Orwell Was Right -- Again

Many people have attested they have read Orwell's 1984. But how good is the average memory of it or anything else? And even should the memory be good, how many are willing to connect what they remember to what they witness in real time?

I ask about being willing to make connections because there are a number of risks involved in doing so. Chief among these is the fear of being dismissed for jumping to conclusions. As a result, there is a requirement to piece all the evidence together before announcing the conclusion so as to be prepared to answer all outright adversaries, cynics, skeptics or casual scoffers rapidly and as thoroughly as possible.

However -- and this is the game changer -- it now matters not how well prepared we are for debate. Those who resent our abilities to answer them with facts, reason and rationality want us just to shut up, and they will charge us with all the things our well-backed-up arguments -- if permitted a fair hearing -- would belie.

See the world for what it has become and adapt!

We now live in an age where those who control the major outlets of communication, what most people refer to as MSM, but we here at Pascal Fervor refer to as the Soviet-Style Media, SSM, have hired people to spout utter nonsense without a shred of evidence, and are quite willing to slander any whom they wish with baseless charges.

Charges of racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic -- I'm sure I'm forgetting a lot more -- are brandished to the point of meaninglessness. But that does not mean tossing such charges are not still deemed as useful by those who pay for the service. They approve by renewing the contracts of all those who spew such unsupported "stupidity."

I put stupidity in quotes because such evil assertions are more easily deflected by calling them stupid than to take umbrage -- which would require a stronger response. So it's often called stupid by someone not willing to risk the implications on them of drawing the connection of evil intent to those who seek to gain by tarnishing the reputation of their opponents. And besides, such emissions are still food for mindless idiots to repeat to others of their ilk. Idiots will repeat any stupidity that suits them.

So this is written to remind my readers of one of the more unclear notions that Orwell wrote about. It's an attempt to make it easier to pass the understanding along to others how novelist George Orwell (journalist Eric Blair) predicted the sort of repeated gibberish of which we see all the time on SSM, most frequently on CNN and MSNBC, but on every TV news outlet, including Fox, and ever increasingly in the products of the entertainment arm of the SSM.  

Darin at Crusader Rabbit in FFS! #39,528  reacted in the usual way to what appears to be simply the title of the Daniel Greenfield report Dr Seuss is Racist, Thomas the Tank Engine is Sexist

  “Are there even words for this level of stupid?”

Of course he's right on one level, as I laid out above. And the direct answer to Darin's question was provided by Ed Bonderenka with the brilliant double entendre: "utter nonsense."

There's much more to comprehend, and that's why I am looking at it more thoroughly here.

Contend that Orwell predicted what may be called orchestrated stupidity. He gave it the name Duckspeak. He wrote several paragraphs in 1984 explaining the goal of the practice, but did not provide explicit examples.

The best summation of all that Orwell wrote on the topic may be this:

“make articulate speech issue from the larynx without involving the higher brain centres at all.”

I’m guessing he didn’t give us an example because he could see the value in its use but had not yet seen it put to use.

We, unfortunately, have been forced to live with it and have not yet figured out a successful counter-ploy since we individualists and targets of the oppressors don’t command the intrusive and omnipresent stage as the SSM does.

Such a widely staged practice, its contents prevented from being fairly contested on that stage and thus easily employed for inculcating weak and weakened minds, provides material for the jabbering parrots you may hear every hour of every day. Emitting words without involving the higher brain centers at all.

Wait. There's yet more. How did it evolve?

Duckspeak may have begun in this country with the relatively minor behavior of Eleanor Clift on the long running PBS show The McLaughlin Group. It bore the initial appearances of a slightly less formal debate: a panel discussion between various political commentators who worked for establishment outlets. But it was always rigged to Clift's advantage in that she was always granted a hecklers veto. Whenever an argument seemed to expose the failings of some Leftist Sinister policies, those in charge of her microphone permitted her high pitched whine to overwhelm whichever opponent was speaking. It didn't happen all the time, but it proved to be an acceptable and winning format. It went on for over 20 years and until the death of the host.  Suggestive that the resultant disorder that harmed fair discussions could well have been one objective goal of its host is that although the other panelists changed around over the years, only McLaughlin, the host, and Clift were regulars. Clift's behavior was essential in advancing the ability of nonsense to gain any ground on that program and in setting the pattern of what could follow on to undermine ordered discussions in our society.

