Consequences

Time and again we now read of, hear of, and even see words and actions that have historically been considered as terrible, rotten and worse. Yet even in more normal times they were often of a nature that there were not legal remedies. However, the behavior would have received near universal public condemnation, and its purveyors subjected to due opprobrium.

Today, we are ever more witnessing the reverse to be true. Should the "wrong" designee utter any disparagement towards a member of a favored group for having done something society once considered universally egregious, he is likely to find himself facing legalities. Most call it as the SSM has taught them to call it. Politically Correct. I think that I have identified it on these pages more accurately as Political Cowering. Cowardice. (Due to unpreparedness at best, but often made worse by complicity.)

And now, as you shall see below, because saner heads have not prevailed in our society, this phenomenon has gone on to become far worse.

Readers may recall that a few years ago I invented the word victimoguery.

Today, Dr. Francis Porretto, in Legitimized Victims, identified circumstances demonstrating that such victimogues (or in less precise but more familiar terms: exploitative sociopaths) have taken us to the brink of their inevitable destination. They are instigating riots and mayhem, all justified by indoctrination of a warped and lopsided moral code created solely to inflame hatreds, and in many instances (but not the worst) for a variety of economic and political reasons that serves the exploiters well.

A flash point will inevitably be reached as the full legal implementation of this phoney justice, identified in the following summation, begins to hit normally decent human beings.

If you're not a member of a Leftist mascot group, you may not harm a member of any such. More, a Leftist mascot can take your life in any way he pleases, with no blot upon his group "identity."

Although Dr. Porretto limited his observations to the US, it is the same all over the world where humanity formerly thrived under, more or less, the concept of  the Western Social Contract.

What Dr. Porretto has identified is worse than abrogation by the state side. It is worse than the ages older divide and conquer tactic. And mainstream politicians like President Obama (having set the stage for those threatening riots should George Zimmerman be acquited) and Senator Schumer (setting the stage for those threatening riots should illegal aliens demands not be met) are talking and acting like Left-wing fringe radicals from the late 19th Century.

Another way to put how far this debacle of thinking has taken us is this.  Who would have ever thought that, as a consequence from having permitted the mass murderer escape execution, Charles Manson would see the fulfillment of his dream? (Well, maybe Paul Ehrlich, who you may be sure is nearing orgasm.)

It is a pretty horrible set up that these victimogues have wrought for us. I do not see any leader on the horizon with the understanding of how to cut this Gordian knot. So I repeat Dr. Porretto's advice. Yes pray. Very much.

Why America Needs a 2nd Party

You will find this to be exceedingly short.

Headline at Washington Times: 

Jeb Bush to award Hillary Clinton with 2013 Liberty Medal

For the record. That's the perspective "opposition" candidates for 2016, as deemed even now by our Establishment. Their pick for us peons to choose from.

• Those who do not want the nation to be pondering the way things really are will claim not to understand the title of this post.
• 
  
• Those who know how fundamentally phoney has been the opposition between the parties for a very long time do not need this for additional evidence. This evidence is tantamount to shipping coal to Newcastle, and perhaps bailing the ocean.

The real opposition to tyranny knows what needs to be done. Look for leaders. Support them and protect them with whatever you can.

Hat tip to KG, who says "Perhaps Amb. Stevens could present it to her…oh, hang on…."

Slogans of the Supermen

Let's face it. Until the cowards of the new politburo have the majority of us safely contained, they will never admit they are building to a new final solution. So to understand they who hate you better, you are forced to speculate how they keep themselves on their narrow little track to hell.

They think themselves supermen because they dare consider the really big thinks. But since they are really only humans inculcated with the moral imperative that is associated with Neo-Malthusianism, they need catchy slogans to help keep them focused on their task. It -- and they by extension -- are too important. So their task must never be forgotten (like Nancy Pelosi's eyes). Else their normal consciences, cleverly suppressed now, might sneak back and take over and spoil all the megalomania of the architects.

So here are my own dim-witted speculations of what is in the mind of those who hate you.

"Eliminate the no longer useful so that the best may survive."

 "Übermenschen über  untermenschen."

"So that we may survive, let the unvaluable die."

"Live and Let Die."

I'm sure you can speculate on more clever slogans. The Left is filled with sloganeers, so I'm sure they have much more catchy elevations for themselves and put downs of you.

