Monday, September 30, 2013

Compelled Sterilization

In the bad old days of the early "Progressives," the eugenics program most often associated with  Margaret Sanger came under attack for its racism. It sought to sterilize those minorities it considered sub-standard and less useful for their utopian vision.

Naturally, they met backlash from many sources. So they redirected their programs to achieve much the same thing by indirect means.

Mostly they sought "voluntary" compliance. The sneer quotes are meant to convey the fact that they continued to hide their racism by speaking kindly to their targets and demonizing those who tried to warn the targets of the subterfuge.

Today we have new and improved forms of subterfuge that have made a mockery of the meaning of voluntary. Someone who is not yet fully developed and aware is hardly making decisions that in any reasonable way could be called "informed volition."

I call this newest form "compelled sterilization." It comes in the disguise of "sex-change" operations.

The pro-homosexual lobby (all radical leftists who may or may not include actual gay people as if that matters to the Left) has gotten state legislatures to prevent parents from protecting their children from the radical "information" supplied to children.

There are any number of arguments contrary to that agenda that we all would hear on broadcast media if that media also wasn't Leftist.

I am simply not that creative a writer to come up with arguments that I think could be provided the public.

But I am capable of seeing that sex change operations are sterilization by other means.

I'd like to see arguments that justify the headline Compelled Sterilization.
It just seems to me that if the homosexual lobby succeeds in
  1. preventing the opposition to their "information" from providing contrary information to children.
  2. preventing parents from protecting their children from making a choice instigated by having been convinced by that one-sided set of arguments.
  3. that any sterilizations that result are the direct result of other concerned parties being forced into both silence and being legally compelled from interceding.
I've got good, sensible readers. What can you add to this?

Saturday, September 28, 2013

The Way It COULD Work

Bottom line: We prepare to expose the lies of our enemies.

We know that the Soviet-Style Media (SSM) will demonize any response by the GOP controlled House of Representatives to the Democratic controlled Senate's version of the Continuing Resolution bill. The new GOP effort could work to build a true opposition to Statism and marginalize the SKUNCs instead of them marginalizing the constitutionally conscientious members of the GOP.

To help make that work it becomes up to the new and real independent 4th Estate like this blog to pass along the real substance to its readers. Our aim is to keep our spirits high. That is precisely in preparation for the SSM trying to demoralize us and make us give up in despair. They will do what they have always done: pass along "news" that runs from half truths, to outright lies, to provocations of mob violence. Our job is to neutralize it all as much as possible. 

I'm told by many (who are far more religiously faithful than I) that despair is a sin. So I'm encouraging my readers help me do my part (and maybe theirs) to help keep our side from additional sinning.

First, let me familiarize you with the latest response by the House of Representatives to the Senate GOP not blocking Harry Reid's determination to keep in place the Obama/Reid/Pelosi  deleterious health act of 2010.

Drudge does a superior headlining job than either of the two sites to which he links.

  2. Speaker of the House: BOEHNER MAKES MOVE 

Excerpts from SSM source 1.
This puts Senate Democrats and the White House at loggerheads with House Republicans, a standoff that could lead to the first government shutdown since 1995.

“We’ve had enough of the disunity in our party,” Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) told the meeting of House Republicans Saturday afternoon. “The headlines are Republicans fighting Republicans. This will unite us. This protects the people who sent us here from Obamacare.”

House Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) said it would be the “fastest whip check in history,” as every member raised their hand, saying they would support the bill.
Excerpts from the horse's mouth 2.
“The American people don’t want a government shut down and they don’t want ObamaCare. That’s why later today, the House will vote on two amendments to the Senate-passed continuing resolution that will keep the government open and stop as much of the president’s health care law as possible.

“The first amendment delays the president’s health care law by one year. And the second permanently repeals ObamaCare’s medical device tax that is sending jobs overseas.”
As you can already see in the way the Politico framed the news, it is long on what the SSM wants the public to hear and short on substantive reasons which just so happen to match the public's wishes. IOW, the SSM does not want the public to know how much the GOP wing of Congress is doing what the public sent them to Congress to do.