Following that, CNN advanced the assault on reasoned debate with a show titled Cross-Fire. In that one, the shouting was more pronounced as the title of the show explicitly suggests. In other words, the appearance of decorum was far less often preserved. And given all that CNN has come to represent in its support of all that has become ever more openly sinister to what America once stood for, their advancement of Duckspeak appears to have taken the practice about as far as it can go.

The facts of the situations we have witnessed in only the last few years indicate that the effectiveness of Duckspeak has dwindled quite a bit. The most flagrant practitioners may be needing to look for new jobs assuming they survive the extremists who have begun to eat their own. 

The failure of nonsense to win over new parrots to utter the nonsense is why authorities in universoties and skools who are committed to the failing Prog agenda have increasingly resorted to shut-down real debates where students might actually hear clear, reasonable, rational arguments that expose the huge numbers of failures being forced down our throats. And expose Duckspeak for the utter nonsense it is.

That also explains why authorities all around the country, even more deeply committed to the failed Prog agenda, have allowed violent thugs to appear masked and with bludgeons and mostly tied the hands of law enforcement to prevent their unlawful acts.  It explains why the crony-corporate funded SSM invoke invalid apologetics for Antifa's antics and grants those thugs the uncritical use of the label Antifa without once acknowledging incident after incident where Antifa's actions match exactly those of past fascists and other violent organizations such as the Democrat Party's violent auxiliaries in the KKK.

This may be another reason why Orwell didn't explicitly provide examples of Duckspeak. It would have been too stupid to write about convincingly. This is because, once again, truth is stranger than fiction. Who could believe a fiction wherein someone would say that Doctor Seuss is racist and others would repeat it?  Only in the real world!

Face it. Even if it's in decline, as far as Orwell once again proving to be a predictor of the tactics to expect from those seeking absolute power and his understanding of how it would diminish of the ability of the intended subjects to resist, he was right.

Liberal Profs Awaken Too Late for Their Lives

What I want to highlight today is that liberal "intellectuals," having been slammed hard in the chops, can end their piece wondering "Is the modern Antifa fight against fascism actually fighting for fascism without realizing it?" [emphasis in the original]

Let's get on to the lunacy.

Photo provided by the following link

In Mussolini’s Description of Fascism Sounds a Lot Like Antifa  you will read that the intellectuals have discovered among Mussolini's drivel a passage that mimics what they witnessed on their former campus (they've been expelled for not being Left Sinister enough.)

"the modern relativist infers that everybody has the right to create for himself his own ideology and to attempt to enforce it with all the energy of which he is capable.” -- B. Mussolini [emphasis mine.]

Essentially these liberal professors may have finally awakened, realizing the Left Sinister is not liberal but as bad as the fascists the Antifa claim to oppose. Can you imagine that?  Antifa is not only not what they claim to be, but they are what they claim to be against. 

Are these profs yet so naïve that they still can ask 'how is that possible?'   Seems so.

Why next they may awaken to the fact that the overarching group from which the violent Antifa sprang, the Progressives, are really regressive authoritarians, the original masters of disguising themselves and hiding their agenda of gaining power by any means necessary.

But, like their quote of Martin Niemöller, it will be too late for these profs. They will be destroyed by the Progs because they know too much. Or they may be destroyed by the patriots, fighting to reclaim their republic, for remaining useful idiots to the end. (You will notice if you read the whole above link, that they are quoted still rationalizing the role their "good intentions" played in their own undoing.)

This find by a friend, and sent to me, is priceless. I'd never have read this site on my own.

I wish I could say I enjoy the schadenfreude, but I fear too many patriots will have a share of their karma. All who have known better, but wrote off evil too often as mere stupidity, means all earned share.

Now let me answer the link's final wondering question "Is the Antifa fight against fascism actually fighting for fascism without realizing it?" 

