suggested by how much insanity it has taken, or at least blind eyes had to be given, for Social Security and other programs to have become ticking time-bombs.


  • Ace exposed himself within the main piece as playing along with RINO soft-peddling of Leftist assaults on our nation by saying the NY Times only began its slide 15 years ago. That's the kind of revisionism a conservative comes to expect from "Progressive" Republicans.
  • Ace also admitted to not being frank with his readers four years ago. He says that we on the Right would understand because he was deploying his "game face." How about his game face during primary season -- how could it best be described?
I will demonstrate after the break how in a short paragraph I jibed at Ace for both exposures. And got called names from the start as if I were a conservative at a Leftist blog. I did not rise to the bait but instead demonstrated how small was Ace to be hiding behind sycophants and/or sock puppets. At least Ace didn't ban me; I'll give him that.

And then I even got some praise for the definition of the acronym SKUNC. Thank you again Guy S!

Thursday, October 11, 2012

Part of the Reason for Shunning Social Security

To be fair to my readers, when I posted "This Post Cost Me $2200" I did not expand on all the reasons for doing it.

I started several years ago thinking about where the money would come from to pay me that $26K+ per year (although I didn't know it was that much, I figured it was close to that). The payments come either from borrowed money that has to be paid back with interest, or from printing it, which devalues every dollar that is already in print. And that is because from day one (1935) all money taken allegedly to fund Social Security went immediately into the general tax coffers. (There is family
history related to this.)

Such a cache would surely tempt decent moral men. But lawyers and politicians? C'mon. I once posed it as something like the following.

Social security has provided politicians the tax money they wanted for their favorite programs when they were certain the people wouldn't like paying for it. Of course they were too cowardly to face the music at the ballot box by imposing taxes for other programs, with a good portion of that money going into the pockets of cronies. So they pretended that by putting the payments off into the future it wasn't really a problem. But today it is very serious problem (as it had to become eventually) — but half the damn politicians still won't admit it. So ultimately FICA payroll extractions became taxes for other things, thus levied under false pretext. And the house of cards gets shakier every day.
Bottom line is the whole total of the SS "trust" fund (what Al Gore infamously said was in a lock-box) has been borrowed to pay for other things in addition to past retirees. Now every penny paid out must be borrowed again, with interest. ("Backed by the full-faith and credit of the United States Government" that was recently reduced a second notch to AA)

My small contribution won't stop the hemorrhaging or the enslavement of the coming generations. But at least I'm one man who says ENOUGH already, and am putting my money where my mouth is each month I continue this campaign. Tell me: how many career politicians are willing to match me even dollar for dollar, let alone the portion of my total worth? The good news is I'm not holding my breath waiting to hear of them.

Social security was a tax for other purposes not stated, and apparently always was a tax for other purposes. We as a nation -- several generations -- allowed our political hacks to lie to us and keep on being reelected rather than tarred and feathered. So we are all to blame and ought to take some responsibility for it when we can.

What really troubles me.
The idea that I would be further helping to forge the chains of our posterity troubles me greatly. Especially because I failed to learn how to effectively fight this cancer when I was younger.  This is my small measure of penance. I was too busy make a living at what came easily to me so I could raise my family. I never thought I was suited to engage more fully in politics. If I had, maybe things would be different at least a little. I tried, but did not try hard enough. [One really abysmal story of my ill-preparedness is here.] This is my self assessed penalty for that failure. I pray I can afford to keep my resolve.

Yes, there is more. As the need arises again in me, I will post more.

Monday, October 08, 2012

This Post Cost Me $2200

Not only that, this post could cost me considerably more. That is because some members of the human race are so perverse that they will hate me for making this announcement, and would seek to find some way to eliminate the circumstances that permit me to offer this sacrifice.

So let me make this clear: I will make this offering as long as I am able. My wife has passed away, and my kids are successfully (for now, praise God) on their own. The burden of this sacrifice falls only on me.

Last month I turned 66 years old. I am now eligible to draw my full social security benefits.The SS administration estimates that I would have over $2200 coming to me last month, and each subsequent month.

