Despite the alleged separation of church and state, BELIEF in Sustainability is widely held in American secular government. Judeo-Christian moral guidelines have been incrementally supplanted by what can best be described as neo-pagan ones. Consequently, notice where rulers never utter a harsh word against Malthusian, Utilitarian, Green and Islamistophilic nutcases. There the ruled are at grave risk.
YESS!
It needed saying and it needs to be repeated, again and again.
Returning to live in NZ, I’m surprised most by two things:
The widespread anger and resentment at the special treatment and
privileges maori are afforded, and how afraid people are of speaking
openly on the subject.
It really is quite palpable now, isn’t
it? For a long time our political elites have fanned the flames of
division and discontent, and yet they now seem surprised at the level of
discontent they’ve fostered.
The writers and editors at Breitbart.com surely know that human remains are called corpses and not carcasses. It would appear that they are trying to convince the creeps in this world that they agree with them: that all humans are no different than animals.
That there was nobody at the website with the humanity of Andrew Breitbart is evident in that they do not employ a headline editor who would prevent such a disgusting headline.
I submit this as proof of the problem I keep warning about all our commercial media outlets.
Unless more people take notice and insist on decency, your silence will encourage more indecency! And when it's done by our media, the damaging effects are multiplied.
It's even more appalling that only one reader thumbed-up my comment about this headline.
Though I've explained to a large number of people (some of you readers offline) how the soviet-style media (SSM) was the biggest villain in Ferguson Missouri from the start, I've got to commend Daniel Greenfield for exposing how the villainy goes further back than that. Very long indeed.
Communists realized how useful race riots and the authoritarian backlash
could be to their agenda. Terrorists don't just aim for the target;
they also exploit the fallout to polarize a society.
That is what the left has been doing for generations since.
Everything from the Weathermen to September 11 became a means of
polarizing the response while removing the context. The left plants the
bombs and then acts as if the security men running around are insane
fascists who could have no other possible motive except abusing innocent
people.
Ferguson is more of the same. The left's army of activists and reporters
troop down to the city. The activists start the violence while the
reporters dramatize it. The coverage polarizes Americans and gives the
left another hook for hanging on to power long after its economic
policies have been as thoroughly discredited as those of the Soviet
Union.
Law enforcement is an immune system. If we have an overdeveloped and
oversensitive immune system, that's worth discussing, but it has to be
discussed in the context of the infection it is reacting to. Until we
treat the infection of the left, the country will be caught in the same
cycle of crime and authoritarian backlash, liberals who open the door
for criminals and conservatives who slam it shut.
--- Hands Up, Don't Loot
Read the whole thing.
The Progs, from their 1800s start, labeled all who would react to their destabilizing as Reactionaries. That was even before their first attacks began. Mr. Greenfield never says that explicitly, but it is there as his underlying theme.
What is more, now that the Left has so thoroughly infiltrated our institutions, it is they who are the Reactionaries. It is so because they wish to conserve their incrementally gained, unconstitutional powers. Their DHS has designated TEA Party affiliation and returning veterans as primary terrorist concerns precisely because they fear we the people as we attempt to regain some sanity and order not just for ourselves, but for the sake of our posterity.
As each individual encounters and bridles at the checks on our once taken for granted liberties, then it may be more common to see groups form to challenge their authoritarianism on one or more fronts. Then watch as the militarized responses are used against native born Americans and not our border crashers -- because it is the decent, hard-working people (and not any of the FSA) who are a threat to the Left's unconstitutional power.
This all needed to be said because whatever has happened and will happen, would not have happened to such an extent but for the villainy of the media.
What with all the special powers granted it in our constitution, it is that institution which needed to be on guard for excessive power grabs.
Instead it lauds it and has become a vital part in advancing that crime. Hampering other watchdogs, discouraging real justice by assisting those who invented the fallacy of "social justice," and inducing societal decadence by parading in front of its audience uncountable varieties of flamboyant indecencies.
Each of those affronts has made media strongly complicit in and essential to our societal decay. This all was essential in the Left's attack on American culture, and the media in all its forms provided the means and developed the programs for the attack. That is how our soviet-style media became the biggest villain, not just in Ferguson which makes their role all the more noticeable, but for so much more.
Help me end the use of the acronym RINO. Rhinos are tough.
SKUNCs (Stooges keep undermining national constitutionalists) is the kind of label any designee or his potential voters will find hard to misunderstand as a compliment.
If you think the answer is "they work for the American citizen," I would offer to sell you a bridge, but you've already bought too many.