This has been my small effort to seek out substantive news. The more of us that do this, the more the efforts of our side stand a chance of working.

Thursday, September 26, 2013

Sunny Outlook On Obamacare

I've yet to see this young lady miss a beat.

Update on Friday, October 4, 2013.

Because the previously embedded link to Sunny Lohman's video loads as autoplay, I have finally deleted the embed and am only providing you with a link to the entry at the daily caller Daily Caller embed of Sunny's Outlook on Obamacare.

I will take the opportunity of this update to criticize Daily Caller for a number of things on this.
  1. This is the first of Sunny's video's whose audio sounds like it was recorded in a cave. 
  2. It's hard to hear her well. Horrible production values.
  3. The nature of their embed that insists on autoplay is, if it keeps up, going to run against their goal of increasing traffic to their site. It's okay to have the included ad, but they really ought to find some other way to direct traffic to them. I'd label this attempt as a FAIL.
  4. So far they have not made it possible to find her weekly videos easily. The only way I found her first week's video was by happenstance via another blog. Searching for "Sunny" at their site did not do it at the time I tried. I have not yet gone back to find this week's video, published yesterday.

Wednesday, September 25, 2013

Media Errors: "A Feature Not a Bug"

Fast forward to 5:50 in this clip

"My final conclusion 'This is deliberate,'" says Stewart. "The chaos they vomit onto the screen -- the very same thing we thought news organizations were created to prevent* -- is a feature, not a bug."

*Jon Stewart malapropped clarify for prevent. We corrected the record to be consistent with context.
Stewart goes on to a clip from an interview with CNN's honcho, where he explains (crows?) how the audience forgave them for their botch of the Boston Marathon terror episode. How does he know? CNN was rewarded by the viewers when, only two days later, they gave CNN its largest audience ever.

Stewart concludes from that:
"OMG! The lesson they take from this is 'it doesn't matter how much they betray our trust; we'll keep coming back.'  We're in an abusive relationship with CNN!"

Not funny ha ha, but funny sad.

It reminds me of Bill Clinton's twist of the old wisdom into his infamous "Why tell the truth when a good lie will do?" Clinton's cynicism is echoed in the behavior of the Soviet-Style Media (SSM) where it seems like their slogan is
"Don't worry about making errors; it's good practice for when ordered to lie."

Tuesday, September 24, 2013

Filibuster Live

Live streaming video by Ustream

While you watch this, you may find this post, inspired by the words of Harry Reid (who made this filibuster necessary), noteworthy.

No Taxation Without Representation

One More Thing

I have broken precedent here.

This little note is my fifth post in two days. I've never done that before.

Furthermore, I may yet post two more before the day is out.


I have never been so upset before with our public servants, our media, and also our so-called watchdogs of the media as well.  The two posts I'm currently working on could be too long were I to include all the evidence I have showing that Brent Bozelle's Media Research Center is in it only for the money they can get in donations from us who are targets of the alphabet networks.

As brother Og asks, "how is that news?"  What is news is that I have evidence.  Stay tuned.

One Handgun

One worthy, stand-alone extract from Wretchard 

In other news we hear that one handgun in Kenya saved 100 lives.
An off-duty member of the SAS emerged as a hero of the Nairobi siege yesterday, after he was credited with saving up to 100 lives.
The soldier was having coffee at the Westgate mall when it was attacked by Islamists on Saturday. With a gun tucked into his waistband, he was pictured helping two women from the complex.
He is said to have returned to the building on a dozen occasions, despite intense gunfire.
A friend in Nairobi said: ‘What he did was so heroic. He was having coffee with friends when it happened.
‘He went back in 12 times and saved 100 people. Imagine going back in when you knew what was going on inside.’
Calling Piers Morgan. Calling Piers Morgan.