Yes. Definitely yes, you dolts.

For sure, there are undoubtedly useful idiots within Antifa who don't know it. They provide cover for the violence the thugs have inflicted and will continue to inflict -- just as you libs with all your alleged good intentions provided reasons and cover for the Left Sinister to incrementally steal power for the last one hundred plus years.  

But the bastards who provide them funds, train their leaders, and see that hardly any are arrested let alone restrained, know full well these are fascists.

And you "intellectuals," because you are only just wondering if they are fascists, are indeed dolts. For even if you are wise as serpents, and are still playing a role trying to convince us you've been fooled, you are still dolts. Because, in the grand scheme of things, you will pay a price, one whose painful extent you are too stupid to see.

Witnessing When the GOPe Role is Most Essential to Continued Statism

I find this link http://trumptrainnews.com/articles/trump-fbi-director-interviews
troubling.

Of the four names being interviewed for FBI director, the one I recognize is Sen John Cornyn — a GOPe of the highest order. He’s the current Senate Whip (AKA leg breaker to assure enough votes tailored to McConnell’s orders).

Without my providing all the evidence that supports the following: The job of the GOPe when the Right seems to be in power is to demand policies that placate the Left despite the Left having done nothing of the sort while it was in power. Such as just now putting a revised Obamacare on a tax basis that sustains the power of government over healthcare rather than returning healthcare to the free market.

If Cornyn is the sort of the other choices, or of the choices to come, and the final pick is much closer to a Lindsay Graham type rather than a Ted Cruz type, then we know Trump is just another frontman for the oligarchs.

Remember, there is no nominee who can be filibustered thanks to Harry Reid, so no nominee can be too far right while the GOP holds the senate. And the only way a nominee can be voted down is if Cornyn can’t whip the votes to get the nominee passed (wink, wink). Damned GOPe will be outed but don’t expect most talk-show hosts to make an issue of the exposure. You heard it hear first.

Going on — we will know we’ve been had in style and we can expect more of the same. We will get Leftism but on a paying basis — aka Statism — in a manner similar to what Nixon pulled off.

I’ve seen it all done before, so I’m not just pulling this out of my ass. My number one understanding of Progs is that the current generation has no genius amongst them, so they always do whatever has worked before. They are the quintessential throwbacks and their goal is enslavement of the entire globe. Feudalism 2.0.

Anyway, watch who is chosen for FBI director. If it's a GOPe (AKA as SKUNC on this blog) or an unknown rather than a staunch constitutionalist, then not only may we expect far more disappointments ahead, but many of the people the FBI targets will NOT be radical Leftists or dangerous aliens, and far more will be what the bureau labels as "wingers."

Between the Lines #2 [Cashing In On AGW]

From the news of "Monster" and "Worst Storm Evah" Hurricane Patricia.

The clock is ticking up to the moment that Mexico sues the United States for the damages caused by the hurricane.

The stage has already been set by the Progs and their climate fraudsters that American prosperity is the cause of greater and greater storms.

The thinking man will be wondering if this worst storm is really the worst on record because of all the lies about last summer being the hottest on record (when there's been no warming for nearly 2 decades). Alas, we know the SSM is not heeding the thinking man, and indeed is seeking to have him prosecuted.

That's what you can expect from reading today's headlines and reflecting back on all the CAGW staged preparations that preceded it.

High Risk Exposure of Our Corrupt Political Class

I have been pained by Ted Cruz. That is because I get the sense that he's intended to be a lone and isolated voice.

It could very well be his job with the Establishment to demoralize all those who hold the principled stands that favor the American constitution that he has spoken of often.

And in this latest speech on the Senate floor, he lashes out at the business as usual McConnell and company.

One of the things he says today I have repeatedly said about seated establishment republicans (SKUNCs on this blog but called RINOs almost everywhere else).

SKUNCs will attack true conservative Republicans with a level of vitriol that they would never use on a Democrat.

A wonderful insight and a related observation

Wow.