The opening headline is Drudge's of course.
And I don't think most people reading it see in it any inkling as readers of this blog know how I read it. The megalomaniacs are bragging. And goading the goad-able. And thinking their time to crack down is nigh.
My advice to you today is not what it would have been 30 years ago. Trust in G-d, cause there are no men currently in power who give a rat's butt less value than yours.
When one is living the consequences of Godwin's Curse1, adherents to Godwin's Law2 will then know what desperation really means.
1Godwin's Curse There will be a point in time where events have so deteriorated that the value of any comparative arguments, such as how similar behavior led to the same repercussions, will be moot. 2Godwin's Law in short asserts Mentioning Hitler or Nazi for any reason in support of an argument implicitly categorizes the speaker as desperate.
Godwin's Law in short asserts that mentioning of Hitler for any reason in support of an argument implicitly categorizes the speaker as desperate.
I don't care who Godwin was or that he is credited with this assertion. However I will credit him with the curse since his attitude will have helped trends to continue.
Godwin's Curse:
There will be a point in time where events have so deteriorated that the
value of any comparative arguments, such as how similar behavior led to
the same repercussions, will be moot.
[**Updated** to include the corollary:
When one is living the consequences of Godwin's Curse, adherents to Godwin's Law will then know what desperation really means.]
I will have you know that this video helped, especailly at 30 seconds in, helped me recognize this curse.
Someone please list and point to places where Bill Whittle has called out RINOs SKUNCs for their back-stabbing and anti-constitutional ways of their own?
Undoubtedly Whittle keeps showing us superbly how badly we are being served. I think he does so better than anyone else except, on some occasions, his pal Andrew Klavan.
See, this is what worries me about Whittle. I cannot quite shake the feeling that he is frequently laughing at Americans who are less well-connected than is he.
The Environmental Protection Agency has quietly claimed that it has the
authority to unilaterally garnish the wages of individuals who have been
accused of violating its rules. Source
(h/t FoxNews)
A thieving, gobbling, ruthless Leviathan.
Let us put aside a number of items in the Bill of Rights that basically codifies basic human rights. Rights that say we should be left safe and secure in our effects except after due process, and even then without outrageous fining.
Instead, let us move on to the list of particular grievances in another American document of some significance:
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.
You can be sure that Leviathan knows of this sentence and where it originated. Could it be goading its targets? That is a rhetorical question.
It is not yet July 14. But I highly suspect that is what Leviathan seeks. That has always been the Leftist goal no matter that the Leftist is often consumed, as was Robespierre, by the very excesses he unleashes upon the world.
The Left are lunatics. What are you?
****Update****
Speaking of being goaded. What do you make of this layout at the top of Drudge at 8:49AM PST July 9, 2014?
What is startling it that it took a Congressman to say it. It confounds me that the most blogs continue to use MSM instead of SSM (Soviet-Style Media or some other fitting equivalent).
This headline was published by Jammie Wearing Fool. Now, Jammie is mostly a news and opinion aggregator, so many of his headlines are going to be repeats of what others publish. Nevertheless, why should such a statement seem controversial to him? Because he knows that an unwritten law has been breached? One about what is and is not acceptable in polite salons? Maybe.
I get the feeling that many blogs are afraid of being labeled impolite or impolitic: too radical if they make such value assessments such as affixing labels to poorly functioning mainstream institutions.
How in the name of sanity can anything ever be reformed when glaring malfeasance of one of our important mainstream institutions are not openly criticized?
I know from experience that your humble author is hardly more insightful than other human beings. Privately I find ready agreement that, indeed, our news organizations are delivering propaganda that would have made Pravda blush. IOW, it's an observation that should long ago have become mainstream.
So why is it necessary for a news-maker -- in this instance a Congressman -- to break the ice before other blogs repeat the accurate labeling of our news media? Hell, will they even repeat that label now? I have my doubts.
And this highlights something you should find even more troubling.
When things get so out of hand that it takes a Congress critter to say something that should long ago have become mainstream, but is now published as a headline because it is seen as "controversial," then it may indicate that we as a "free" people are long ago permanently enslaved. If you are too afraid to say what is obvious to a fool such as your humble author, what chance is there that you will have the courage and insights needed to defend your liberty when all Hell breaks loose?
A liberal friend on becoming cognizant of real news:
"...the conditions of these youngsters from Central America who have been shipped one way or another North (media still silent on such details and seems not likely to investigate further) to be shoved across our borders. An organized invasion. I don't think it would be going too far to call it a warped update of the Children's Crusade. What is going on here?"