Forced Against His Will; of the Same Opinion Still

I headlined this old maxim so as to provide South Carolina campaigners something to work with. I wanted to build something to provide an example of how to help voters expect what lies to hear from Lindsey Graham so they will reelect him.

Talkshow host Mark Levin sarcastically refers to the Progressive duo of Graham and McCain as "the same sex senators." Why?  Because they tend to be so close on Leftist policy issues, including redefining marriage, on most any  part of the Prog assaults on our culture and religious mores.

So for primarying Graham, I suggest looking at McCain's successful bid to hoodwink the conservative electorate of Arizona, and presume that Graham will attempt to do the same, and then exploit the similarity of the two men.

Based on the following story, it appears he has already begun to do so. For Graham in 2014, the Obamacare factor should still be big:

 Facing Primary, Lindsey Graham Now Supports Defunding ObamaCare

Yet, we all know from only months ago what he really thinks, and "a man forced against his will is of the same opinion still. "

For McCain for 2010, illegal aliens and border violence were big:
1. "Since taking a harder line on illegal immigration, the Arizona senator's future may hinge on whether voters see him as honest or opportunistic."
June 08, 2010 | By Mark Z. Barabak, Los Angeles Times
(Heck, even the LASlimes was skeptical): 
 2. Pressure on McCain was so great that he stooped to create this video.

Yet look at John McCain's stance today. He rails against all who expected him to honor his promise to protect our borders.
So, yes, "a man forced against his will is of the same opinion still." And, as evidenced by McCain's hatred for anything TEA party, there is hardly another man too who could be more bitter about his feeling being forced to pretend to be a servant of the public's will. How degrading, eh Johnny boy?

This is meant more as a demonstration than as any solid sort of campaign program. It was too easy to build.

Still, if South Carolina campaigners cannot come up with their own ideas after reviewing these facts, I'd not trust the campaign chairs. They've probably been bought off by the GOPe which they must think is the only thing that really matters. There are too many shadowy consultants for whom character, integrity, patriotism and honor are only words to be manipulated.

Monday, September 23, 2013

No Taxation Without Representation

Harry Reid said today
“We’re not going to bow to Tea Party anarchists who deny the mere fact that Obamacare is the law.” 

Hold on Harry. Now you are concerned about the law? What about the border laws? Immigration Laws? War laws that say the President can't arm terrorists as he's doing in Syria and did in Libya and Egypt?

Now you are "Mr Law is sacrosanct."

You know where you can shove your hypocrisy you pompous Prog.

Now lets get down to tax.

The only reason this damn law was declared constitutional was that the SCOTUS majority opinion called its key penalty a tax.

We are represented by members of Congress to decide when and if we will be taxed and by how much. The provisions in the law must be funded each year with our representatives agreeing to it. That is the point of the checks and balances. The House of Representatives is not the Senate that you rule.

At least on the face of it we do not yet live in a one-party ruled nation. Got that buster?

Who are you to call half the legislature and the people who gave them the majority anarchists? Project much buster?

It is YOU who is acting like only you and Obama are joint central strongmen of an anarchy, where you make the laws for others as you deign which you yourself will obey.

Because you have the nerve to show no deference or even simple respect (you damned radical!) to our representatives who tell you "NO. You cannot tax us for Obamacare" -- then FUHR.

Dammit TEA party patriots. Nail this bastard but good.
No taxation without representation. 
That IS the spirit of the TEA party.

No, Not Stupid; The Complicit Party

I get so tired of needing to point this out. Ace will turn blue in the face before he utters the words Complicit Party, no matter how much evidence he presents demonstrating it.

Why It's Called "The Stupid Party": GOP Turns Fight Against The Horrors Of ObamaCare Into A Process Story

You know why the GOP loses a lot? Because it deserves to.
Yesterday a bunch of Republican Senators went around to the various Sunday shows and instead of talking about why it's imperative ObamaCare be repealed because of the damage it's doing, they decided to make it about how much they hate Ted Cruz. Some Republicans went as far as to offer Fox News Sunday Host Chris Wallace what he termed, "opposition research" on Cruz. 