Shameless Sus High Priest

Just when you didn't think he could be any more of a fool, Bummer tops himself, all with the aid of the SSM doing its 3-monkey shtick.

But we fearlessly step in to fill the vacuum left by the creatures formerly practicing journalism.

His Most High Eminence, Sustainability Priest Obama, declared today that all who disagree with his denial of the latest science news were "Flat Earth Society" members that he has no time for.

Sus worshipers clearly don't like humans very much do they? For else they would not be looking to freeze us (increasing the cost of all fuel and looking to eliminate coal altogether) and starve us (wasting corn acreage to be burned and eliminating farm land under ESA and other pretexts)  in the name of protecting the planet from us.

You know their claims that we're heating her up. It turns out that even the science that is beholden to them and their grants says it's not (see that second link up there).

It's an awfully suspect religion that our rulers have tied to their tyranny.

Look friends, religious and atheist alike, it definitely is in our best interest to put an end to this attempted government establishment of an all-but-declared religion before it destroys us in large numbers.


These charlatans and hangers on believe there is no force in the world that can stop them. But the truth of Natural Law keeps coming back to bite em', so they have to lie to prop up their facade a few more moments so they can steal your treasury blind.

I know from conversations that even those who don't believe in God will accept the notion of Natural Law.  So because it (some say the Hand of God) has made a liar of the Sus cult and its tyrants and now they have nothing left but to increase the lying and start looking for the exits.

Even though Leftist who agree with you on nothing major are likely more embarrassed by this bozo than they would like (or ever) admit. Take it to them.

Would You Buy a Pig In a Poke?

Increasingly common: our Congressional "representatives" tell you should buy what they give you.
    "What's in it? What's it cost?"
    "The right to ask is beyond your pay-grade Dopey."

The Senate just passed the huge amnesty bill before reading it. Same as they did with two stimulus bills and Obamacare. Same as was done under George W Bush with TARP.

Speaking of pigs. Who remembers "The Wild and Free Pigs of the Okefenokee" story?

They seem to be welding shut the gates to your corral.

You know that extra 20,000 border patrolmen we are told are in this obamination? Needed for stopping fleeing Americans.

BELIEF In Sustainability: Sneakily Violating Our Constitution

About two weeks ago I expanded my subheading. I have decided to spend more time addressing the problem as I see it. My former interrogative subheading "If our "leaders" are so humanitarian, how is it that we never hear them direct a harsh word at the Malthusian, Utilitarian and Green nutcases? " was less precise than I felt it should be, so I changed it to the four sentences you see now.

Today I am going to address the first sentence: "Despite the alleged separation of church and state, belief in Sustainability is widely held in American secular government."


I would like to see a law suit brought against agents and agencies in our Federal Government for gross violation of the first Amendment. Charging our secular authorities with establishing a state religion will be difficult because they will steadfastly deny it is a religion. More to the point: they dare not declare it a religion yet. But their refusal does not make this impossible. See, there is precedent for defeating their denials. It simply will be a harder task than was that of the precedent.

First of all, let us call it a nascent secular religion for now. That allows even those who favor the beliefs to be able to deny that a religion based on those beliefs is not really in formation.

The precedent I am referring to is desegregation.  The tactic used to defeat denials of segregation was establishing that defacto segregation existed. Our task will be harder because the world has changed and the soviet-style media (SSM) is uniformly against us.

To date I do not know if I have any allies in this fight. Almost all writers simply will not touch the topic.  The few of whom I am aware to have done so have ceased. Unless I begin to group the facts and make the case where evidence can be labeled exhibit 1, exhibit 2, and so on, I fear no one else will. 

The case must first be brought into the court of public opinion. I sure could use your help. If you see as I see that secular forces are determined to finally obliterate all Judeo-Christian religions (which is the competition of the nascent state religion, or possibly with Sharia where there might be special set-aside agreements at least temporarily) by various and sundry means, by hook or by crook, and you would like to do something legally about it, then maybe you should consider helping.

More anon.

But, But, That's Impossible!

Never say never 
Lest you fail from habit 
Presuming the unexpected 
Impossible.

Fly in the Ointment

Well it's not quite yet flies on the carcass, thank God.

Mark Levin just pointed out how AGAIN the 17th Amendment threw a monkey-wrench into the balance  our founders built  into the Constitution.

"More than half the state legislatures are against the amnesty, but 60 upwards of 70 senators appear ready to vote for it."

Once again the word incrementalist is much more revealing a label for the early and current politicians who call themselves progressive.