I suggested, "I think the word you are looking for, to hang on all this, may be Exploitation."
And a fire lit in her eyes.
Please welcome the newest member of the growing resistance to DC.
You too may have one budding near you.
Just be open to him and primed to offer just the right word.
I would have titled this "How Really to Sue an Imperial President," but blogger doesn't permit italics up there. And I mean Really! As in: distinctly different from the posturing gesture made by John Boehner this week.
Short rundown first.
On
Wednesday's show, Mark Levin spoke about John Boehner saying he was
going to sue Obama for failing to faithfully execute the laws passed by
Congress in violation of his oath of office.
Mr. Levin
said that Cong. Boehner likely would not be granted standing. That he wished
it were different, but that the bar would be very hard to overcome.
Upon hearing that, I
recalled that in 1997, shortly after Pres. Bill Clinton signed the line item
veto that Congress had passed, Sen. Robert Byrd had immediately filed suit to
stop it. I did not recall the details, but it is a fact that shortly thereafter the line
item veto was indeed overturned by the Supreme Court as
unconstitutional.
So the next day, while Mr. Levin was in his monologue about why the SCOTUS ruling about the appointments clause was a Trojan Horse, I called his show to ask him if there was not something to be learned in the line item veto case about how to sue the President successfully for his extra-constitutional legislating.
The first clip was my laying the premise in order to get to the idea. He corrects a key
mistaken assumption I had made, but he then patiently goes on to let me finally get my
point
across -- How was the line-item veto overturned and what can you learn
from that?
I must say it was very gratifying for me to have him respond so well once my idea hit home.
Especially so because there was a moment there where I was afraid I was going to blow my chance to get my point across.
And I am particularly grateful to Ed Bonderenka for extracting the clips from the full podcast so I could present them in this shortened form.
Milbank just made up his anecdote about Gabriel "demanding" to know if
the young woman was American. What Gabriel really said was, "I assume
you're an American." After the studens says that she is, Gabriel says,
"I'm glad you're here." She then goes on to make a point about how she
wishes people would worry more about the government's response to the
Benghazi attacks than how many peaceful Muslims there are in the world.
Please RTWT.
Back? See, that didn't take long.
Note John Nolte's bottom line.
"The real question is: Where are the Washington Post fact checkers? Where
are Milbank's editors? A major newspaper publishing this kind of smear
is beyond bias; it's indecent."
Indecent? That is understating the behavior by a long shot in my opinion.
That's why I posted this as my first of many examples of Soviet style behavior in the Izvestia and Pravda's of our time and in this country.
Readers are requested to send in additional examples of outright lying, dissembling and disingenuous reporting by the SSM.* Feel free to use my comment stream or my email. I intend to keep a record of them here under my label Agency of Lies and my new SSM label.
----------
*SSM is the acronym for Soviet-Style Media.
Readers know that over the years my terms for what most still call MSM have evolved. IIRC it began with Lamestream Media, then the Orwellian Ministry of Truth and Minitrue, to Ministry of Lies, to Agency of Lies (AoL) to Soviet-Style Media.
I was delighted before I darkly considered what higher courts are likely to next do. This feeling of sanity does not need to be short lived. Still, you understand that the war is not nearly won.
What YOU have to say on the matter can affect 5 or more of those black robed pretenders if you so desire. Maybe one of you can figure out how to do it and then do it.
How can there remain any doubt that the GOPe is currently playing for the side that wants to sustain all recent violations of our Constitution's limits on governmental power? They are doing whatever it takes to keep the Prog agenda moving Forward. Provided is significant evidence that the GOPe plays a central role all or part of advancing the Progressive movement. Readers are provided examples on how to observe and assess new evidence and add it to the growing list on how real opposition to Leviathan is being not just marginalized, but steam-rolled.
The GOPe appears to have dropped all its facade as the leadership of the "opposition party" with its efforts to keep Thad Cochran as U.S. Senator from Mississippi.
And he was certainly not the first, and he is clearly was not breaking new ground. Only the latest and more open. Just last week we had another example.
Who can be surprised at this point? It is simply par for the course when you understand what a kabuki theater postmodern American "adversarial" politics has become.
The GOPe is extremely consistent. They play at being stern with the Dems, but reserve their real venom for conservatives who stand for principles. This Politico headline GOP establishment backs Thad Cochran gives no hint how hard they are playing, but the story at the link is much more clear on the matter:
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell bragged at an event Tuesday night that it was the “biggest fundraiser ever in this building” — a feat considering the building is the National Republican Senatorial Committee.