His point is valid about what would be stupid if they really were on our side. But all evidence suggests that we cannot afford to think those who are smart enough to attain the power and position they now own can ONLY be stupid on life threatening laws. Once it's happenstance, twice it's coincidence, thrice it's enemy action.

Look even Ace shows he does understand the problem by ending his post with "There are only a couple of ways the GOP can possibly lose the House next year. A shutdown isn't one of them but completely demoralizing conservatives certainly could."

Ultimately I cannot make headway on this alone. I will try, but that is far from the same thing as succeeding. More smaller blogs need to say this -- "No, not the stupid party; the complicit party"-- when they report on the next bit of evidence supporting it. Only in that way do we stand a chance to rid ourselves of Prog Republicans once and for all.

An Obama hack at The Politico equated men like Senator Cruz to scorpions:
"I am not talking about the entire Republican Party. I am talking about a faction of far-right, tea party-driven congressmen who do not care who drowns."
See what this implies? The Left knows and needs to protect the SKUNCs who work with them to undermine America. As the TEA Party members get hit from both sides, help make other patriots see how these SKUNCs are complicit.

Thursday, September 19, 2013

Update Contempt from Unexpected Sources

This is the third in a series of emails I've received from Heritage. (The second, which was like the first which I have already discussed, I ignored).

Dear Pascal,

Without leadership, nations crumble.

Yet today, our nation’s leaders too often fail to lead. They are too often feckless, subject to the winds of public opinion.

Unless we hold them accountable to our Constitution and to the conservative principles critical to our nation’s success, we will slip deeper and deeper into an economic, moral, and spiritual decline.

The Heritage Foundation is willing to fill this leadership vacuum and lead the fight to restore America. And I believe you have what it takes to stand alongside us.  

The Heritage Foundation is calling 500 strong, committed conservatives like you to join our exclusive Leaders Club before September20[ IOW: SEND MONEY!]

Your support has already made a difference. Just yesterday, Congressional leaders announced their support for a plan -- championed by Heritage over the objections of the Washington Establishment -- to defund Obamacare.

But this isn't the end of the fight. We need people like you who will lead based on principle, not popularity . . . who will commit to the conservative cause month in and month out.  

 [IOW BE A GOOD LEADER (laughter stifled) AND SEND MONEY]

Thank you for standing with Heritage in our fight to get America back on course.
Jim DeMint
The Heritage Foundation 

Good News or Bad?

Wednesday night was the first time I heard any talk show host use the phrase Soviet-style in the manner I have when referring to what most people still refer to as MSM, but to which I refer as SSM -- Soviet-Style Media.

The actual sentence he used was  near the end of his opening monologue at 11:50 (of the podcast) pertaining to the fight we have forced on the House of Representatives to eliminate the funding for ObamaCare:
"What will all the phoney conservatives, phoney leaders of the Republican Party in the senate [McCain, Graham, McConnell, Alexander], what will they do?  Are they going to continue to undermine the American people who want nothing to do with this damn Soviet-style law? " [Earlier in the monologue he lays out how tyrannical Obamacare's implementation has been, and thus fitting of the appellation.]
The good news is that by Levin uttering the phrase "Soviet-style," that the phrase is no longer found solely on this humble blog. It is now okay to say on national radio. And elsewhere.

The bad news: Is it too little too late to affect the debate and fight?

Well, let us pray that it is not too late.  I myself realized only this past March that the media is the most Soviet-style institution we have. And, as such, has been the most damaging to our efforts to garner respect for the TEA Party movement and its goal of reining in the monstrous growth of Leviathan.

Thus, I say again, paraphrasing Cato the Elder, but in English this time: Soviet-style media must be destroyed.