I have chosen not to file.

That's $26000 in annual income that the Social Security Administration says I have coming to me. It is more than my total income last year, including what I've withdrawn from my IRAs. Furthermore, last year when I turned 65 I did not file for Medicare either. That was despite the warning that should I choose to later join Medicare, my contributions to parts B and D would be more expensive.

But the big ticket is the $2200 per month. The $26000 per year. The $80-90K total I did not claim between age 62 and now.

I think I have heard all the arguments as to why I have a right to the money, and what I could do with it, and all the thoughts that I am a nutcase for having even considered this course. Feel free to try to convince me against this course of action in comments, but you have your work cut out for you.

See, I have an important motive. I am hoping I am not the only one who is able to do this. I may be the first though to risk telling the world about it. And let me make this clear. I'm doing this because those at the top of our political ladder have gotten far too shameless in how sticky their fingers have gotten and how much they lust to rule us. In order to hide their thievery (and the shackles on our posterity) they are outright encouraging more and more people to demand "what we have stolen taxed from others in your name" -- all so that they can enslave you all.

The Statists and their Leftist avante-garde are making one great final effort to "bring it all down baby."  They seek to bring the whole financial house of cards down on your heads as the Cloward-Piven schemers had planned.

This is my one small effort to make a shout out that they have to be stopped. Someone has to say ENOUGH ALREADY, and really mean it. So I am putting my money where my mouth is.

I love the idea of what America has stood for, and why it enabled me and my parents and grandparents to achieve what we could. Indeed, it has made it possible that I may do this one thing that runs contrary to the Leftist idea that only money matters. It is a lie. Principles like the sacredness of human life and the beauty of INDIVIDUAL freedom matter far more in my individualist creed.

This idea to spurn the entitlements when one is able to do so ought to spread. But I fear I may be the only man to do it. I've seen it in the eyes of too many I've discussed this with. Far too many will fear being ridiculed for doing the same thing. And they too would risk the ire of those who are so cynical they cannot stand the fact that others are not also cynical and take whatever is not nailed down while there is still something to take. Those corrupt individuals will seek a resolution that will satisfy their madness just so long as all hold-outs are eliminated by the example my ordeal would set.

If I am the only one to take on this risk, well so be it. I pray that is not the case.

Part 2: Part of the Reason for Shunning Social Security

Part 3: Social Security and Family Lore

Part 4: This Post Cost Me $4400

Part 5: Political Cowardice and Social Security

Part 6: This Post Cost Me Over $11K

Part 7: This Post Cost Me At Least $65K

Wednesday, September 26, 2012

If You Believe Political Ignorance Resides Only In Liberals

then you never had a conversation like I just had with an old friend who was a Republican long before I was. Damn he's was so damn smug he no longer lives in California so that he doesn't have to worry about the risk of our state legislature being voted fraudulently 2/3 Democratic in a few weeks. [The democratic fraudulent voter registrations were institutionalized by "R" Secretary of State Bill Jones during his 8 years in office (ca. 1995-2002) and phoney "fair" redistricting put in place under the direction of "R" Governor Schwarzenegger.] 'But they were Republicans and that is all that matters.'

So smug, he laughed as he said "I voted with my feet." 

"You schmuck" I hollered, "You still have a house out here, and I know you don't want to sell it. How you gonna like it when the Dems use their 2/3's majority to eliminate Proposition 13 property tax limits and send you an enormous property tax bill, maybe retroactive, that you can't possibly pay?"

He hung up.

Did Romney Really Do This?

Because if he did, it's a striking departure from RINO behavior.

During a recent Romney campaign stop, a heckler from the audience hollered, "Hey Mitt Witt, where are you hiding your tax returns?

Governor Romney politely responded, "I've found a very secure place that I'm certain they won't be found."

The insistent heckler, then shouted, "And just where is that, dummy"?

Governor Romney smiled and said, "They are underneath Obama's college records, his immigration status as a student, and his funding sources to pay for college. What's your next question"?"