Look. None of us oldsters, who witnessed in our youth how constitutional conservatives railed against the "country club" Republicans, and who also know some older American history, should be surprised.
The Progressive movement began in the GOP. Understand how the Progs engineered their spread to the Democrats? It was Prog Teddy Roosevelt's Bull Moose run that split the vote against sitting GOP President William Howard Taft in 1912 to give us disastrous and tyrannical Prog Dem President Woodrow Wilson.
If the voters of Mississippi, including many Democrats who don't like Washington telling them what to do, lets Cochran pleas to Dem voters succeed at stealing the primary run-off from Chris McDaniel and legitimate Republican voters, then they are indeed the dunces that much of the world laughs at.
However, the rest of America should not be too smug either.
If Americans as a whole do not yet recognize how the Dems and the GOPe make up a combined party of power-mad Statist, then maybe it is time that the schemers succeed in erasing our liberty. We are either too stupid or willfully ignorant to put together the flaming evidence and understand how successful has been the subterfuge of this Statist juggernaut with their Leftist shock troops and Soviet-style media.
The above cartoon was first published in 2002. The knibbling at the edges has gone on for so long, what is left of our constitution today? Who is gonna impeach the Constitution violator in chief?
Haven't we let the SKUNCs win?
As for you arrogant bastards at the top: you may not care that you will eventually answer to a Higher Authority, but those of us who cherish what it is you are destroying do care for those whose life you seek to make a living Hell.
And so some of us pray that He makes you who know full well what you are doing to suffer for your hubris in this life while forgiving us our seeming inadequacies.
Me: As you can tell from my comments tonight, I really appreciated what you said last night.
Bob: Thanks. The audience response was relieving. Sometimes you wonder "what's the use?" Too bad so few others got to speak on point.
Me: Yes. Come to think of it, could you hear what Adam [in the audience facing the moderator and far to my right] said last night? He spoke at length on possible solutions. But without a mic it was hard to hear and I thought I heard him hit on some great points. Too bad he's not here tonight.
Bob: Yeah, I like Adam. He's a good man. But I was too far behind and I couldn't hear his comments at all.
Me: Too bad he wasn't as easy to hear as you are. I guess it didn't help that he was chewing gum. I'm sure it made it hard for him to project besides muffling his voice.
Bob: [Laughs.] At least he didn't do it on the podium like President Obama did at the D-Day celebration. For someone with so many handlers you'd think they'd have helped keep him from making that mistake.
Me: After so many "mistakes" you have to begin to think some of these things are deliberate.
Bob: I'm sorry, I can't believe in conspiracies.
Me: [snicker] What does conspiracy have to do with observing someone choosing repeatedly to behave boorishly for G-d know how many reasons?
Bob: I'm sorry, I can't believe in conspiracies.
I could not help how quickly Bob connected a local man's gum-chewing to Obama's widely noticed display of it at Normandy suggested his disinterest or even contempt (as Head of State) for the event being commemorated.
So it clearly was on his mind. My guess is that it had already occurred to him that Obama was maybe bored at the least, and possibly even contemptuous. But he didn't like where that thought took him, so he discarded it.
His giving me such a quick and seemingly unrelated response suggests where he thought such thinking leads, and he engaged in double-think. "oh, it's a mistake that his handlers screwed up on." And he was also advising me, in a stern but friendly way, that it was best that I not think about it too much either.
Have any of you run into this sort of thing much? I mean, being a President can't rule out that boorish behavior is not deliberate. Cavalier at best. And there is nothing stopping ones motives from being much worse. And any rate, I think I spotted a fatal tic in Bob. LOL
We have all heard the line "too big to fail" in regards economics.
Now consider those words when wondering why Obama is effectively safe from impeachment, and -- well -- you know that house of cards metaphor for our financial situation? Think of that as regards the advanced decay of our republic.
is a war on humanity itself. Turn the table on the Progs. You who hold
human life as sacred own the moral high ground in this at least. Act
like you know you own it.
The point of this post was to get the pun out there.
Think about it. Understand all the implications. There is an ancient
meme that connects woman to womb-man because it encompasses a role in
which only woman may engage. Those who hate humanity (or fear it) have
long sought to expunge as much as possible thoughts of providing another
womb. Hence, the war on womb-man.
The above headline is a fantasy, as it could never be uttered by the guilt-ridden speakers.