Wednesday, September 18, 2013

Contempt from Unexpected Sources

This time it is the Heritage Foundation and a letter from its head, former GOP Senator Jim DeMint.
Subject: Lead the way

Dear Pascal,

Are you a true and committed conservative leader? Do you want to be? 
Followed by more attempts at sounding appealing. And, at the closing, above link is again offered.
This is what you find at the link as of the time of this posting:

How you can be a leader who will change the course of the conservative movement

Our nation is under siege by big-government liberals who work tirelessly and deliberately to dismantle the foundation of our great country.

We see the evidence of the liberals’ work in the federal government’s over-reaching regulation, out-of-control spending, skyrocketing deficits, and weakened national defense.

The liberals’ constant vigilance—and the left-wing drumbeat from their media allies—means that Heritage’s fight for conservative principles must not rest. To carry this fight through to victory, we must have principled partners who will stand with us along each step of this battle.

You can be part of the solution

To be prepared for this fight, The Heritage Foundation created the Leaders Club, a small cadre of committed conservatives who show their dedication to conservative principles by supporting the cause with a simple monthly donation.

Let me highlight the key words in that last portion on "how to become a leader" before concluding:
show dedication to conservative principles with a simple monthly donation.

Listen you schmucks: Send Heritage your money and leave the thinking to us big brains.

Great! That is the precisely the language the TEA party movement hears from the GOPe.

Crystal Clear: FUHF

BTW, I do not have HF's email recipient list, and I know they won't listen to any email I send them back.  That would be true even if I doesn't run up against an automatic "no-return-email" wall. So they have left me (FUPF) with this blog exposé as the only way I have to attempt to get through to them.

If you can see the contempt for us "proles" that this sort of emailing  implies, please consider doing something like this at your own blogs, or in comments elsewhere. It is really not so much that I am for revolting, it is that I find the Establishment revolting.

Tuesday, September 17, 2013

Contempt for Us: Relentless

I received this email from the Media Research Center

Dear Pascal,
It’s hard to decide which is the bigger scandal: The IRS harassing conservatives or the liberal Soviet Style* media’s continued censorship of this shockingstory. [*fixed by PF]

In our relentless effort to blow the lid off the most shocking political scandal to hit Washington in decades, the Media Research Center has uncovered that ABC, NBC, and CBS are refusingto report the latest bombshell news that severely undercut the IRS’s case that the agency wasn’t politically motivated in its targeting of Tea Party groups. 

In a February 2011 email, Lois Lerner advised her staff that the Tea Party matter was “very dangerous” and insisted that “Cincy should probably not have these cases.”

And how do the leftist propagandists posing as journalists respond? By censoring this story completely.
I rarely sign these petitions. That is due to my personal discomfort that organizations like this do not request any sort of aid other than signing their petitions and sending them money. When the communication is only one-way, then it is categorically non-grassroots, and thus highly suspect. It smells too much of O'Brien. If your senses differ from mine, here is the link to their petition and entry into their pester you forever list. 

All we ask is that you sign our Stop Censoring the IRS Scandal petition to shame the liberal media into doing their job.

"Shame the liberal media SSM." ROTFLMAO

Monday, September 16, 2013

Well Beyond Shameless

I often speak in general about how the Progs, as they advanced their power grabs, came to the phase where they acted shamelessly. That is, they became so powerful they could feel the success of their long-term agenda was fully secure. Opposition to their expanding agenda had become so spotty as to have become unworthy of even acknowledgement.

That is why this story caught my eye. The opposition this time seems to have moved them to mounting a reactionary type vendetta. 

Congress’s Exemption from Obamacare Make Congress get insurance the same way the little people do? Hill denizens howl in fury. 


The Congressional Leadership Empire decided to strike back at Vitter. Politico reported that several Democratic senators have asked staff to draft legislation that would deny federal health subsidies to anyone who votes for the Vitter plan, even if Vitter’s plan doesn’t become law. An even more spiteful draft bill would bar subsidies to any lawmaker or aide found by a congressional ethics committee to have “engaged in the solicitation of prostitution.”