‘..The big stuff, wars, moon landings, civilizations, doesn’t matter. Everything has been reduced to the lowest common denominator of personal insecurities masquerading as politics and entertainment reduced to fame for fame’s sake celebrities. All of it is calculated to match the workday routine of a twenty-something female college graduate working in media. Because that is mostly who writes it.
…Our enemies have set out big goals. We must set out bigger ones. We must become more than conservatives. If we remain conservatives, then all we will have is the America we live in now. And even if our children and grandchildren become conservatives, that is the culture and nation they will fight to conserve. We must become revolutionaries. We must think in terms of the world we want. Not the world we have lost.’

Daniel Greenfield

http://sultanknish.blogspot.com.au/2015/09/this-is-america-we-live-in-now.html

H/T Crusader Rabbit.

That’s an orthodox Jew perspective if I’ve ever seen one and it’s one of the best things to learn from the faith: it fully recognizes the hegemony of Natural Law so a reader doesn’t even have to be of their faith.

It reminds us that Abraham himself was a revolutionary.

Too bad his seed had so much in-fighting, usually involving jealousies and covetousness.

Ike hated by Ish, Jake hated by Esav, Joe hated by his bros, the Israelites hated by the Amalekites, set the pattern that is merely a repetition of what is endemic in the whole of the human race.

The last commandment, thou shalt not covet, were it strictly adhered to, would likey lead to the end of war.

People who admire others and don’t covet what the others have or can do are usually the most productive and loving people I know.

So what do we have now? Western Civilization hated by its current rulers for much the same reason as those revealed in scripture. Hence there is why our governments are also at war with Judeo-Christianity and its scriptures. It exposes how their actions are in parallel with all the evil-doers there.

Hence Greenfield is correct.

Hillary Is Out & Here's Why - update 1

They who ignore the lessons of history are condemned to repeat it.

Whatever use the Clintons provided for Obama before, the finest thing they could do for him now is not regain power. Lenin did not see his mortal danger from Stalin before it was too late. Stalin never permitted anyone to retain power for too long. Even exiled Trotsky knew his days were numbered. The other apparatchiks who outlived their usefulness never saw it coming. When Stalin died, there was a collective sigh of relief throughout the Soviet Union as each apparatchik displayed his grief over the loss of Uncle Joe in perfect double-think harmony.

As long as Obama is reasonably sure that the press will continue to sing his praises, he may not even be worried about any dirt that Hillary and her backers have on him.  So that is one of the major calculations that are on-going. How much does what she knows trouble Obama? My guess is almost nothing.  So should the Justice department actually indict her, I foresee conviction. Why? A wounded Queen would be extremely dangerous.

In my opinion, Obama and his handlers do not want to worry about retaliation for real or imagined slights to the Clintons -- just the cloud from the threat of indictments are exactly that -- so there is not a chance in hell that he will permit Hillary to be the Democratic candidate.

And if I am right -- and I hope many others see this before it is too late -- the most important aspect of the next GOP candidate better not be "who will be the best to beat Hillary." Because that will be preparing to battle the wrong war.

**Update 16Aug2015**
Photo borrowed from seattletimes.com

Zoom in on Bill's eyes -- yowsa!

There is no way in hell that Xero will let Hillary reign. As suggested in comments, more likely he arranges for Moochelle to be the Dem candidate. Fitting too in that it's a tactic right out of George Wallace's playbook. He may even point to that as precedent. LOL

Sitting Senator Breaks Collective Silence

Why did it take until today for a sitting senator to state what has been obvious to principled conservatives for decades?

“We’ve just seen something extraordinary on the Senate floor. The American people elected a Republican majority believing that a Republican majority would be somehow different from a Democratic majority in the United States Senate. Unfortunately, the way the current Senate operates, there is one party, the Washington party.” -- Senator Ted Cruz ("Independent," TX)

The answer is that the senate has a tradition of enforced niceties, so frank language is usually very risky. Frankly, niceties are a luxury at this point, and it seems that Cruz is one of the few (like Mike Lee) who understand this.