However dear readers, this fictitious headline is a more fitting response by parents who were truly regretful of their son's rampage yesterday. Instead we read their chutzpah headline garnered to generate sympathy from their like-minded Leftist friends:
The story of how the film-maker father was envied by the son and the father did nothing to rectify it is not the headline. Nor is the fact that the sire provided his monster the opportunity to stab to death three of his friends before striking four others with his car was not even in the man's thoughts. But calling for gun control was.
But before I could finish the explanation of the take-down of 'the esteemed" Paul Krugman I was awash with ennui. If that is the right label for the emotion. I'm not sure that ennui even comes close to the disgust I felt about wasting good logic on a complete hack like Krugman; or on any of the Progs that Krug fittingly represents. Self-satisfied, arrogant with not a scintilla of humility, and apparently paid well to provide red-herrings to opponents of Statism when they might otherwise be contemplating ways to effectively eliminating the tyrants.
The otherwise fine job that Ace and, if he's correct in his assessment, that Dan Kahan have attempted proves why writing about the bums and their pretenses is a complete waste of time. In my opinion the bums know they are wrong and it's simply their job to tie sane people up in knots attempting to demonstrate why the clowns are -- if one wishes to more accurately describe them -- well-paid liars.
After over two months of not writing a single word for this blog I think this bit might provide you an explanation as to why.
It is my opinion that committing murder or advocating commiting murder will not solve a thing. In fact it would only exacerbate our woes. However, I would find it hard to denounce people who feel that way today, even to my Maker. That our despots wish us to be thinking like that only further suggests that they may deserve to meet such an end so as to prevent the destruction of so many more people who are relatively innocent. I call myself agnostic only because I do not KNOW My Maker intimately. That He made the world work as it does -- beyond human calculation to make things happen that cannot happen -- I take wholly on faith. And it is because of that faith that I know -- I am NOT agnostic on this -- that today's tyrants seek the destruction of billions of people and the subjugation of the remnant.
In part I know this from the more complex evidence like that of the masthead above. But I know it even more from the tyrants' claims to be doing things that they could never ever do (e.g., 2+2 ≠ 5) but constantly lie that they are doing. This is wrong and leads to disaster and needs to be ended, but it is something that one mere man cannot bring an end to on his own.
I pray daily that He will achieve it much in the manner that Pharaoh was dealt with. Let His wrath pass over the decent human beings and fall on those who deserve it. It's a lot to ask of He with Whom I have no intimate contact; may it be enough that I ask it not for me.
I've posted my recollection of this speech before. Too many establishment Republicans, including so-called friends of Ronald Reagan, apparently don't want the American people to hear this revised version of Reagan's 1964 stump speech.
On this 103rd anniversary of Ronald Reagans birthday, I am offering Internet readers a bonus.
Provide the world with the actual speech and transcript and details of where and when it was given, and I will gratefully provide you with a two hundred dollar bounty. And what is left of the free world too will be grateful too since it will demonstrate how the establishment so hated Reagan that they have been hiding it.
The following, published last year, should provide you with enough information to unearth this buried speech..
Ronald Reagan's Political Model
Today Is the 102nd 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.
After you have finished reading my last post Statist Tools: Compliant Media Editing, I'd like you to consider the possibilities of the reaction at the Holder DOJ to this headline.
Q: What do you suppose will be Eric Holder's first response should any of those political ads be critical of his boss, the Bummer?
A: Anti-trust indictment here we come!
Then there is this in the text of the headlined story:
"Dish and DirecTV said they would consider partnering with cable companies if it means they can reach a larger base."
Q: In the unlikely event that all those subscription services suddenly begin acting as if larger government is a bad thing (when you stop laughing...), what will the SSM be calling such an agreement?
A: An anti-American conspiracy in dire need of eradication.
What has happened to America? Look deeply into your mirror.
It is clear that those at the top of the influence peddling pyramid know full well that what I'm relating here is obvious to just about every American who is willing to pay attention. So it only goes to prove that you creeps at the top are seeking to provoke a reaction from one or more hotheads so your fascist preparations can finally begin in earnest. What you are ignoring at your own risk is there are many people who understand the dangerous game you are playing and may be even more ruthless than you. The next member of your cadre who dies prematurely in all likelihood will not be due to natural causes. But there will be no evidence to the contrary other than whatever your bunko agents try to invent. Think Andrew Breitbart. You may currently believe that your worst fear is what will happen if you cross your other club members. Reality can prove you wrong. Think about repenting while you still have time.
Two days before the State of the Union speech to be delivered by the President of the United States, that same president was charged with abuse of power by a news-making senator.
