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.

On the Road to America's End

In Obama’s Henchmen, Selwyn Duke has analyzed the workings of Obama and his administration in a way I'd not seen before. I find it intriguing even if I'm not sure I accept some of his premises. (For instance, when the Sustainability angle is not considered in the mix of premises, what seems bizarre isn't really, and that is due to the misanthropic morality that the Sus crowd has embraced.)

But it is well composed, so I thought I should pass it along to my readers who are upset with the decline of America.

Why do I recommend reading it? I direct your eyes to the troubling if accurate closing paragraph of his analysis.

While it’s clear that he [Obama] doesn’t have traditional America’s best interests at heart, the reality is that his corrupted judgment ensures he couldn’t choose good appointees even if he wanted to. But the real problem is a people that, clearly, couldn’t choose a good president even if they wanted to.  This intellectual and moral decay is the real scandal in America — and it ensures political scandal till the end of the republic. [emphasis added]

Dear reader, even if that dire prediction is inevitable whatever the ultimate reason for it, is the reason he gives entirely outside of our control? Have we simply given up because we are frustrated by all the idiocy we see around us? I hate giving up, accepting that our nation's fate is sealed. So what might we do to help remedy this people problem?

For Better Grokking "Fundamentally Changing America"

I have not in a long while pointed to a Fran Porretto post. Although he regularly provides penetrating and even trenchant thoughts, there is more Ayn Rand novelist than Walter Williams essayist in his works, so it is often too hard to identify all of them and how they interact in the kind of short essay I prefer to compose.

Today, however, he is quite singly focused. I wholly recommend you read all of The Debunking: Public Safety. It makes clear that the forces who are fundamentally changing the meaning of freedom in America will do it at your extreme expense and none for themselves.

In particular, take note of the doughnut shop exception. The cynicism of the Left in their bold assaults on our reason is, from my point of view, a form of childish daring of us to respond in a manner to their liking. Consequently,  I firmly suggest that you serve them -- any response -- cold.

The Left Protects Wildlife to the Extreme; Babies, Nah

Commenting on the Soviet Style Media's avoidance of the Gosnel (baby mass-murdering abortionist) verdicts last week, Open Blogger (at Ace of Spades) "Krakatoa" made the following observation.

If one of the byproducts of abortions was a dead environmentally insignificant fish or three in some river delta or perhaps a few well-lubricated pelicans [in] the Gulf of Mexico, there would have been a moratorium on them years ago.

This sadly reinforces my observation that most bloggers are shocked when the misanthropics of an issue become obvious. The entire Progressive movement grew out of Malthusianism and Utilitarianism, both of which looks with a murderous eye towards sub-races and their natalism. Thus the Gosnel atrocity (these were Black babies) should be doubly concerning towards Blacks. That white leftist/progressives dominate the media is no surprise.

They who call conservatives racist are proven here to be the most deadly racists in America.

Pass this observation and my commentary on. It pains me to see Blacks so misled, and it should any decent human being. But then again, the decent human being is the most endangered species on Earth based on the lack of them.

**Update**
Og brought to my attention that Baldilocks has indeed made attempts and endured trolls for trying to inform Blacks about anti-natalism -- the ultimate form of racism -- against them. I always find it hopeful when I see people who do not Politically Cower. They have the stuff from which real leaders are made.

Some of her discussion about Margaret Sanger inspired to me to compile a lengthy comment which included with some obcure links* (and of which contains some items upon which to base a larger essay here) she may or may not have been aware of before, but of which I always hope others will learn.

-----
*Groan: both links I left there are messed up because I couldn't get the < a href= > to work. So  I left actual url links between brackets. Baldilocks' site turns them hot -- but incorrectly included the closing bracket as part of the url, and they don't work properly. They need to be copied; pasted in the url line, and edited to delete the trailing nonsense. What's worse is that I previewed the post before publishing and tested to see that both links worked. After publication the closing brackets became an issue. Just damn. Just adding to my day that was not a good one.

Here's a Fine Example

About 8 months ago I published the short post The Most Dreadful Phrases about some hard learned wisdom.  Among the dreadful phrases is "I thought you were smart."   Today I saw this headline in my sweep of news (h/t Newsbusters by way of  JWF).

Luke Russert: ‘Smart’ House Republicans Aren’t The ‘God, Guns & Guts People’

Money quote:

...they got to keep it serious, they can't make this into a witch hunt because they lose the political high ground. The best committee to have out of the gate in order to have these types of questions, Joe [Scarborough], is the House Ways and Means committee. You remember from your time up here, that's where the party puts its stars. It's not the God, guns and guts people on the Ways and Means committee, it's the smart people, it's the people that understand the true mechanisms of government. 

Let me interpret this the way little Russert meant it. "The party that is allegedly [wink, wink] the home of those representatives who know that government needs to be kept on a short leash, that's the one where the smart people know which way the wind blows and what side butters their bread."

Like I said last August, "I thought you were smart" is the kind of line you hear from those who are disappointed you don't fall in line with the corruption that "everybody else" is a part of.

Levin -- "Eliminate the IRS"

Our Soviet Style Media has been dragged kicking and screaming into covering the Obama scandals. The most eagerly reported of these are the excesses of the IRS in persecuting Rightist not-for-profit organizations (like Heritage) but doing nothing against Leftist ones (such as Media Matters).

In the wake of this "new" awareness, Mark Levin tonight vehemently demanded the IRS be eliminated. [I will provide a link after the show is over.] LINK

@2:25 "Folks: It's time to kill the IRS."