However, at this point the two parties' combined action and inaction in destroying the rule of law -- the rule of law being essentially what has made this a great republic -- appears irreversible. So for a sitting senator breaking the collective silence about bipartisan complicity not only seems too late, it looks too much like it is being done for personal advancement, if not by Lee, at least by Cruz in his run for president.

Anyway, now seems like a good time for me to re-post the cartoon I commissioned in 2002 when things were still not that far out of hand.

It is a crying shame that more people did not make many similar cartoons and repeatedly drive the point home when combined outrage by the electorate might have had a chance. Instead they waited until 2009 to form the TEA party movement.

It's such a pity that you may not live to see how bad it can become and that your posterity will pay for the consequences of your lack of vision.

The Pinocchio in Chief on Gun Violence

The Pinocchio in Chief on Gun Violence yesterday:

 “Now is the time for mourning and for healing. But let’s be clear. At some point, we as a country will have to reckon with the fact that this type of mass violence does not happen in other advanced countries. " [source]

Does anybody believe this oligarchic puppet has no recollection of the Breivik murders in gun- banning Norway or the Charlie Hebdo murders in gun-banning France where even the police victims were unarmed?

If your  answer is "No," then you must realize that this shameless ghoul is a liar.

Updated to include this related set of facts that Pinocchio would never bring to light from his Bull*****y Pulpit. 

‘To Stop Mass Killers, We Have To Stop Drugging Our Young Boys’

Posted on June 20, 2015 by KG

‘How our touchy-feely feminised society creates young male killers’

Silence Often Viewed As Consent

The SSM has not taken notice of Mr. Obama's rare silence on anything on matters such as this headline.

FBI: Law Enforcement Officers Feloniously Killed in Line of Duty Up 89% in 2014

Because the highly paid apparatchiks occupying our news institutions haven't mentioned it, someone ought comment that silence is often viewed as consent.

The List of Lost Liberties -- Levin

Mark Levin, concluding his opening segment, declared,

When people say we're losing our country, they're wrong. 

We've lost our country.   

Everything that follows below is my short synopsis of the points he raised (evidence he provided not included) before arriving at that conclusion.
All of this can be found by listening to the opening 15 minutes of the podcast. (BTW, also try to find time to listen to Sue in the last 15 minutes of the podcast. What she has to report about Obama's plan to further Balkanize us is worth the time.)

 2/26/15-Mark Levin Audio Rewind (1:53:22)

We lost more liberty today.

1. Internet. 
2. Healthcare.
3. Banks.
4. Student loans.
5. Seized Congress' control of spending.
6. Seized Congress' legislative power.
7. Seized Congress' power over immigration and naturalization.
8. Seized confirmation process (failed for now).
9. Accepts limits in treaties as if law without Senate confirmation.
10. Attacked most of the Bill of Rights:

1. Speech and of the press.
2. Religious liberty.
3. 2nd A. (bullet bans).
4. Due process rights.
5. Takings clause.
6. States' rights.

Assaults

1. on the Declaration of Independence.
2. on the Free Market
3. Private property rights
4. Industrial heartland

"The Democratic Party has become a flat-out party of tyranny. Centralized power, authoritarianism and worse. Seeks power for power's sake. Seeks to control your life."

"A growing police state in the name of seeking security all as he hollows out the military from within."

"The Republican Party is a throwback party. Not the party of Lincoln that stood up to slavery. Not the party of Reagan who stood up to the Soviet Union. An old, fat, directionless Republican party that exists to serve its leaders, its bureaucrats and its operatives, not the American people."

"The Democrat Party is a radical, statist party. (Seeks at every turn to destroy individual liberty, state sovereignty, private property rights and the rule of law.) A party led by fanatics who seek power to rule over you. To rule over everything you do, large and small. Whatever it is, they want to control it because they want to control you. A despotic party with a despotic leader in the White House."

Orwellian America

When I read this headline at Breitbart.com,

Jeb Bush: GOP Doesn't Need Conservatives to Win 2016, Should Not Defund Exec Amnesty,

the words from Orwell's 1984 came to mind; a dire threat to the every man.  

O'Brien: If you want a vision of the future, Winston, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — forever.