It was the kind of statement that news organizations once craved because such controversy helped them sell interest in their shows and gain them revenue.
But what would one expect from a "news" organization whose purpose was not to gin up interest in its shows but rather to promote another agenda even apparently more important than their revenue generated by viewership? You'd expect them to edit out the controversy.
Well, here are the facts of two videos. (You may want to save this page so you will have a record when the originals are dumped down the memory hole.) The first is what was extracted by CBS's Face the Nation when Bob Shieffer interviewed Senator Ted Cruz on Sunday Jan 26 2104.
What was edited out.
What was aired instead.
[Hmmm. The MRC embed code is strangely being ignored by Bloogger. Here it is with the brackets disabled with spaces so maybe you can use it: < iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="270" src="http://www.mrctv.org/embed/125154" title="MRC TV video player" width="480" >< /iframe >]
(Well maybe Newsbusters will be able to keep its version alive and safe of the memory hole for a while, so here is the link to them: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/jeffrey-meyer/2014/01/26/face-nation-edits-out-senator-cruz-condemning-obama-s-abuse-power#ixzz2rZ167RcB )
It is blatantly obvious that CBS is trying to shield President Obama 2 days before his big speech. It, like Pravda and Izvestia before it, knows no shame when it comes to marching to the demands of the Party. MSM continues to live up to the Soviet-Style Media label. I do not recall what the major news organ was for the Nazis, but I'm sure it was little different from the Soviets, only it lived a shorter time.
An SSM living a shorter time. Has a nice ring to it, no?
I’ve been tweeting variations of this line at each CAGW related story in the hopes that many others begin to repeat its essence.
Marginalize the marginalizers. Rent seekers co-opting science to coerce consensus via expulsion are NOT scientists.
Others will repeat this sort of message until there will be no place you clowns
go where your audience has not heard it.
We will pile the ridicule high enough
and so that even the most brainless rent seekers among you will look for safer pickings. You will help
bring sanity and adults back to proper prominence or you will lose to a Higher authority.
Just when you think a format has run its course, someone finds a way to reinject new life into it. I will not make you any promises, but I found the What would Mawson do? segment hilarious.
If it so moves you, for extended chuckles you will find a copy of the screenplay of the Mawson segment below the break.
----------------------------------
The distinctions as laid down by Angelo Codevilla a few years ago
will become all the more contrasted this Happy New Yeah.
I suspect it
must be in pursuit of evermore elusive sexual kicks that you hoity-toity
experience* from knowing that your policies are killing us hoi polloi.
I have met you people. Any claims you make that your actions are in
pursuit of the public good would be laughable were the results not so
deadly.
————————
*Even greater kicks than disgraced former prosecutor and governor Elliot Spitzer got from play-strangling his hookers.
His actions were mostly fantasy/play while the actions of you ever more
brazen Ruling Class cretins are resulting in the real thing. And I think you still consider him one of you. You really have no normal sense of shame do you?
Given
all the muck you helped create and that you love to wallow in, I know
that whenever the option occurs to you, you see it would be a shame for
you to leave it. But leave it you must if there is any hope remaining
for you to save your soul.
I had just completed some work on my house that required me to climb around on a ladder for several hours. And it fatigued me quite a bit; particularly my lower legs.
I remarked to a friend. "Ya know, my poor granddad was climbing around on those things until he was almost 70. I don't know how he did it." Of course he did it for a living and I just do it as needed. But still.
The American public is far less Statist than our Soviet-style Media wants us to believe. Hence the relentless propaganda against the TEA Party movement as far Right.
But SSM never even hints, let alone admits, how far Left the Dem Party (and itself) is today.
Meanwhile the GOP is filled with liberal Statists who would rather see a GOP candidate lose to a Dem than let any additional TEA party types win and thus have a chance to form a true anti-Statist party.
Bottom line is that too much of the GOP hierarchy are Progs throwing plays to serve the other team. They do it because Dem views and moneyed interests are much closer to their own hoity-toity position than the position of us members of what they call the hoi polloi (when they aren't calling us racist, homophobes or xenophobles; and it is only a matter of time before they are dehumanizing us as Goebbals did Jews).
This headline may not be a complete lie, but it is misleading. If the GOP remains obstructed because too many Karl Rove type picks get elected, we will only see more govt growth from maneuvers where the Hastert rule is ignored or the filibuster gets gutted without consequence.
Thus Dem losses in 2014 are not enough to turn things around. God help us.
The latest scion of one of America's most powerful political dynasties is trying to convince voters he's something other than what his famous surname suggests.