Speaking of Firsts

The only first that really matters to America: becoming the first republic ever to survive a democratic death spiral. Dear God, make us worthy of Your forgiveness and aid.

The above observation was a reaction to the self-serving words of this pretender.

In Need of a BS Cutter?

In a recent debate I had with another writer*, he pulled out a variation of Hanlon's razor. He did it, typically as is the case, not to disprove my point, but to evade it and all evidence that supports it.

I now have a quick response to such lines as "Never attribute to malice what can be passed off as stupidity."

Discard your trite old Hanlon's Razor and buy Heinlein. It's sharper.

--- Copyright Pascal Fervor, 2013.

For the record, Heinlein's razor is Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. But do not overlook malice.


------------
*Separately so as to not to detract from the new quip.
What is particularly humorous about this incident is that this author writes for an organization that you would recognize as the publisher of more conspiracy theories in the last 60-70 years than any other. Until Og asked me, I had forgotten that connection. Og knows what questions to ask.
 

Sad Dumb Eloi

H.G. Wells' protagonist in "The Time Machine" bemoaned the Eloi, the pretty but completely neutered remnant of mankind he encountered and tried to help.

But being enthralled with Malthus, Wells was happy because at least in their state they were governable. Those who do not know of this only have to seek out his paean "The Open Conspiracy."

Well, today, low and behold, he was right. Here is a Breitbart headline that assuredly will calm all previously nervous Fox viewers.

"After Phone Call with Rubio, O'Reilly Offers Full-Scale Support of Immigration Bill"

Is Bill O'Reilly really an Eloi? Sorry, Hanlon's razor is too dull. Buy Heinlein. O'Reilly is governable by other means:

Nice show ya have there Bill.
Would be a shame were something to happen to it.

New Feed Reader Bleg

Not since the days when I built my own web site (now defunct) have I had any blog list. Google reader provided me with a better means to track the sites I followed. Not only alerting me to new posts, but making it possible to do a whole lot more

• Usually finding an old post faster than at the site itself.
• make note of posts with extra perspicacity
• track where I'd left comments
• tag different posts with labels of my own
• collect posts touching subjects of interest to third parties
• etc.

But now that Google Reader is to be eliminated on 1 July, I am considering anew adding the sites I follow to a blog list.

Does anyone know of a feed collector site that you feel is as good or better than Google Reader?

Most Traitorous SSM (Soviet-Style Media) Gambit Yet

It is my opinion that the Dextrosphere should charge the AP with their most traitorous subterfuge and collusion to date. Despite all their complaints, I think there is good cause to see it as feigned. I suspect they are acting in concert with the DOJ as they have with Obama since he came on the political scene.

The Drudge headlines appearing late on Wednesday provide evidence that the ploy may be working.

AP: Sources have stopped talking...

Calls DOJ 'judge, jury and executioner'...

From the very beginning the AP scandal stunk. We are to believe that all of a sudden the Obama administration is targeting even their friends in the media? And so conservatives and TEA Party members can let down their guard as they expect the SSM to join with them in their outrage? HAH!  I can hardly wait for the AP and Bummer kiss-and-make-up season finale.

WHY ARE THEY DOING THIS NOW?

Most commentators who've noticed this suspect it is to focus the headlines away from many of the other scandals of the Bummer administration.

But I think the matter they are trying desperately to have ignored is strategically more important to the Statists than all the scandals they are practically flaunting at this point. After all,  they have proven themselves worse than shameless (John McCain for instance), and actually brazen with their illegal activities.

I think what they want ignored most is Amnesty.

This is all so Harry Reid and the SKUNCs can push through the Amnesty without Borders / United States Destruction bill before the number of Americans who are angered gets much much larger than the current 80%.

"They Make the Law"

The Jeopardy Category is FASCISM

The Final Jeopardy Answer is "They Make the Law"

You have 30 seconds. Remember to put your response in the form of a question.

(The correct response is below the break)

It's All In the Cards

First the shorter version of this analysis.

In conversation with Og, he made reference to our current boat load of "natural leaders." Yes dear reader, Og used scorn quotes.

He's right of course.

It's not that they are leaders in any real sense of the word. It's simply that they have bought their microphone, and so they are all we hear and we are permitted to assume they are leaders of a sort. Ask Michael Bloomberg's microphone what it costs since Bloomie ain't gonna talk.