Nonetheless folks, once again Mr. Levin is not extreme enough. It really shouldn't need that much explanation for regular readers, because you are already aware of the one-two dance that the Dems and the GOP do to increase Fed powers. The SKUNCs in congress will simply work with the Democrats organized Leftists in Congress to cut back on such demands. They will wind up squandering the public outrage by compromising away from "eliminated" into "reforms."

In order to actually achieve elimination of the IRS, someone like Levin needs to make more extreme suggestions. Only by making more Draconian demands do we have a real chance to actually achieve elimination of any corrupt and dangerous wing of government. You know I'm right.
 

Congressional Scholar Bleg

My question arises due to the news that the Senate passed an Internet sales tax bill today. 

Amidst all the moaning and gnashing of teeth about how this is unconstitutional (I agree), there is another constitutional matter that I am curious about. I must be missing something. How is it possible that this bill originates in the Senate? Doesn't our Constitution require all tax bills be initiated in the House of Representatives?

Please direct you favorite constitutional lawyer to this question. For Mark Levin's 3 hours he never addressed that part. Maybe he's aligned with the other SKUNCs and think this question deserves a response like Nancy Pelosi's "you must be joking."

I'm not joking.

And You Thought *I* Was Tough On Progressives

Pat Condell is not a web commentator that I favor consistently. However, the following video is particularly worth directing your eyes toward. He makes many of the same observations I have made over the decades about "Progressives" -- or, as I prefer to call them, Incrementalcases -- but he also provides you with many fine and currently hidden (by our soviet-style media) examples as to how the they are a curse on humanity, particularly towards heroic individuals.

In my opinion, Condell's Title: The Truth is Incorrect does not do it justice.



Hat tip Gates of Vienna, whose title Progressives Always Know Best also does not do it justice.

It is also a frustration bordering on criminal that so many well-meaning liberals will never see and be counseled by this video.

A prime quote (you'll remember what prompted it):
"Statistically one in four Swedish women will now be raped during their lifetime, and every one of them can thank a progressive journalist [for hiding the truth from the public because it is incorrect]."

And he has a special riff for a Danish pair (reporter and photographer) who tailed the van of a Dane who was moving after surviving a failed Jihadi assassination so they could tell the world of his new home.

Countering the Undermining of Your Moral Foundations

The point of this screed is this. When you hear a popular talkshow host make a statement you know to be contrary to the views of the Right and its principles, or undermines our case that distinguishes us from the Left, speak out.  Don't let your inability to get past the call-screener stop you. Just tell as many people who are on the Right until there are many more of us who understand our need to watch our backs. We cannot be betrayed by an enemy.

One of the key foundations of Judeo-Christian morality is being able to recognize evil. And as I have constantly written here (so many times that I have a link to one near the top of my sidebar), the killing, murdering, sacrificing of children is one of the most distinct of evils recognized by this Western ethos.

I am currently battling a terrible cold while having a great many other things to do. This is but one of the reasons for my dearth of publishing.

However, while preparing coffee I turned on the radio briefly. It was Dennis Prager, a "conservative" radio talker whose niche is allegedly to keep moral issues alive and well in this overwhelming time of secular domination. Indeed, he often has many good and revealing things to contribute.

But as I warn my readers, it is very unwise to be an unwary fan of any man for his apparent wisdom. And there is abundant evidence that it is very unwise to do so with men who make their living in a medium that is constantly being monitored by licensing agents of an increasingly one-world-view government. There are some things they cannot say, and there are some untruths that they will propagate.

I heard Mr. Prager repeat one of those untruths, all the more angering to me given the latest news proving the contrary. It so angered me that I stopped what I was doing to write this down.

I hope what I tell you will be repeated widely. I know from experience that although Mr. Prager claims to allow dissident voices to his on first, that his screener will very likely find some reason not to -- such as "he's moved on from that" being one of the favorite lines.

At about 5 minutes to the end of his first hour, Mr. Prager was speaking about how easy life would be if both sides could agree what is good for society. Before he went on to mention distinct differences, he stated the following mind blowing statement. [paraphrasing as best I can since I don't have it recorded]

"Of course the Left and the Right agree that the killing of children is bad."-- Dennis Prager

I would ask Mr. Prager to square this with what his knows to be historically true, but even more so, by what is very current in the news -- or lack of it. Namely: The story of Kermit Gosnell and his "Women's Medical Society" is the precise opposite of The Preferred Narrative of the MSM. Mr. Prager is one of the first to assert that the MSM is dominated by Leftists. Yet he somehow overlooked without a moments hesitation that the MSM's determination to bury this story (as recounted at this link and many others) proves his statement to be completely untrue.

Get out there my friends. Make it clear that you and the Left are distinctly different, most especially in this issue as demonstrated in this matter.

And when you do so, you will now be prepared to be knifed in the back by the likes of Mr. Prager. When it comes you can now charge him and those like him with being an apologist for the Left. Here is your proof.

RINO Connotes Thick-Skinned You Fools

The filibuster in favor of protecting the 2nd Amendment, and indeed all of the letters of the Bill of Rights, lost today with 68 votes

When will the rest of the dextrosphere get it? Looks like never.

The damned so-called RINOs glory in being called that name. Why? Because it reminds them that they need to be thick-skinned enough to ignore their conservative and libertarian base.

They are the worst kind of Statists -- ones that will lie to you about their intentions. At least you can't say that Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid or Bummer have been lying to YOU. You won't vote for them because their intentions are known. But the member of the GOP Senate that you voted for because he claimed to be a defender of the constitution, he outright lied to you.