Right! /s
Recall that W told us he was more like Reagan than his dad.
How did that work out? Well, why not let W demonstrate.
[This is his notorious "Fool me once...." faux pas.]
Had W kept his word and governed like Reagan in most every other way, who thinks we would now be facing what we are today?
(BTW. Who thinks being like Newt sharing-the-couch-with-Pelosi Gingrich is a good thing?)
Regular readers know that I've been waging a campaign for new media to habitually label the Obama endorsing and protecting Mainstream Media (MSM) as Soviet-Style Media (SSM).
But now the media, itself recognizing that my charges against them are warranted, has decided to use the term Soviet-style as it sees fit. By applying the attribute to others they hope to avoid having the label applied to themselves.
Well, I hope you all understand my frustration here. With the notable exception of Nemesis, nobody else has taken on the media for their Soviet-style behavior by that name.
Ok, here's the evidence, both appearing today.
First Mark Levin (frequently a TEA Party supporter, but hardly one of us) tweeted his facebook entry (with the fb extra length included in brackets):
Even government radio is frustrated with government propaganda. Obama manages the press the way the old Soviet [dictators did.]
Then there was this tweet by Drudge of his headline Media attacks 'Soviet-style' publicity policy... but that happens to be the headline from and link to the mainstream Telegraph. So naturally, I repeated my challenge of Levin to Drudge "C'mon Matt...."
I repeat that challenge to the whole of the dextropshere. (If nothing else, go to those replies to Levin and Drudge and retweet them so that those guys get the sense that we are serious.)
Dare to be leaders. It is hardly difficult to state the obvious behavior of our pols and our media. I know that it is hard to be the first; but new nobility is needed. Many more of us can dare calling every twist and turn accurately so that others like us feel comfortable with calling things as they appear in reality.
The media has not yet gotten into full projection mode. If you delay, others will delay too. The media will shortly be calling others what they are themselves if you fail. They may do it anyway, but you can point to my blog entries and our side at least will know the truth.
What gets us into trouble is not so much our ignorance. It's what we know that just ain't so.-- Mark Twain
The regrettable reality is how many of us are susceptible to group
think – the consensus understanding of anything that
“everybody knows.”
We in the west like to think of ourselves as more civilized, more
advanced and all that, but we’re just as capable of refusing to
acknowledge reality and looking at facts placed in front of us. We’re
not very different from the barbarians of old believing in potions,
chicken bones and whatever hocus-pocus is shown to them. We’re
susceptible to the same stupidity. -- Mathew in comment at Crusader Rabbit
I like Mathew's observation of our civility. Particularly our "intelligentsia" thinks themselves more civilized;
they will see that there is hell to pay for anyone who dares suggest they’re not. Burn the
evidence and the detectives who dared dig it up.
And it is not just our wannabe rulers.
Most of us react instantly negatively to anyone who dares
violate our consensus. The reaction has been been described as having ones world turned upside down. Nausea is not an uncommon result. So it is not abnormal when all of us, as a general rule, hate to fight the consensus we find
surrounding us lest we find ourselves on the receiving end of that reflexive negativity and emotional outbursts. That is tragic; only made more so by those who exploit it. Sociopaths are tremendously successful
in tiptoeing past that minefield while condemning most of the rest of
us to the mines they themselves placed. Yet even the harshest of realities may never burst the illusions in some people. The proof of that is found in the reports of the last words of communist true-believers as they died in Stalin's Gulags: "If Stalin only knew [what a faithful comrade am I]." It is quite apparent that consensus and the fear of transgressing is so strong that, were zombies real, it would be manifest in its victims after death.
If I ever stop procrastinating I will complete the series of screeds I've begun about how consensus has been a terrible factor in why we are so divided in how we perceive our troubles and our enemies.
Although there are many national stories and news outlets and major talk show hosts who traffic heavily in fostering and maintaining consensus views, I have a couple of anecdotal examples of defense of consensus views. One is from the Left. It is the rabbi with whom I differed over his new-age take on Genesis 22. He censored my rejoinders, and eventually deleted from his site that portion of our interchange he originally posted. However, his efforts are foiled by the wayback machine and copies of what he refused to publish. The second is from the Right. Tam did not delete our discussion, but her manner provides a fine demonstration of why the Right is no home for either principled conservatism or classical liberalism.
Neither example is of people influential enough to be considered significant members of the Downers. But their type sure as shooting aids the Downers by being so damned closed-minded and fearful of climbing out of the pit of despair and joining the Upsiders. That both will blindly continue what they've been doing and expecting different results is sad. That they are not alone is tragic.