His is not leadership. He's like someone who buys the pot in every poker hand. In a poker game without raise limits, all a well financed player need do is raise the bet until nobody else has enough money to match it. He doesn't even need do anything but hold cards in his hand -- nobody can afford to call his bluff. It doesn't take any time at all for a savvy poker player to know there is no point in putting in his ante in such a game. So the buyer of pots soon discovers he has nobody to play with. Good; that is as it should be.

But in politics we are supposed to have a choice. When there is someone who acts like a pot buyer, those who are forced to live under his rule are left with only with hope and prayer that he is not completely nuts, or faced with a messier solution if he is. Our founders fought to free us from the haphazard system of divine rights of kings and aristocratic rule -- only so we could allow this to happen on our watch? Sad to say, it looks like their spirits are shrugging "well, we gave them 200 years more or less."

In NYC politics, Bloomy scared off the opposition from the start. Nobody who wanted to be NYC mayor could afford to run against him. Essentially nobody could afford to "call" his bluster.

Going on, there is a lesson to be learned.This is a sign that maybe there was some truth in the progressive income tax. Had Bloomie been taxed at 95%, he'd not have had the money and power to get himself elected 3 times. And, in keeping with traditional political behavior, moneyed backers would not have been inclined to pave the path of someone too much like themselves. Why? Because other big money would not trust someone who has been, or could easily become, in competition with them. Another one of those features of checks and balances.

You might say that due to the tax law loopholes anyway, the big money could always find ways to keep it. But it was much harder when the top rate was high. Many charitable" foundations are what is left of 19th century robber baron's wealth -- and they live on to torment us. They have funded 501c3s and c4s that do all sorts of mischief. And the power brokers know it, which is surely one reason why TEA Parties were having such difficulty getting their paper work approved at the corrupted IRS.

The power to tax is the power to destroy all but your friends.
Well, until THEY become troublesome that is. Or no longer useful. Period.
Utilitarian nutcases will wipe them all out too when they are no longer needed.

Of course the wealthier ones will sneer: "Well, we had fun while it lasted, unlike you losers."

See, the diff between the foundations and today's office buying pols is that before they had to launder the foundation money by arranging all those non-profits to carry their water and buy votes that way.

Now that they have been able to accumulate wealth themselves, the Dem corridors are filled with those who could "buy the pot."

In other words, they need less to buy the loyalty of lower beings.

I think that has to eventually blow up on them. At least it is on us now that the public sector unions are insisting on bringing down the house of cards just to pay out pensions.

And this was the Soviet influenced plan to destroy us: Cloward-Piven. A house of cards has to fall.

A more detailed version of this analysis, that I hope answers some of your questions, is below the break.

Proofs It Is Happening Here

First let me pass along an observation of a friend of mine being dismissed by a long-time friend of his.

A woman (an anarcho-libertarian atheist) closed her ears to my friend (a religious conservative) because she insisted that evidence he introduced had happened in EU and could not happen here. She said she refused to let him trouble her any further.

What is more troubling is I have similar problems with people close to me. They are nowhere near the type who would label themselves atheist, let alone anarcho anything. But they are equally as determined not to hear news that would shatter their personal world-view.

So, I hope you know how to be a better diplomat than either me or my friend, because the world needs more courageous people to help shatter the delusions of such frightened souls. Help get them in fight rather than fright mode. And let there be no doubt, the dilemma facing you is that you want them aiding you to fight your mutual enemy and NOT turning on YOU. (Such is the terrible situation when you realize how much influence is carried by our SSM -- soviet-style media.)

Two stories go a long way to illuminate how badly that woman is deluded by saying what happens in Europe cannot happen here.

Headline 1. 8th Grader Suspended Over NRA T-Shirt Could Get Jail Time
excerpt:

Fox News reports that on June 13 Marcum appeared before a judge "and was officially charged with obstructing an officer." Moreover, the judge has allowed "the prosecution to move forward" with its case against Marcum.

Logan City Police officer James Adkins says that Marcum refused to quit talking when asked to remove the shirt. The officer said this hindered his ability to do his job.

In short, there are undoubtedly a number of civil right organizations who might come to Marcum's defense.

Headline 2. Rewriting the Past
excerpt:

I also got into trouble because when asked by a Moslem school pupil, ‘Why were Moslems not in the Roman Army?’ I replied ‘because Islam came into existence 500 years after the period’ I was talking about. My Archaeological Society received a letter stating I had made a racist comment. These events rook place some years ago but now it is all too commonplace. And people simply put up with it.