Short of calling them traitors outright, Guy S's acronym SKUNC (Statist Knowingly Undermining our Nation's Constitution) is much more satisfying.

And were those RINOs to begin hearing the term SKUNC, at least they'd be reminded that we think they stink. They may not give a damn at this point, but it will be very hard for any of them to glory in being so labeled.

Think about it. At least cease using the label RINO.

Choking on "The Most Transparent Administration in History"

Offer this evidence to the morons naifs who swallow that line and never choke. And you could rightfully file this away under the heading "Open Contempt."

Gov't taxes & fees now included

Did you know?

In compliance with new Department of Transportation rules, the fares you see now include all government taxes and fees. 

When,  how and why did I got that message?

Just now when I noticed my air fare didn't disclose the portion of the trip that was for landing and TSA fees. Thinking that perhaps the airline had the information on a different page, I clicked on the following link:  Gov't taxes & fees now included

To add to the grim irony, the address of the link is titled -- ta dum -- pop_fullFareDisclosure.html

Full fare disclosure?

FULL fare DISCLOSURE.

There is NO breakdown of the regulatory fees imposed by the Statist government whatsoever.

Here, let me put it in the proper voice. Ahem.

"Eat your taxes and don't worry about how big they are or what we even claim to be using them for.

Why should we even bother figuring it out anyway. Where's your need to know what we are doing? The need to know is above your pay-grade citizen peon."

Let Me Fix That for Yer "Breitbart".com -- Updated

The following is how Breitbart.com would have corrected this headline were Andrew still alive.

Left Soviet Style Media Selectively Edit Steve King on Sasha, Malia Bahamas Vacation

 

Several in the left-wing media jumped on King’s comments immediately, taking them out of context to attempt to disparage him. by Matthew Boyle 

At the risk of sounding like another blogger many of you know: were I to give a damn anymore I could rewrite headlines like this all day long -- and they might even occasionally be amusing -- but what difference would it make?

Sure as shooting, the "Right" publishers are all wimping out just like the talkshow hosts. They make a show like they're on the case. Hence headlines like this one shoot short of the mark.

Rewriting their tepid headlines is one way of ridiculing them for their cowardice. But ever since Don Rickles became famous making Johnny Carson laugh at being called a hockey puck (learn to accept being abused as the cost of gaining power, but always remember who gets the last laugh), people in positions of influence and power have been trained to build up their callousness. So our insults will roll off them like water off a duck's back.

If insults won't affect them any longer, maybe something stronger will penetrate those calloused brains. Surfactants work on ducks, ______ work on political elites. I simply don't know what that something is just yet.

Anyway, my noticing the understatement in the word "Left" in that headline got me to break my month long silence. Our media more and more is copycatting all out Soviet era Pravda. And they have been quite successful too, especially in their stoking divisiveness between neighbors, abetting the conquering by our ever more low-life tyrants on the rise. The right media is doing nobody any service by understating the gravity of such dangerous propaganda.

***Updated***
If anyone agrees with my assessment, that the sites which bear Andrew's name ought to be more hard-hitting, then you might want to add a thumbs up to the comment I left there. Thanks.

pascal fervor • 8 days ago

• −

Dear Editors:
Here, let me fix the headline of this story for you:
"Soviet Style Media Selectively Edit Steve King on Sasha, Malia Bahamas Vacation"
This way there is no understating the gravity of the dangers from such a despicable propaganda machine. Long live the spirit of Andrew.

1

•

Reply

Diagnosis By a Quack

Seeing as how he feels he can be unrestrained, and has broken his collegial phoniness airs of the US Senate, I declare John Quackain a quack rather than some more accurate designation reserved for a later date. As Guy S had reevaluated the partisans he previously so designated, SKUNC appears to be a far too understated label.

From the top of Drudge this morning.

MCCAIN CALLS YOUNG BUCKS 'WACKOS'...

Hatchet Man At PJ Media

Re: PJ Media has taken a novel approach to doing business.  Tells all its best customers that what they have to say carries no weight with, has no value whatsoever to, them.

"Send ideas, comments, suggestions, links or tips to tips@pjmedia.com"

To whom is endangering PJMedia.

We Are Fighting Elitism -- and then you take a cavalier attitude towards comments.
All comments of the past are now down the memory hole. You must be proud!

Gee, and we thought you were different. Silly we.

Buh bye.

Pascal

Some of Wretchard's best work was in the comments to his own Belmont Club posts. Unless those comments are recovered, I cannot imagine how this can end well for PJ Media. Maybe that's the point. Hatchet men are usually employed to rid a company of dead wood, not to eliminate the company itself.

Ronald Reagan's Political Model

Today Is the 102^nd anniversary of Ronald Reagan's birth.

Many revere the man not so much for his years in office but for voicing his vision of American ideals clearly and with enthusiasm. Among the best examples of that vision was elucidated in his 1964 stump speech "A Time for Choosing." Excerpt:

You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right. Well I'd like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There's only an up or down: up to man's ages-old dream, the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order, or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. And regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motive, those who would trade our freedom for security have embarked on this downward course.

It was delivered on behalf of Barry Goldwater's run for president. But far more effectively, it established Mr. Reagan as a first-rate conservative voice in America.

Wait. Don't leave yet just because you think you have heard the 1964 speech before.

Some time in Mr Reagan's first term as president, circa 1982, while traveling in my car, I heard what I consider to be a very important expansion on that speech. I have repeatedly tried to find that later version, but I have not yet succeeded.