It occurs to me: surely that's an overreaction. But is it really?

Even Bright People Can't or Won't See Layers

When Dem senator Charles Schumer came out the other day against Obamacare, a friend of mine called excitedly to tell me of the news. It delighted him that the Dems were splitting.

I tried to convince him that Schumer is a long time hack, but quite shrewd in his manipulation of the news. (In that he always has been helped and never hindered by the SSM. That made it easier and, so, makes him look smarter than he really is.)

My friend just would not see it as that.

Then backing up my suspicions this piece came to my attention today.

Second Take: Schumer's Merely Attempting a Trial Balloon Tactic of Distancing Democrats From Obamacare, While Continuing to Support and Defend It

I thought the Schumer statement -- in which he criticized Obama for pushing Obamacare in 2010, instead of addressing the needs of the And The Middle Class -- was important.

But now I think it's just so much positioning. With Elizabeth Warren now endorsing his statement (!!!), it seems obvious to me that this does not represent a true schism in the Democrat Party, but rather a way to snooker the voters again, to Gruber them anew.

Bottom line: Because we don't have a truly independent press to provide us the proper cynical views about politicians, especially about Dems, and usually about GOPe, the task has fallen to the people themselves.

See the layers of the statements so you can figure out the underlying meaning. Look for and at the layers.

Sometimes it's like peeling an onion, and can make you cry. But it needs to be done.

Fighting the Growth of Theocracy in America -- Part 2

I was going to follow up by adding some of the details I had removed from the draft in Part 1.  For now it should be sufficient for you to read what Og posted at Neanderpundit » The new priesthood of junk science, where he included much from that draft.

Instead I will provide you with some words that help reveal the nasty side of those seeking to establish Sustainability as this new state religion in America specifically; but ultimately all over the globe.

The alternate title for this post could be "Knowing Neither Morals, Nor What is High Ground"

Those working hard to make our society function like [Prince] Charlie's favorite slum aren't moving to their own collective farms. Instead they are transforming our society into the collective farm while pretending that their calculated destruction of our prosperity is smart and modern.

These words are from Daniel Greenfield's The Environmental Apocalypse published in April.

Five months later an anonymous convert to Sus worship felt compelled to contribute the following:

Fighting the destructive side of capitalist economies is not easy. So maybe the practices employed cause odd side-effects or don't pay as well as mining ores whose side effect is poisoning a town's water supply, but wouldn't you rather err on the side of caution for the sake of your kids and theirs when you're gone?

I'm often shocked by the attitudes conservatives have about the unknowns of global warming when they are so adamantly sure of the unknown of the afterlife. If you are good in this life with the aim of securing a place in heaven, why would you jeopardize the ability of those who come after you to have a good life when it is their turn? Whether there is a heaven or not, you will be good in the chance of going there when your time has come. Whether fossil fuels, CO2 emissions, etc. cause global warming, wouldn't you rather reduce this risk than to find out it is the cause and that you attributed to it? It seems so insignificant that people would lose money when it's weighed against your grandchildren living without food when severe droughts and lack of clean water or power sources could threaten the food supply. It seems that doubting global warming is like playing Russian roulette because the odds are in your favor, never mind that pointing a gun at your head is a stupid idea. 

This has very many incredibly off observations, so it would not be hard to fisk it merely for amusement.

For instance, since not all conservatives are religious it proves he's flat wrong about conservative certainty about afterlife.

Another example, more to the point, is how he sees caring for the environment as a liberal/conservative divide. That's a typical presumption of the indoctrinated Left. But it is over means where the divide appears. The Sus worshiper presumes any people who do not fall in line with his methods are -- when not cast as evil -- benighted at best; beneath him in understanding. His tone throughout his remonstration is bigoted: resistors are immoral by default; they can employ no reason in their defense.

That's only a small indication of the kind of danger inherent from a Sustainability state religion whose priests would help draft law. Much like Imans do with Sharia Law for IS.

Disagree only with his religion, he declares you a heretic.

Give him influence over laws, he makes you an outlaw.