How are these related? Aside from freedom of speech, there is a sense of creeping outrageousness by those in authority. What used to be known as common sense and not making mountains out of molehills will be totally out the door once the autocrat believes that higher ups will simply let them get away with their going overboard.

See, there are more troubling implications to story number 1, especially in light of story number 2.  Story number 2 did not happen here YET, but it will once the police-state seeker's intended effects become reality.

What one needs to ask is how a police state gets established in the first place?

• What police state architects would be seeking to achieve is wide-scale compliance to them violating one of your rights after another.  
• It would be wise to see that they know that they are making an example of this kid even if they lose in court. 
• What they want is that a whole slew of people will give up their rights next time rather than be forced into Marcum's position (which common sheeple will be indoctrinated to see as unnecessary and stupid). 

Why do the power seekers dare take the risk of doing it? Because the tactic proves time and again over history that it works. As the man who related story 2, Guy Leven-Torres, said "People simply put up with it."

If you have any success, please pass it along. Tell me HOW you succeeded if even only a little. I need to learn.

Skirting Godwin at AoSHQ: No Smoking Gun

Really.

Oregon Muse makes a nice case, in my opinion, why Hitler might have skated at Nuremberg. Because he needed no documentation to further his will, as summarized here:

[After all that] They knew what der Fuhrer wanted, and der Fuhrer knew he could trust his henchman to get the job done -- no matter how, no matter what may be the law -- and to not bother him with the gory details.

Then  he goes on to summarize what we are witnessing with the Sgt. Schultz style testimony.

So all Obama has to do is publicly castigate and demonize his [sic] those who oppose his policies (which he has done many times), and thugs like Eric Holder and Lois Lerner swing into action. 

Worth reading the whole thing. Can it legitimately be called a conspiracy when nearly the whole country has witnessed some of this and so cannot rightly say they have no inkling of what is going on?

How extensive is the brazenness that we are witnessing? I think it is best summarized with a 3-D video playing in your imagination. In it Obama is poking his finger at you with his eyes piercing:

"Watcha gonna do about it punk?"

------
P.S.: Dear reader. Do you like summaries like this? Then please click the "do more" box below.

Conspiracies

No matter what anyone says, I am not a conspiracy nut. I've simply never allowed the common fear of such charges intimidate me into silence. Today I will try to provide you with ammunition so that you don't have to feel the need to shut up either.

Michael Medved and a few others have made a grand living providing microphones to actual conspiracy nuts, and of course, the effect is to undermine the very idea of looking into actual conspiracies. Maybe only because it is entertaining. Maybe because they don't like how past false conspiracies have hurt innocent people and don't want to see it happen again. And maybe because they are paid by special interests to prevent revelations of some specific conspiracy. Perhaps there are other reasons, but motive is unimportant here.

See, it should never be forgotten that history is replete with conspiracies. To me the most consequential one took place in a once great republic similar in many ways to our own. It was the famous* First Triumvirate of ancient Rome. Lesser ones occurred in our own country, and were what brought about legislation like anti-trust and institutions like the FBI. Conspiracies have existed; they can always be created anew no matter what fool-proof preventive measures we  believe we've forged; therefore there will always be some. So the frequent knee-jerk laugh at the idea of conspiracy can only be the product of relentless propaganda and indoctrination and not sober understanding of history and the risks from letting it be repeated. The indoctrination is so great I am sure this paragraph will be met with worse than merely deaf ears. But the fact remains.

Now don't go overboard. There are examples aplenty of those who do. The most useful thing to come out of considering how conspiracy might be present is discovering ways to counter it. You can't defeat what you never consider.

------
*It was notorious only to loyal republicans such as Cicero. I wrote famous because it was a conspiracy that was widely accepted by the time the three generals revealed their fait accompli and announced that their previous battling had been a smokescreen to hide their partnership. 

We Laughed With Sgt Schultz

I've a question to ask FBI Director Mueller:

Can you tell us who wrote your "I know nutting" line today?

A Cassandra In Denial of His Own Vision?

A pessimistic bon mot of author Jerry Pournelle was made quote of the day by Kevin Baker last week.