So I had a dilemma. Continue to search and wait to pass along what Mr. Reagan attempted to portray or pass along his words as best as I could recall. I made the decision a few years ago that until  someone answers my request to unearth the last version of that speech and provide the man's actual words, I would on various occasions publish it. It is what I remember about Mr. Reagan's more detailed explanation of the political mechanism that Americans find themselves saddled with and he meant for you to know it.

He clearly was attempting to provide us with a new model that could be used to override the Marxist model that he rejected. In my opinion he was correct in rejecting it. When we stick to the mono-directional model made famous by Marx and promulgated by our media, we are playing on the field of their choosing. Mr. Reagan offered us an alternative, and we ought to have learned to listen to him by now.

Please forgive me my inabilities to be precise. It is more important that those who love freedom know the essence of his vision as I recall them.

Thank you.

As best as I can recall, Mr. Reagan referred to a political platform. He likened what he considered to be the Marxist political spectrum of left and right to a see-saw of a platform.

The Left would gain control, and they'd pile up programs on their side of the platform. The foundation beneath the platform would begin to sink from the weight of their efforts. This resulted in the platform being tilted noticeably. It made the voters feel uncomfortable. So the voters would turn to the Right to straighten things out. 

Well the right might try to prop up the left side a bit, and refill the foundation, but in doing so, they'd dig a hole under their side of the platform next. Those who gain power always have interests who want something back -- usually in the form of legislation that favors them or taxes their competitors -- for their support. Thus the weight of these efforts and favors repaid cause the platform to tip to the right this time. That sinking feeling leaves the voters uncomfortable again.

So the voters would then put the Left back into power. And the Left would begin to fill in the hole under the right, but pile up more programs on their side and drive their side of the platform even deeper into the foundation of America's liberties.

And so it would go on, back and forth, Left and Right, Left then Right. Pretty soon the citizens of this great nation would find themselves in a pit of despair; a pit dug by the machinations of those who built up the oppressive weight of government. Government has been built up incrementally, one law after another, ruling upon ruling, practice becoming entrenched policy. And it was all done under the guise of representing a left or a right side, but both headed in one direction -- into the pit of tyranny. All those vested interests would insist it stay that way. Worse, as they'd get more demanding they'd cloak it with fairness. They were owed all that they'd "earned" for their efforts to gain "their people" power in the past.

At some point the vast majority of Americans will insist on climbing out of the hole dug for them by this political machine -- that single minded and ruthless incremental see-saw of power-seeking achieved by eating away at the foundation of our liberties. Taxes and regulations and busybodyness that is in no way justified in a nation dedicated to individual freedom.

Americans were passed a birthright containing the fresh air of freedom. It is what  our Founders had envisioned, and it is what our fathers fought to keep. And it's pretty much still been available to most Americans for around 200 years. If we do not stop the digging soon, somewhere along the way, Americans will demand to be let out of this pit. May God bless them then as He has in the past.

It is my opinion that the Tea Party movement is the realization of Mr. Reagan's vision. We will no longer limit ourselves to the thinking that we must choose to accept a Left or a Right.  We are trying to climb out of the Marxist/Statist pit dug by influential forces who've been incrementally overriding the restraints on their power. We are seeking freedom from the tyranny of those tired old partisans who claim to be working for our common good but are enthusiastically enslaving us and our posterity. 

More TEA Party Betrayal

Today's episode is headlined at Breitbart.
Surrender: Ohio Gov. Kasich Spurns Tea Party, Backs Obamacare Medicaid Expansion; Left Celebrates . 

John Kasich. Once a creature of DC (which also stands for death cult, but who notices?), always a creature of DC. Probably because the ones that remain still have handles on you.

The former Congressman and former Fox commentator and current governor could not help himself. It’s in his nature to betray those who believed him.

I took the opportunity to introduce some readers at Breitbart.com to the SKUNC acronym. One of the Lefty trolls there (and it could be a sock-troll since "Gary" seems to be a regular pest) somehow "corrected" me by misreading my definition and redoubling what I said. So natch I played it straight with my response.

Sequence begins.

• thunder2984

 When push comes to shove, 90% of "Republicans" are RINOs.

• Pascal

RINO is too good a term. Since they all think of themselves as Platonic elitist republicans, they laugh at the term.

They won't laugh at being called traitors, but that may need to be proven.

Until that time, SKUNC fits.

Statists Knowingly Undermining National Charters fits all those in the formerly Western culture countries who are elected allegedly to represent (allegedly) those who voted for them.

To spell out the globalist connection more clearly, SKUNC can also be thought to mean Scoundrels Kneeling to United Nations Control.

RINO is simply too easy on them. These stinkers have earned the label SKUNC.

• Gary

Okay SKUNC, but wouldn't Statists prefer as opposed to try to undermine National Charters. I'm confused.

And there is precisely NO United Nations Control going on to be a feared of. That is just propaganda you have chosen not to see through.

• Pascal

 Gary, the Statist forces in the United States have been doing everything they can to hollow out the constitution which is written to limit their power in very many ways. Hence, those who want power need to undermine and ultimately cancel out the importance of the national charter of the USA.

Rove Begins the Split of the GOP

The Establishment Republicans have finally decided it's gonna be them alone without anyone else I guess. Who made Karl Rove King of the GOP?

Rove Declares War On the TEA Party.

“biggest donors in the Republican Party [coincidentally includes many of the biggest donors to the Democratic Party]” have joined forces with Karl Rove and Steven J. Law, president of American Crossroads, to create the Conservative Victory Project. ...this new group will dedicate itself to “recruit seasoned candidates and protect Senate incumbents from challenges by far-right conservatives and Tea Party enthusiasts who Republican leaders worry could complicate the party’s effort to win control of the Senate.”