Tuesday, September 25, 2012

Establishing a State Religion

When I was little I loved puzzles. Jigsaw puzzles especially. Though some of the pieces can be quite convoluted in shape, it's not unintentional that a good puzzle has many pieces that are bizarre in the same way, yet not any one fits into the position of any other. The task is to fit them all together in their proper place so that you can see the whole picture. (Were there a picture on the cover of the Obamacare bill,  there could be another joke Nancy Pelosi here. But let's not digress.)

Richard Fernandez put up a particularly striking post entitled "Be a Man" that requires only a bit of deeper thought to see the contrast he has set up between Judeo-Christian religions and what the Left and Statists are trying to replace them with. (G. K. Chesterton was right!)
What is the right and manful thing to do? These seem like questions out of an earlier age.

The striking thing about our modern and supposedly secular politically correct culture is just how religious it is. The concepts of piety and the sense of the sacred are still very much in evidence although other terms are used to describe them. In place of “blasphemy” we have the newfangled term “hate speech”. In place of “sin” we have “bigotry”. Where the word “Satan” was formerly applied we have “Romney”.  In place of well … Madonna says “like a prayer”. But it is the same dog with a different collar. Whereas in the past intellectuals complained that society was afflicted by pious women, today the intellectuals have themselves become the pious women.

There is apparently nothing that can be done to stem or suppress the religious instincts in man. They are as strong as ever. But perhaps some purpose can be served by recognizing it for what it is. There is no benefit in the self-deceptive act of pretending that Jesus and Moses are one thing, but somehow Xenu, Gaia and the Prophet Mohammed are another.
I believe Wretchard is implying, especially after viewing the comedian's video clip from which he borrowed the title for his post, that our would-be masters are adamant that none of us is being manly (responsible) unless we each cave into their demands no matter how bizarre and rights-stealing and just plainly not in the true interests of anyone of us. In order to scare us into believing that we will not like it when we don't let them have their way, but being cowards themselves, they are quite content to incite radical Jihadis to show us what we should fear. (They don't make union thugs like they used to; too well-to-do and living high off of government teets.)