Sort of a twofer:

I do not say that democracy has been more pernicious on the whole, and in the long run, than monarchy or aristocracy. Democracy has never been and never can be so durable as aristocracy or monarchy; but while it lasts, it is more bloody than either. … Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide. It is in vain to say that democracy is less vain, less proud, less selfish, less ambitious, or less avaricious than aristocracy or monarchy. It is not true, in fact, and nowhere appears in history. Those passions are the same in all men, under all forms of simple government, and when unchecked, produce the same effects of fraud, violence, and cruelty. When clear prospects are opened before vanity, pride, avarice, or ambition, for their easy gratification, it is hard for the most considerate philosophers and the most conscientious moralists to resist the temptation. Individuals have conquered themselves. Nations and large bodies of men, never.

John Adams, letter to John Taylor (15 April 1814).

The remedy, of course, was to form a Republic, and for over two hundred years the Republic endured. Now it is to be converted into a democracy, and the result is predictable and predicted. There are many good studies of what happens when a democracy commits suicide. If it is fortunate it gets a Claudius Caesar, but more often it must first endure a Caligula so that Claudius seems a blessed relief. And after Claudius as likely as not comes Nero. But I digress. For the moment we do not yet have Marius.[Highlighting by PF]

For the record, on 10 June I sent the following request to Mr. Pournelle.

Please explain why you say we do not yet have Marius. Aside from the fact we do not have as head of state the general of his own army, there is a long list of benchmark achievements in the last dozen years that come close to Marius'. (If you'd like an absolute: I'd say it is clear that there is no Sulla in sight.)

Maybe, as you consider a response, you might provide your opinion as to what fraction of Marius' standard we are currently enduring.

No reply yet.

Maybe he meant there is not one man -- a Marius -- and didn't think the question worthy. But just because we cannot point to one man, that does not mean we haven't endured the same sort of inroads on our republic and our individual sovereignty that are associated with Marius and the ancient republic.

Or maybe it was his way of dismissing his own worries about the further degradations to Caligua/Claudius/Nero -- by denying that we are knee deep in the sort of cultural destruction that Marius introduced.

One more thing.
Should amnesty ever be passed, we will have matched (ironically?)  Marius' granting the Latins (of Italy) Roman citizenship, and then that will have changed our status from near knee deep to about neck deep.

Liartime

Lying in the morning,
Scamming in the evening
Cov'ups at suppertime
That's what our media gives us
They hate us all the time.

Busted: Washington Post Stealth Edits PRISM Story

It's gotten to be habitual.

Statist Tools: Plan B

Doncha just love the way our patriarchal Statists (through the man in the president's office and his cadres) use language?

Here's the Drudge headline that prompted today's warning.

Plan B: In latenight announcement, Obama allows morning-after abortion pill for under-17s...

All the while play-acting like they are the defenders of women, they are actively scheming (clandestinely even -- as suggested by the "late-night" announcement) to push sterilization pills (said to be temporary, unh, huh) into the mouths of minor girls.

Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, backed off her virulent eugenics program (Plan A) after she became involved with H.G. Wells. It was Wells who pointed out to her that her "worthwhile" goals would be resisted if forced on the target populations. He convinced her that what was needed was to disguise the idea as something desirable; a Plan B. "Choice."  The rest, paraphrasing the "as they say," is the end of history. The end of history, at least, of many of those young women suckered into volunteering the end of their lines.

The misanthropically nurtured Malthusians have switched from Plan A to Plan B and our side hardly ever gets the message out. More is our shame than our pity. It is not safe to follow leaders who never have a harsh word for Malthusian, Utilitarian, and Green nut-cases.

And doncha also love how the Statists are flogging our side by actually calling this pill "Plan B." God bless 'em, they are a boastful lot.

Why Is This The Soviet Style Media?

Because the spinning by the media (WaPo here) is such that the ghosts of the old Soviet Politburo  would be bursting with pride with the following.

A large majority of Americans say the federal government should focus on investigating possible terrorist threats even if personal privacy is compromised, and most support the blanket tracking of telephone records in an effort to uncover terrorist activity, according to a new Washington Post-Pew Research Center poll.

Fully 45 percent [under 50% is a large majority at WaPo, and doncha love their fully tack-on] of all Americans say the government should be able to go further than it is, saying that it should be able to monitor everyone’s online activity if doing so would prevent terrorist attacks. A slender majority, 52 percent, [if true, this is too small, so their "slender" is crowing, but it is STILL a majority unlike "fully 45 percent"] say no such broad-based monitoring should occur.

Hat tip JWF.

