Shameless Sus High Priest

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

Would You Buy a Pig In a Poke?

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

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

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

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

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

BELIEF In Sustainability: Sneakily Violating Our Constitution

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

More anon.

But, But, That's Impossible!

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

Fly in the Ointment

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

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

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

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

Speaking of Firsts

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

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

In Need of a BS Cutter?

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

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

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

--- Copyright Pascal Fervor, 2013.

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


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

Sad Dumb Eloi

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

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

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

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

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

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

New Feed Reader Bleg

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

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

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

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

Most Traitorous SSM (Soviet-Style Media) Gambit Yet

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

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

AP: Sources have stopped talking...

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

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

WHY ARE THEY DOING THIS NOW?

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

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

I think what they want ignored most is Amnesty.

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

"They Make the Law"

The Jeopardy Category is FASCISM

The Final Jeopardy Answer is "They Make the Law"

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

(The correct response is below the break)

It's All In the Cards

First the shorter version of this analysis.

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

He's right of course.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Proofs It Is Happening Here

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Headline 2. Rewriting the Past
excerpt:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Skirting Godwin at AoSHQ: No Smoking Gun

Really.

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

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

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

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

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

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

"Watcha gonna do about it punk?"

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

Conspiracies

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

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

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

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

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

We Laughed With Sgt Schultz

I've a question to ask FBI Director Mueller:

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

A Cassandra In Denial of His Own Vision?

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

Sort of a twofer:

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

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

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

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

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

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

No reply yet.

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

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

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

Liartime

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

Busted: Washington Post Stealth Edits PRISM Story

It's gotten to be habitual.

Statist Tools: Plan B

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Why Is This The Soviet Style Media?

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

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

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

Hat tip JWF.

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

Traitors: You will be remembered.

I Am Honored and Grateful

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

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

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

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

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

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

What Date Do You Want In the Pool?

Holy Congressional sanctity Batman.




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

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

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

The Sus Nuts Behind ObamaCare

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.