If that title seems a bit raw, you ain't seen nothing yet. Here's Ace on the subject:

The Establishment Strikes Back: Rove Group To Put Money Into Protecting And Promoting Party Favorites From Tea Party Kooks.

So, the same donor group that closed ranks behind Mitt Romney and helped shut out credible challengers has decided that fresh off that success, they are ready to pick candidates for the Senate.

What could go wrong?

And if that isn't enough for you, you'll surely get your fill by listening to the first half hour of Mark Levin today.  Some excerpts

• I would tell independents and republicans and conservatives and right of center people: you are a target right now. You are target by the Republican Establishment, the RINOs [the SKUNCs] in Washington DC. Because these people really do not believe in reestablishing constitutional government. These people really don't believe in capitalism. They're leaders in the fight for crony capitalism. 
• I want you to remember that when George W Bush was president and controlled both houses of Congress for 6 of his 8 years, the Republicans in the congress and the Republican in the white house were out of control. We'd never seen spending like that in human history.... We did not take a single step in this country towards advancing free market capitalism. We did not take a single step in this country towards reestablishing constitutional government. We have to be honest with ourselves or we cannot effectively address this. [In that last sentence he sounds like me.]
•  But the worst problem right now, from a political organizing and political strategic point of view, isn't even Obama; it's the Republican Establishment -- the RINOs [the SKUNCs] -- who are trying to hold on to power. Who are trying to hold on to the largesse that they get from the growing federal leviathan.... These are the people we are up against. These are the people we are up against. [sic] ...The parasite class I call them. They no more believe in liberty and capitalism and limited government than the people we're battling.Those are platitudes for these people.
• Here we are folks, looking into the abyss; hanging on by a thread as a society. Our biggest problem is Barack Obama, and we're being stabbed in the back. Listen to the name this group assigns itself: "The Conservative Victory Project." So here's a project funded by crony capitalists, funded by corporatists, who are not conservative, funding a group called the conservative victory project. This is the sort of thing Obama does, that Marxists do. They give a name to themselves that really has nothing to do with what they're up to in order to try and control the propaganda. To position themselves. "Oh, you're against the conservative victory project." And then you have to spend ten minutes explaining why they're not the conservatives why you are. I'm just showing you how diabolical this is.

Oh, find the time to listen to the first 30 minutes or so. He is well voiced and you'll enjoy it while you learn good talking points.

Conclusion:
Add this threat to your control of the opposition party to what I published on February 1: the long-delayed news (30 years!) that the GOP deliberately has not fought to protect our votes against Democratic Party fraud. I think you have a quite enough already in the recipe for abandoning the GOP in total and moving on to the next steps with the zeal that begot the TEA Party.

Developing...

Overspecialization and Misanthropy

A blind nut finds a squirrel now and then. It looks like an observation I left at NRO yesterday rang a few bells there. So far my comment has received 7 thumbs up, and that pleases me. I have already added it to my annual Gorehog Day contempt post, but in hindsight its message deserves more than to be an add-on to some throw-away humor.

Jonah Goldberg had waxed eloquently about the movie "Groundhog Day" nearly a decade ago, and has seen fit to republish it each year on February 2. This was the first year I'd read it, and it struck me that he'd missed something I thought I should share with his audience, and as I implied above, it seems to have struck a harmonious chord there.

I could not help but notice how Goldberg's examination (as have myriad others who've discussed the movie) somehow missed out on one deeper ramification of Bill Murray's character due to him becoming so well versed in so many skills and trades and professions. Knowledge that he was compelled to learn only from all the locals for whom he had nothing but disdain before his nightmare began. There was something more there than him solely transforming from the  the soulless, smart-Alec, weatherman celebrity. The movie provided, maybe unwittingly, what may be an insight as to why someone like him could be transformed.

You might want to consider that Phil Connors has essentially become a Renaissance man by the end of the film. His postmodernist cynicism that accompanies celebrities in particular (famous for usually some specialty, or even for only being well-known) is finally vanquished by him no longer being a narrow specialist.

By engaging in depth in all those other activities, he trashes the contempt our society implies in its appellation "Jack of all trades." After he picks up all that additional depth, we see he begins to respect and love those who are now colleagues of a sort. Most noticeably supplanted is the casual contempt Phil had for others ("hicks") that so many like his former self display towards those who are not a part of ones narrow circle. That is a true love that is apparently vacant in those at the top of our contemporary world.

Those who miss or reject this additional concept really are missing the key on how it is possible to learn love of mankind. In a world where Sustainability is becoming even more worshiped than money, such an outlook offers an antidote.

Happy Gorehog Day

I may have sold Current TV so that I'm in the news again, but otherwise you won't see me declaring CAGW is not a scheme while it's cold out here.

Jonah Goldberg's retrospective on the movie "Groundhog Day" is one worth reading. I could not help but notice how Goldberg's examination (as have the myriad others who've discussed the movie) somehow missed out on one deeper ramification of Bill Murray's character due to him becoming so well versed in so many skills and trades and professions. Something more than him solely transforming from the  the soulless, smart-Alec, weatherman celebrity – by providing what may be an insight as to why he transformed.

You might want to consider that Phil Connors has essentially become a Renaissance man by the end of the film. His postmodernist cynicism that accompanies celebrities in particular (famous for usually some specialty, or even for only being well-known) is finally vanquished by him no longer being a narrow specialist.