Here is my response to anonymous, published on the same day his comment appeared. He was probably a troll as he did not respond.

"Whether fossil fuels, CO2 emissions, etc. cause global warming, wouldn't you rather reduce this risk than to find out it is the cause and that you attributed [sic] to it? "

Your argument relies too much on the Precautionary Principle. Using it, you have chosen fear of shortages as your religion. As such, you see it trumping all other considerations, including the most essential of America's promises to its posterity: defending individual liberties.

Not that you'd acknowledge it, but conservatives and libertarians wish to protect individuals from all religious zealots, including such as yourself who "knows" what's good for everyone else and their posterity.

Yours is a throwback to tyrannies that had all the rest of humanity in servitude of one form or another as symbolized by the broken chains at the feet of the Statue of Liberty.

Indeed, your fears of shortages are even more primitive than that. It's tied to ancient human sacrificing Pagan religions, the successful rebellion from which was endowed by  the Judeo-Christian ethos which your priests wish to eliminate and supplant.

Your views are uninformed because those who taught you your dogma need you to stay ignorant.

No poor anonymous: yours is NOT the moral high ground your priests pretend to stand upon. You are speaking from the pit of despair that Daniel, above, says that they've convinced you to accept for you and yours. And the actions you promote would throw the whole world back into chains so as to keep you company.

Do yourself the favor and break the chains on your mind before you find yourself thrown in the new gulags by those who trained you to be their useful idiot.

Part 3 "Those Forced to Pass a Religious Test Have Standing in Court."

Neverending Ploys for Ending Liberty

When I write about fighting the growing despotism, I see, along with many of you readers, how thoroughly the apparatchiks have penetrated our institutions and continue to run our lives based upon an ever increasing pile of lies.

So I often say we can only do that with G-d's help. When speaking to atheists, can that have any meaning? Yes, of course it can. I may imply nothing more than that we must fall back on physics rather than metaphysics, so that "G-d's help" wrings out as:

 "natural law has a way of building tsunamis of reality, like chickens coming home to roost, so that every stack of lies will inevitably be swamped."

Rhetorical question from Og: Like the global warming that has continued not to happen?

Yes, that hasn't stopped them from using The Lie as cover to steal our liberties incrementally.

Following Og's advice, I will continue to write short items like this before my writing skills cause them to grow so large nobody will ever read them.

How the SSM Came to Be the Biggest Villain

Though I've explained to a large number of people (some of you readers offline) how the soviet-style media (SSM) was the biggest villain in Ferguson Missouri from the start, I've got to commend Daniel Greenfield for exposing how the villainy goes further back than that. Very long indeed. 

Communists realized how useful race riots and the authoritarian backlash could be to their agenda. Terrorists don't just aim for the target; they also exploit the fallout to polarize a society.
That is what the left has been doing for generations since.
 
Everything from the Weathermen to September 11 became a means of polarizing the response while removing the context. The left plants the bombs and then acts as if the security men running around are insane fascists who could have no other possible motive except abusing innocent people.

Ferguson is more of the same. The left's army of activists and reporters troop down to the city. The activists start the violence while the reporters dramatize it. The coverage polarizes Americans and gives the left another hook for hanging on to power long after its economic policies have been as thoroughly discredited as those of the Soviet Union.

Law enforcement is an immune system. If we have an overdeveloped and oversensitive immune system, that's worth discussing, but it has to be discussed in the context of the infection it is reacting to. Until we treat the infection of the left, the country will be caught in the same cycle of crime and authoritarian backlash, liberals who open the door for criminals and conservatives who slam it shut.  --- Hands Up, Don't Loot

Read the whole thing.

The Progs, from their 1800s start, labeled all who would react to their destabilizing as Reactionaries. That was even before their first attacks began. Mr. Greenfield never says that explicitly, but it is there as his underlying theme.

What is more, now that the Left has so thoroughly infiltrated our institutions,  it is they who are the Reactionaries. It is so because they wish to conserve their incrementally gained, unconstitutional powers. Their DHS has designated TEA Party affiliation and returning veterans as primary terrorist concerns precisely because they fear we the people as we attempt to regain some sanity and order not just for ourselves, but for the sake of our posterity.