Aside from the strong-arm tactics that this dust-up provides us a rare opportunity to witness, there is the implied better-than-thou by the Senators out to punish Vitter and allies for his dissent with them.

What I observed here was what I wished to place in my archives. It's been abundantly clear that DC has been operating in a crony-capitalist capacity for many years, but most openly -- do a search for the word brazen on this blog for more examples -- in these last five years.

So please note that they who seek now to punish Vitter, specifically for a past forgiven incident of "solicitation of prostitution," have  themselves proven to be the best paid whores in our country's history. Thus, Senators Reid and Boxer, in attacking Vitter this way, are well past shameless.

Monday, September 09, 2013

Are You a Target of the Susnuts?

Or are you one of their mindless bots who believes you are somehow special?

At Liberty's Torch, Weetabix asked me a question whose answer is too long to put into a small comment.

Pascal - I must admit up front that a surfeit of current projects has undermined my normal willingness to research - have you any links to further explain the "Malthusian Sustainability nuts?" 

The answer is even too long for a single post, but I need try at least this once.

For my recent thoughts, the Sustainability label at my blog will provide you many examples of news that spurred me to note the connection.

Our host, Fran, beginning in 2004, ran an exhaustive series called "The Death Cults."  The participation of mainstream elected leaders were much less brazen then. But they did permit non-profit status to be bestowed upon a load of Malthusian extremists. The same IRS that blocked TEA Party groups from (c4) status lets those guys thrive under (c3).

I've a not too complex theory that has withstood my tests over time. It is time to let others take some shots at it. If it only needs some adaptations and it can be refined, maybe there is hope that can be snatched from the knowledge. Know thy enemy and know thyself, and you will win every war said Sun Tsu.

Thomas Malthus' theories arose about 50 years after Pascal's death. The Age of Reason was beginning to undermine the Ancien Régimes. Many rulers saw and welcomed the benefits of liberty. But two kinds, both powerful, hated it. Those who hate the common man, and those who love concentrated power. Sometimes they're the same, and sometimes not. Malthus provided a "moral" cloak to hide both the explicit and implicit hatred of humanity -- even from themselves. By being able to convince even themselves that their vision is righteous, they can remain calm and seemingly benign as they convince large numbers
"Leave it to us boys. We know what needs be done. Really."

(The ancient Sophists understood power and how to get and keep it. One of their chief ways of keeping it was through fostering ideas that attract casuists -- men who sought the moral path based on studying cases of conduct -- and let them do the heavy lifting, often with little expense or risk to the Sophists' masters, spurred by a few demagogues, and fueled considerably by the zeal of the useful idiots. Eric Hoffer, by popularizing the more easily understood term of "true believer,"  did us a disservice by disconnecting the Greek designation for them, and thus their historically implied connection to the power seeking schemers. The humanity haters may believe they now have sufficient armies of those who are enthralled by the indirect means  to achieving a new (old) religion (see below). It is one that will provide them moral authority to achieve their goals. The real powers only have to support the activists when things get tough. Mostly they have historically chosen to be silent partners. Today -- not so silent.) 

A tactical note. What I'd like to make popular is the term Susnuts (or something like it), for the worshipers of Sustainability. (It really does fit the open ones. What I'd like is for the term to affect those who remain hidden. Some, who retain some of their humanity, will feel tainted by it). They believe their goal is righteous: to save us all from the one thing (they believe) that the planet has too much of -- human beings. They know that targets will not appreciate it, so they can't easily announce it. But they could not help leaving mountains of evidence as they progress.

It has all the earmarks of a religion. Ancient pagan ones. The ones that flung live babies into holocausts and virgins to the wolves. Its "priests" are instigating wars with the competition; that is, with  all people who still adhere to the Judeo-Christian ethos whether or not they are religious.