By engaging in depth in all those other activities, he trashes the contempt our society implies in its appellation "Jack of all trades." After he picks up all that additional depth, we see he begins to respect and love those who are now colleagues of a sort. Most noticeably supplanted is the casual contempt Phil had for others ("hicks") that so many like his former self display towards those who are not a part of ones narrow circle. That is a true love that is apparently vacant in those at the top of our contemporary world.

Those who miss or reject this additional concept really are missing the key on how it is possible to learn love of mankind. In a world where Sustainability is becoming even more worshiped than money, such an outlook offers an antidote.

This Post Cost Me Over $11K

I am posting this just for those who are so cynical they believe my silence proves that I must have  come to my "senses."  No. I have still refused to file for Social Security. And no, I am not independently wealthy. What with Obama urging all sorts of people to steal from your posterity even when they never put a penny into the coffers as I have, I can only say "Thank God You have made it possible for me to take a stand for the truth."

The estimating software at the Social Security Administration site told me I had something in the neighborhood of $22xx.00 per month coming beginning on my 66th Birthday last September. I still haven't gone in to the more detailed software to find out exactly how much I am choosing not to claim. I think it is better that I don't really know.

For those who are new here and don't know my reasons for taking this stand, please click on the label below.

Voter Fraud Institutionalized

I've suspected the Republican National Committee of underhandedness, as I am sure is true of many of you.

But did you know that the RNC had entered into a consent decree with the DNC thirty years ago that the RNC would never challenge voter fraud? I didn't. I heard about this a few weeks ago, but today I remembered to look into it more. So here you go:

Why the GOP won’t challenge vote fraud.

The RNC and DNC made their Consent Decree 30 years ago, in 1982. The agreement in effect gives a carte blanche to the Democrat Party to commit vote fraud in every voting district across America that has, in the language of the Consent Decree, “a substantial proportion of racial or ethnic populations.” The term “substantial proportion” is not defined.

How many more reasons will Americans need before they recognize that the GOP has to be scrapped and replaced by something like the TEA Party, only more formalized? May God soon remove enough blinders from the eyes and stoppers from the ears of those with whom you speak.

In order to be able to begin to roll back the out of control growth of government and all the destruction it will bring to human life (and reduced quality for all, including the aristocracy), some way to bring back integrity of our votes must be accomplished. I currently leave the method of getting it done to cleverer and swifter minds than my own.

Gay Marriage + Immigration Reform = Importing Terrorists

Do I really have to spell this out for you? You can do the math on your own.

How many squishes and SKUNCs will ignore the implications of the compounding effect of these two attacks  on American Culture and sovereignty?

Try to make it an issue on talk radio and find out.

Presidential Timbre /s

Formerly leading Democratic Candidate for President

Hat tip Breitbart.

And this creature will still be spun as a top leader should the Agency of Lies continue to be unopposed in its influence.

But, then again, what is to be done about institutionalized voter fraud in the first place? Our uncreative idiots-in-charge were provided their guidance by a dead white man, Stalin: "It's not who votes that counts but who counts the votes." All our institutions have been under attack for decades and now the inmates are running the asylum.

Even more telling than this photo is this. Our current situation is so simple-minded that it suggests there is a huge vacuum of intellect at the highest reaches of power  Nature abhors a vacuum. New alliances and new leaders will step up to the opportunity at some point. Although I am an old man, I will try to help those who I perceive to be patriots in whatever manner I am capable. God help us.

The Godless: Silence Is Agreement

Two more headlines at Drudge that provide evidence that "ordinary" humans cannot trust today's rulers.

Attenborough: Humans are plague on Earth...

Japanese minister: Let elderly people 'hurry up and die'...

Find me a world leader who will excoriate these advocates and useful idiots of the death cult. Those who remain silent tell us what they will rarely admit. (The Japanese minister is an oddity)

Seek out leaders you can trust who will band you against all those who would treat you as overabundant commodities (Precautionary Principle) rather than sacred human life.

Creeps

(Please don't miss update at the bottom either. Drudge stepped it up from making the comparison implied to making it explicit. Let's see the wobbly "conservative" talk show hosts stop your comparisons now.)

Today:

LET'S PLAY TAKE THE GUNS...

'TO KEEP OUR CHILDREN SAFE'...

Yesteryear:

CBS's Schieffer Likens Obama Taking on NRA to 'Defeating the Nazis'...

And what is creepier are those who constantly invoke the so-called Godwin's Law with neither conscious thought nor conscience.  Conscious thought and conscience such as: those who would outlaw guns in private hands are aiding and abetting a police state.

Assisting this understanding is the fact that "Progressive" agenda  successes have been achieved incrementally. Incrementals. They are Incrementalists. Use that term or some term like it. They are NOT progressive,  dammit. Do not cede the moral high ground by allowing such a splendid word be used as the label for those who not only do not deserve it, but are people whose aim is repression. They are not for progress, they are for regress. They are seeking to overturn the most free nation on the Earth and consign its posterity to be subjects of some corporate-statist, or fascist, or communist, or what-have-you, repressive regime. Grow up Americans.

Well? Where are the adults? Well, not hosting the Hugh Hewitt show (where we find a SKUNC who loves to invoke Godwin whenever any comparison to Nazis is in sight).

Thanks to Matt Drudge for juxtaposing these photos today to go along with those headlines shown in the captions. With Drudge calling attention to this makes it much more difficult for wobblies like Hewitt to shout down callers who make the comparison on each issue that begs to be compared with the actions of tyrants and murderers who came to power before.

**Update**

More from Drudge, later in the same day.

FLASHBACK: Tyrants Who Have Used Children As Props...

Oh, please do click that caption even if it is a link to Alex Jones, broken clocks and all.