As each individual encounters and bridles at the checks on our once taken for granted liberties, then it may be more common to see groups form to challenge their authoritarianism on one or more fronts. Then watch as the militarized responses are used against native born Americans and not our border crashers -- because it is the decent, hard-working people (and not any of the FSA) who are a threat to the Left's unconstitutional power.

This all needed to be said because whatever has happened and will happen, would not have happened to such an extent but for the villainy of the media.

What with all the special powers granted it in our constitution, it is that institution which needed to be on guard for excessive power grabs.

Instead it lauds it and has become a vital part in advancing that crime. Hampering other watchdogs, discouraging real justice by assisting those who invented the fallacy of "social justice," and inducing societal decadence by parading in front of its audience uncountable varieties of flamboyant indecencies.

Each of those affronts has made media strongly complicit in and essential to our societal decay.  This all was essential in the Left's attack on American culture, and the media in all its forms provided the means and developed the programs for the attack.  That is how our soviet-style media became the biggest villain, not just in Ferguson which makes their role all the more noticeable, but for so much more.

Well, DUH!

Whistleblower: Ultimate goal of NSA is total population control...

And who does NSA work for?

If you think the answer is "they work for the American citizen," I would offer to sell you a bridge, but you've already bought too many.

The opening headline is Drudge's of course.

And I don't think most people reading it see in it any inkling as readers of this blog know how I read it. The megalomaniacs are bragging. And goading the goad-able. And thinking their time to crack down is nigh.

My advice to you today is not what it would have been 30 years ago. Trust in G-d, cause there are no men currently in power who give a rat's butt less value than yours.

Corollary to Godwin's Curse

The Corollary to Godwin's Curse posted yesterday:

When one is living the consequences of Godwin's Curse¹, adherents to Godwin's Law² will then know what desperation really means.

¹Godwin's Curse
There will be a point in time where events have so deteriorated that the value of any comparative arguments, such as how similar behavior led to the same repercussions, will be moot.

²Godwin's Law in short asserts
Mentioning Hitler or Nazi for any reason in support of an argument implicitly categorizes the speaker as desperate.

Godwin's Curse

Godwin's Law in short asserts that mentioning of Hitler for any reason in support of an argument implicitly categorizes the speaker as desperate.

I don't care who Godwin was or that he is credited with this assertion. However I will credit him with the curse since his attitude will have helped trends to continue.

Godwin's Curse:

There will be a point in time where events have so deteriorated that the value of any comparative arguments, such as how similar behavior led to the same repercussions, will be moot.

[**Updated** to include the corollary:

When one is living the consequences of Godwin's Curse, adherents to Godwin's Law will then know what desperation really means.]

I will have you know that this video helped, especailly at 30 seconds in, helped me recognize this curse.




Hat tip to Kevin Baker.


Oh, and one more observation.

Someone please list and point to places where Bill Whittle has called out RINOs SKUNCs for their back-stabbing and anti-constitutional ways of their own? 

Undoubtedly Whittle keeps showing us superbly how badly we are being served. I think he does so better than anyone else except, on some occasions, his pal Andrew Klavan.

See, this is what worries me about Whittle. I cannot quite shake the feeling that he is frequently laughing at Americans who are less well-connected than is he.

The One-Way Ratchet Again

I wish I could recall where I saw it last week. Maybe one of you can refresh my memory.

But the answer to Ace's questioning headline

If Obama Can Ignore The Law Requiring the Deportation of Illegal Aliens, Why Can't He Ignore the Law Requiring Asylum Hearings?

is that the ratcheting away of protection for Americans continues unabated and rarely specifically laid out for scrutiny.

Who is protected by the law depends on the King's whimsy the unstated but easily recognized agenda of those who enforce the laws.

It is no accident that such blatant and brazen discrepancies continue to be abetted by our rulers' Soviet-Style Media.

 Bottom line for you Ace:

Equality under the law is now completely arbitrary wherever it suits those seeking ever more power and ever more longevity in the seat of power.

Period.