Friday, September 21, 2012

Vote Swapping Pledge Part 3, Objections Answered

Darin, a fellow American commenter and frequent ally at the staunchly conservative New Zealand blog, Crusader Rabbit, has registered some objections to our campaign to generate more anti-Obama votes in swing (purple) states. If I recall correctly, Darin lives in a very Red state.
Jesus wept :roll
Is it really wise to presume for Him? Could you be like that woman on the roof in flood waters who refused all help on the grounds that “God will provide.” Then after drowning, St. Peter wants to know why she didn’t heed the rescuers He sent.
Does no one remember H. Ross Perot? The (faux) third party rift candidate who split the vote and got us Bill Clinton for president???? That one should be remembered as the great quantum leap down the progressive road to serfdom. I have family members I STILL have not forgiven for voting for that clown and being so dense as to do so.
This vote swapping idea is not an endorsement of any third party candidate. Wishing 3rd parties away is akin to those who so fear guns that they wish they didn’t exist. It’s a recognition that there are 1) third party candidates who will attract some votes and thereby reduce the numbers for Romney; 2) Conservative voters who will not turn out to vote for anyone because they believe that their vote for Romney will be useless. This plan provides a way to redirect non-nihilistic third party voters to vote for Romney in swing states. And to reinvigorate conservatives frustrated by Blue State realities, and give them a new reason to go out and vote while providing the third party candidates in the swing states a less dangerous way to register their objections about the GOP.
There are several “Blue” states that aren’t so blue they cannot be turned and California is one of them. They could be turned IF conservatives and moderates had not written them off in surrender.
Even Romney isn’t trying. People like you who live in Red states cannot believe how bad it is in this blue state. We are undermined by every institution including the state GOP. I do not have time to convince Red-staters of this fact; there are still too many Californian’s who refuse to hear even some of the evidence, and there’s a mountain of it.  This plan gives blue state conservatives a chance to help turn purple states red. It provides them a moral reawakening. It turns a case of hopelessness into usefulness.
Equally damaging some (faux) conservatives and moderates are also now talking of surrender in several of the purple states. What the hell???
I know and equally detest the faux conservatives of whom you speak. They are people who aim to demoralize conservatives at every turn. This is not in any way that. It is just the opposite of giving up. It’s finding a new way to make use of what the founding fathers gave us to help save ourselves. The total votes don’t matter – ask President Gore. It is the Electoral College tallies that matter. Those who do not know this have been mis-educated.
We do not need nor want a third party period and there are many reasons why having one is a bad idea. I won’t go into them right now, but anyone who understands American politics and has half a brain should be able to figure it out. Look at what we become if we have more that two parties, do we want to look like the UK or Europe? Why would a governing political system that encourages and supports triangulation be better than what we have now? No, I completely reject a third party as anything more than a delusional fantasy.
You are repeating, I will try not to. This plan recognizes that third parties exist and why. It offers a rational and honest third party voter a realistic alternative. He can vote for the slow road to servitude and not feel he’s giving up his principles. A principled conservative like you ought to appreciate that. We are not turning America into a parliamentary system. This would never do that, and cannot anyway. There’s no provision for power sharing.
We do not need a third party if we on the right take back control of the Republican Party. This is actually happening as we speak and has been all summer. This talk of a third party vote rallying around a nobody like Gary Johnson is akin to calling for surrender in the middle of a pitched battle that we are winning. If you don’t believe me that it is happening then examine who Romeny picked for VP and why as opposed to who the party elites had in mind.
I certainly hope you are right. But we also thought we had control of the House of Representatives when Boehner became speaker. How’s that working out? Not! But we were also buoyed up when McCain chose Palin. Didn’t prove a thing did it? Nor did it help as long as McCain was aiming to lose. Even if Romney is aiming to lose, we can’t afford to let him do so. We are taking Gary Johnson votes out of states where the Electoral Votes are winnable by Romney and transferring them to states where Romney isn’t even trying. Our goal is to get the Electoral College Tally to favor Romney and disfavor Obama. That’s what counts, not what “Contempt” foolishly called for.
Romney is not my ideal candidate, but any talk of him being anywhere near as bad as Obama is just plain lunacy. If Obama gets back in, even if the Senate goes back to Republican control we are doomed, people have no idea just how bad things will get under a second Obama term. If you don’t like what he has done so far, well let me tell you it’s just the tip of the iceberg.
I did not talk of him as being as bad as Obama, that’s why I want him to win. I agree with your other points in this paragraph. We are doomed if we don’t eject Obama, that’s why I came up with a new way to rack up more Electoral College votes  – the only votes that matter.
So, conservatives and libertarians, if you want to vote for Gary Johnson, or write in your dog’s name, or just sit out, then go right ahead. If you do however you are lighting the funeral fire for a once great nation and don’t come crying to me when you get burnt.

Again, this is just the opposite of sitting it out. It will give conservatives in blue states a new reason to live. It will give other party candidates a way to register their dissatisfaction while increasing Romney’s margins, turning the purple state red.

Sunday, September 16, 2012

First, Bring Back America

AMERICA? Filmmaker taken in for interview...

This Drudge headline brought to mind a 26 second clip, "Go Back to America," from the 1940 pro-Western movie, "Escape."

Libertarian/Republican Vote Swapping Pledge, Part 2

Blue State conservative independents and Republicans:  I am sorry, but your state's electoral votes have been written off as the Bummer's by both campaigns. Your participation in this pledge gives you an indirect way to help prevent the reelection of Barrack Obama.

Swing State Libertarian and other 3rd Party voters who recognize that Obama will end this republic much faster than will Romney. Your participation in this pledge helps increase Bumney's margin over Bummer. Electing Bumney theoretically should give our republic some more time to survive. It should become easier to overcome the propaganda perpetrated by the media as the media continues to unwind and expose how much of a collectivist loving, individualist hating agency that it is.

Red State conservatives: You should not risk your vote in this pledge. But you CAN encourage your conservative friends in blue states and independent friends in swing states to participate.

Part 1 is here: The Libertarian/Republican Vote Swapping Pledge.

added: Vote Swapping Pledge Part 3, Objections Answered.

View My Stats