Heh! "I Thought You Were Smarter Than That"

1. Pascal on 13/13/13 at 11:52 pm

    

   I’ve long asserted that it’s obviously good business for those who love government to protect the criminal in a variety of ways. The more criminal activity there is, the more excuses are available to increase government power – ostensibly, of course, “to protect the public.”
    

   You now find that a Lefty rag has actually aided and abetted criminal activity, and you are shocked? I thought you were smarter than that.
   

Back last August I posted about The Most Dreadful Phrases. And today I chose to use one of those phrases when I left the above comment at JWF's Home on Journal News Gun List Burglarized, Gun Safe Targeted.

So what's the reason for my "Heh" in the post title that introduced my closing phrase in the above comment?

Because I really wasn't aiming my comment at Jammie, nor even at the state senator he quoted.

My comment "I thought you were smarter than that" was aimed at the American citizen. You who either believe that all the folks in government are well meaning public servants; or you who fail to drive the point home to family and friends that:

• everyone in public office must be kept on a short leash and never ever trusted out of our sight. 
• And as far as protecting the public goes -- remember that they will always protect themselves first until proven differently in each and every instance. 
• Previous good performance is no guarantee of future good behavior.

Furthermore. Remember the 10^th Amendment to the Constitution. That one is not solely about your rights; not that one. It actually implies you Mr. and Ms. American have a major responsibility.

You've got a call on the red phone.
The Social Contract is calling.

Thought Crime and Mental Illness -- Updated

There are way too many out there who do not know their history, even recent history.

In the Soviet Union, those who opposed or were accused of opposing or were suspected of opposing the Soviet regime would be investigated. If it pleased the apparatchik in charge, the person investigated could find himself in a mental institution overnight. Over the week; turned to months; turned to years. All due to a report of suspicions.

Remember that and pass it along in light of the following I just heard on the radio reminded me of it.
Mark Taylor sitting in for Dennis Prager, reported that Obama was planning a crack down on firearms via executive order. And that in that plan it was rumored (from "credible sources" he said) that Obama would include "'suspected' of being mentally unsound" as justification for seizing guns (particularly from vets).  That being the case, nobody will be safe.

'being charged with it is all it will take for the Feds to swoop in, kick down the walls looking for firearms... Obama's executive order would be acted upon if you are charged with being unsound by anyone: your ex; the neighbor who is feuding with you; an employee you fire. And on that pretext they will be knocking on your door. That's the word we have.' -- Mark Taylor:

Be accused of behaving in an unstable manner and be accused of being in possession of firearms and....

What more do I need to say? How about: remember the title of this post.

• Be in opposition to the ever enlarging federal government  
• ➤ be suspected of thought crime.
• ➤ be accused of being mentally unstable. 
• ➤ expect a loud knock on the door in the wee small hours.

That is history. Work at keeping it from being repeated. The pile of skulls wrought by all the little criminals and all the little lunatics combined is insignificant compared to the pile of any one of the police states of the last century.

**UPDATE**
An afterthought.
Police state:

a political unit characterized by repressive governmental control of political, economic, and social life usually by an arbitrary exercise of power by police and especially secret police in place of regular operation of administrative and judicial organs of the government according to publicly known legal procedures.

I do not know why the definitions do not all note that a police state is impossible when anyone else but the authorities have weapons, but it ought to be clear enough. As even Mao, the tyrant who murdered the most subjects (to date), confessed, "All power grows out of the barrel of a gun."

As a matter for tactical consideration, I'd say it's long passed time our side of the battle consistently called out the other side for its craving for a police state.

M³

KG at Crusader Rabbit brings to our attention an editorial in a print tabloid that I think needed to be posted decades ago but for the fact that nobody wanted to believe there really are people who hate the human race and individualists in particular.  The following is how 'Fight for your life today' begins.

Today is the day to fight for your life. Within weeks, proposed laws will be decided that would destroy your ability to protect your family from predators, including criminals, and, especially, the political wolves who can force you to live, or die, on their terms....

Finally understand that gun control is only one aspect of the great threat.

We see misanthropes every day. In fact there are times that our fellow man is such a PITA that just about everyone feels the same inclinations until our better angels take hold.

And we all know Malthusian Greenies. Regular readers have seen the 10-10 No Pressure video, and that was only suggestive. See, now even mainstream TV dramas have used serial murderers who justified their killings with reference to such extreme Green rationales (viz.: see the Blue Bloods episode of Friday Jan 4 Fathers and Sons). When finally caught and subdued, the killer boasts "future generations will declare me a hero."

Startling and uneasy maybe, but only fiction you say? Then you are not paying attention to who is holding sway in Washington DC. When these two aspects, misanthropy and Malthusian true belief, are found mixed together in those who have significant influence at the highest levels of power (such as Obama’s science Czar John Holdren) then our danger from megalomania is no longer far fetched.

Megalomaniacal Malthusian Misanthropes even sounds clownish to me. Nevertheless it is hard not to see that both Holdren and Zeke Emanuel (Yes, the Godfather's brother) and their unseen promoters fit such a term quite well.

Given the proles created by our edukation systems, I don’t expect 99% to understand what any of those words mean.

But maybe the symbol M³, or the term M cubed could be inserted into common parlance. For instance referring to the threat of M cubed. Clearly I’m no PR guy, so what do I know — other than the threat is quite real and looming.

**Update**
A reader asked me to clarify this post. I think he was correct. I came back and italicizes the three M words when I first mentioned them, and highlighted them when I linked them. Now what is meant by M³ should be clearer.