Patriots: here's another instance to prove that there is no news in Izvestia and no truth in Pravda. Pass it along.

Traitors: You will be remembered.

I Am Honored and Grateful

Og published today "In conversation with Pascal." Due to my frequent inability to get to the point quickly, I am very grateful he did .

My contribution was simply to observe that King Solomon set the liberal standard when he chose not to execute the covetous, lying, murderous, false mother for attempted murder-by-the-state, the moral equivalent of the mastermind behind a hired assassin.

Og explains quickly and clearly how the ripple effect from that decision works. And he also came up with a very cogent conclusion of his own.

And this has been the gold standard for liberalism since; consequence free nastiness for people who act out.
It certainly does explain the progression of a lot of things. [emphasis mine]

Yeah, the consequences have fallen not on the miscreants within every Western cultural center whose "kings" have gone overboard with tolerance since that time, but to those of us who now suffer for still honoring that culture, under God, in gratitude for the immense number of good things it has engendered far beyond that of other cultures.

My insight germinated out of a written debate he'd been having with RobertaX over the past week (and maybe years.), so it is doubly fitting he published it rather than I. I'm simply his cheering section today.

What Date Do You Want In the Pool?

Holy Congressional sanctity Batman.




Seeing as how Holder just about admitted to spying on Congress, what is your guess before he is gone? I hesitate to add:  before he has a chance to tell us who put him up to it?

-----
For when this video disappears, it's title was: "Eric Holder Refuses To Answer If DOJ Monitored Phones for Members of Congress."

Oh, and hat tip to Ace: Sen. Kirk Asks Holder if He Spied on Congress; Holder Says He Can't Answer That In An Open Forum.

The Sus Nuts Behind ObamaCare

The Sustainability nuts that I routinely warn against are finally being noticed. I pray it is not too late to break their monstrous stranglehold on what remains of America's once outstanding healthcare system.

I point you to this conversation at Breitbart Obamacare: We Will All Be Sarah Murnaghan Soon Enough.

It was Ace's link at his own site to his contribution that really pissed me off.  "I predicted it. It was an easy call."  Too bad he's not made his "understanding" a major factor that ties into all the other dangers to our freedoms. Probably too worried about his reputation.

When I say that the Sus nuts and their scheming tie into everything it's because they fit so well as an answer to a whole lot of questions. I'm talking about seemingly odd political actions that leave people stumped -- "that makes no sense"-- and leaves them asking seeming unanswerable things like "how can someone so smart behave so stupidly?" and "Is there nobody in Washington with the balls and the sense to speak out?" To arrive at answers that make sense, I think all that is needed is to recognize that there has been a paradigm shift in the meaning of public servant that is not generally discussed, but for which the risk to human life is quite great if it is as widespread as the evidence suggests.

See: if the people in power are guided by a moral code that does not seek to protect citizens, then their actions will appear to be odd if you think they are still abiding by the old moral code. So to get on the same page as I am on, all you have to ask yourself: "Considering how much other moral foundations have been eroded, dare I ignore the likelihood that those in power believe exactly the opposite of those who hold human life to be sacred?"

I know it sounds really insane to say "they are out to kill us all." But that is mostly because so many of us who hear such words still cling to the basic theme of the Judeo-Christian ethic no matter how much we personally fall short daily. That basic theme -- "do nothing that is hateful" -- conforms pretty much to the Hippocratic Oath as well -- "first do no harm." Thus only madmen would seek to kill others for whatever reason. And so too, would it not also mean that only madmen would eliminate the Hippocratic Oath? But beginning in the 1990s, one medical school after the other did exactly that. That so few know of this is just one more piece bit of evidence to add to the indictment I consider worthy of wider consideration.

Morality is not the same for the Sus worshipers. Their moral code is centered upon limiting human growth so as to save humanity from itself. They are never openly chastised for it like other groups the soviet style media portrays as hateful, so many people know nothing about them and their plans. And as far as I'm concerned, they have been secretly nurtured by those who hate people long before the Progressive movement was formed. The misanthropes loved Malthus and his theory. So even after Malthus himself said he was wrong, they have been using his ideas to hide their lethal, immoral lust.

I have tried repeatedly to get more people to speak up and force the movement out into the open. This particular conversation at Breitbart looks like another opportunity to drive home my point. And again, I pray it is not too late.

Brother Og has mused on a clear-headed start for a plan that stands to aid you should it be too late.