For instance, you are seeing today with the witch hunts to rid the military of people who dare stand by their religion. Any religion that has in its books the promise "God will provide" -- the contrary idea to their conviction that we will run out of sustainable items -- is anathema to them. The phrase linked to Hitler "the Jewish disease" expresses the major cultural foundational obstacle to the earliest Susnuts (eugenics embracing Progressives such as H.G. Wells and Margaret Sanger) long before Hitler was born.

One more thing. The old labels do not apply here. Even those who call themselves religious or conservative will say "but there are too many people." They might be reachable. If even 50% reading this blog don't say that, then that would be wonderful news. But, if Armageddon really is imminent, forget about large numbers. Then, as Revelation predicts, the majority are already deluded. What can I say? The ones who seek to save their souls will be reached.

I say that as an agnostic. I literally do not know. But the evidence is hard to deny. Believing the world is overpopulated has to be deluded, because it leads inevitably to world-wide wipe-outs. This goes back to "Progressive" thought of the late 1800s. Those who most want children cannot be tolerated by the Progs lest they over-populate with all "the wrong" types. HG Wells' eugenic euphemism of "people of the abyss" is what they do not want as survivors.

If we are stoked into a civil war, it will be between peoples who have been set upon each other by these schemers seeking to obliterate the current population of the planet. I used the term 1/13 as a guess for their target number, because it fits their vision so well. A normal deck of 52 playing cards has only 4 aces; 4/52 = 1/13. Only Aces will be permitted to survive. Ace rocket scientists down to ace housekeepers and gardeners I guess.  Don't ask me how they plan on living well if they do manage somehow to survive their man-made cataclysm. They're the whiz-kids. Ask them.

I look at this pessimistic thought process of the Susnuts, their craven misanthropic backers and their foolish followers and I see a clear demarcation between them and people who I'd say are filled with common human decency. That is a charitable streak which shows itself most nobly in times of crisis often in stark contrast to the less than noble behaviors that occur then too. In short its captured by the phrase "we are all in the same boat; let's make the best of it."

The Susnut creed, with its religious like belief in the inevitability of Malthusian catastrophes, and which has created a moral imperative derived from the specious Precautionary Principle, has to hide its intentions from its victims.
  • The boat we call Earth has limited resources, so we enlightened geniuses must decide who stays and what useless souls must be thrown overboard. 
  • We love humanity so much we must cull it properly in order to save it. 
  • Our morality (live and let die) trumps yours (live and let live) so much that we can't even speak of it openly because the majority are benighted souls who simply do not understand us.
Are you with them or are you against them?

And if you agree with them, then "are you useful?"

For how long?

Well?  Are you a target of the Susnuts?

Thursday, September 05, 2013

What Is the Best Answer?

During a brief verbal spat between myself and young woman, she proudly blurted out "I'm a socialist" as if that were proof of her moral superiority and greater intellect. Several retorts crossed my brain at once. I really did not take advantage of the moment to turn the incident more to the light side with a witticism.

So I've been playing with various quips that could be used for a whole slew of instances where some fool blurts "I'm a [blank]." Here are a few I like.

  • What have your personal problems got to do with this?
  •  I'm sorry. What's your Doctor's prognosis?
  • Is that a play for sympathy?
  • Oh, you're the one.

The one that crossed my mind, but I feared might be misconstrued given how ill-informed most young lefties are, was "Given that so many good socialists died in Stalin's Gulag, you should know that such an honest declaration won't save you from your own comrades."

Perhaps some of you can think of a few quips that are not too biting. Please add them to the comment stream.

Wednesday, September 04, 2013

Difficult Decisions

This photo accompanied the headline at The Guardian which reads "Decision to withdraw unflattering photo of François Hollande is criticised."

What I want to know is if this is considered bad, how do they ever run a picture of Nancy Pelosi?
View My Stats