Illogical Fear of Guns and Eloi

I left a comment at Joan of Argghh!'s "Gun Control And Sex Education." It was my reaction to several well-spoken who had tried logic to enlighten a strange new visitor. See, that visitor left a comment that was rather remarkable in its lack of understanding about inequalities in brute strength, as well as choices and consequences and responsibilities to ensure one can deal with brutes. In fact it revealed a rather childish understanding of how the world works historically and its threats. Eloi like.

So rather than respond to the Eloi directly I addressed a short diagnosis to Joan that I was certain she would understand. Since it was an open letter, it is also my hope that my words would also alleviate the frustrations of the other commenters who had tried to enlighten the Eloi using logical arguments.

pascal on January 2, 2013 at 6:13 pm said:
Joan. I see an Eloi dropped by.

Logic and the childish mind do not a good fit make. It has been lulled into believing the government is filled with nicy-nice grown-ups. They can always be relied on for protection and could never ever be hiding any Mao monsters, whatever that is supposed to mean. Repeating in its little head is a loop: “Guns in the hands of govt: GOOD; guns in the hands of individuals — BAD.”

This Eloi brings to mind that wonderful line from one of Og’s commenters: “Those who know their history are condemned to watch those who don’t, repeat it.” - DaveK

I really do hope my comment plays well with the other commenters who tried to reason with the man-child. It identified itself as not being American. I wonder if its another Canuck like my Toronto Troll who, despite repeated requests to stop, insisted on inserting antigun diatribes in old posts that had nothing to do with guns. Whatever the case with this particular Eloi, I empathize with those who try to drill through thick skulls and discover a dry well.

Knuckling Under to the Grating Dictator and His Lying Media

What was the point of struggling over the spending bill in the House of Representatives all these months if Boehner knew he was going to capitulate to the Senate spending bill without so much as a single alteration in conference committee?

So all that rushing around and gnashing of teeth in what was meant to be his attempt at finding compromise was only loads of melodramatic theater?

All the hoopla over what the Speaker of the House was going to demand in spending reductions and allow in tax increases was only a very thin smoke screen?
Demands from a limp noodle?
Allow from a spineless dolt?

Dear God give me a bigger platform so I can tell my fellow Americans what my grandfather said in the 1950s when the unprincipled government growing assholes were only beginning to make their move.

"The American people are so gullible and eager to be misled that should a demagogue come to power here, he'll make Hitler look like a piker."  -- Gpa Fervor, circa 1955

I am sick to my heart that so many many Americans are STILL unwilling to discuss out loud how our election process has been totally invalidated by the Statist schemers. The ruling class has won and you still refuse to acknowledge it.

What Is A RINO?

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

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

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

What is to be done? Read on.

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

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

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

So what is to be done? Read on.

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

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

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

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

A couple of years ago this blog sponsored a contest. Reader Guy S came up with a new acronym.

SKUNC. 

There are a number of underlying words which fit the people to whom RINO has no impact upon and is indeed unfitting given their degree of violating their oath of office to defend and protect the Constitution.

Statist Knowingly Undermining National Charters
Statist Kneeling to United Nations Control 

(Both of these definitions fit the actions of politicians all over the world, but notoriously those in Western nations, especially the pretenders in the former British Commonwealth countries.)

Also there are the support personnel in the arts and education and the media (the Agency of Lies). These groups have been taken over through the relentless use of Critical Theory out of the Marxist Frankfurt School. The Verona papers and KGB defectors told us that long ago, but since our media and  educational establishment was already infiltrated, most of our fellow citizens are still unaware, and even worse, are unwitting and uncaring victims of it. The term SKUNC applied to these perpetrators means:

Statist Knowingly Undermining National Cultures.

So do yourself and your nation a favor and stop using RINO when referring to those who have gone so far off the reservation that there is clearly not a sign of patriotism left in them. They are SKUNCs.

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

Additional words for which SKUNC is a good acronym

Statists Knowingly Undermining our Nation's Constitution (Justices, Congress-critters, and Presidents.)
Stooges Konniving to Unhinge National Consciousness (the Statists' useful idiots in the Soviet-Style Media (SSM) in particular.)

Denying Human Life Its Holy Imprimatur

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

I've been warning of this for ages, but now Drudge headlines the advancing avalanche that has been mockingly called a slippery slope.

Belgium looks at euthanasia for minors, Alzheimer's sufferers...

France considers 'accelerated deaths'...

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

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

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

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

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


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

Pascal Fervor's Razor

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

It has become habitual for people who notice that our culture has been staggering off its pins, step by step, due to Marxist aggression aided and abetted by the Agency of Lies, to say something like the following.

I've noticed that starting in the late 90's, many elements of "new age" belief systems started mapping pretty closely to the melange of stuff that one finds floating around in the collective heads of the progressivoeftist cluster.

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

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

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

But then there are our ostensible leaders of the opposition to Statism.

People are always telling me what so and so wants to do and why he wants to do it. And I say look: I can’t look into a man’s heart. I can’t peer into his soul. I have no idea why he’s trying to do what he’s doing. All I can evaluate are the results. All I can evaluate is the output of his behavior. Whether he intends it to come out that way or doesn’t intend it to come out that way is immaterial. My obligation is the same: to defend the republic.— Scott Ott in the video that asks "Is the looming economic destruction of America deliberate?"

I cry horseshit. This is akin to the definition of insanity: doing the same thing over again and expecting a different result. It’s the same SKUNC line about not behaving like the Left who calls us names without foundation, so therefore we shouldn't even when we have good reason. (It is as if nobody ever taught us that silence will be understood to be agreement. Arrgghhhh.)

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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