I just had to share this one line from a review of The Hunger Games: Catching Fire.
The depiction of a craven television media's employing all its flashy
insincerity in the service of power comes so close to modern-day reality
that it's chilling.[emphasis added]
From the mouths of the enslaved members of the outer party.
That dear readers is the title of the epic I will never write. Surely someone will because it's aching to be told. One complex question:
One complex questionthat I think leads to finding an answer to the question of my epic's title is this one.
How many people with portions of their pay invested in 401Ks and union
pension plans realize how their savings have enabled the trustees of those plans to make a
mockery of the promise of "publicly held" corporations?
Why is this question germane? Certainly the trustees that manage that those plans are all carefully vetted corporate men and unionists (corporatists and Leftists? -- R & L Downers at any rate) respectively, who vote each other onto corporate boards of directors when each new proxy is sent out. They drink fine
wine and eat caviar at annual shareholders' meetings as they battle amongst themselves:
what is their most favorable course of corporate and governmental directions?
who in government are most certain to advance their goals?
who in government is most certain to obstruct their goals?
who on K Street is the best choice to see their ultimatums get delivered?
How did America become a corporate-fascist clone of the Soviet Union?
Yesterday I decided to take Ronald Reagan seriously enough to abandon the Marxist scale of Left and Right because there are too many Progs hiding out and influencing what we call the Right. While it takes some more than others to recognize that in the past they have influenced the Right to accept, incrementally, rule by the Left, they in the last dozen year or so have become more radical and have forced more aggressive compromises on all of us.
I have had enough. I do not think I am alone. So let me remind you again that Reagan said we do not have to accept the false notion of Left or Right; that we need to recognize there is really only an Up or Down.
Up to individual freedom, consistent with law and order, or Down to the ant-heap of totalitarianism.
Yesterday I labeled myself with the Ups. And I identified the enemy of us Ups and labeled them as the Downs.
Upsider is my label today (and may yet change again). Downers is what I may like for all time for all enemies of individual liberty.
That aside, here is today's news report exposing another of the negative effects on human life by the Downers. This time it was one life, tomorrow it could be more as we continue to let them run roughshod over all our values by force of arms.
An airport security officer lay helplessly bleeding after a gunman opened fire at Los Angeles International Airport as paramedics waited 150 yards away because police had not declared the terminal safe to enter, according to two law enforcement officials.
It would be 33 minutes before Transportation Security Administration Officer Gerardo Hernandez, who was about 20 feet from an exit, would be wheeled out by police to an ambulance, said the officials, who were briefed on the investigation and spoke on condition of anonymity because the probe was still ongoing into the Nov. 1 shooting.
For all but five of those minutes, there was no threat from the suspected gunman -- he had been shot and was in custody, they said.
How many ways was this one human death unnecessary and how many was it indeed necessary?
Necessary in that:
the Downers want and have used this death as an excuse to clamp down on citizens rights some more
the Downers want more TSA armed despite the reports of their agents' unpunished misconduct.
the Downers wanting the TSA to adopt even more of an Us versus Them attitude.
the Downers undoubtedly want more than this, and I and my commenters reserve the right to call them on it yet.
Unnecessary in that:
The help was not "standing by," they were prevented by the law officers compelled by Downer rules of engagement.
Even armed volunteers were prevented from retrieving the bleeding man by orders of the Downers.
Downers had offered no "medic" style training for rescuing wounded. Still don't. Disgusting.
Downers have repeatedly hid behind their SSM built consensus that prevents non-felonious citizens from being armed in the first place.
"Gunfree" zones are respected only by the law-abiding and sane Downers know this to be true.
I reserve the right to add to this list as they occur to me or my commenters.
Unbelieveably, the essence of Marxist class warfare, envy and its exploitation, was admitted today by "one of the prime architects of both the Massachusetts healthcare reform and the Affordable Care Act, Professor of economics at MIT, Jonathon Gruber." [source]
"That means that the genetic winners, the lottery winners who've been
paying an artificially low price because of this discrimination now will
have to pay more in return."
Sickening. Coveting the health of your neighbor is now fair game in contemporary America. Essentially this: 'If you are healthy, you deserve to be handicapped, and we have the power to do it to you.' You first Dr. Gruber.
Incidental report from the street:
I hear from soft-headed liberals who have been repeating the nonsense that gets aired repeatedly on SSM TV such as MSNBC declare that conservatives are anti-American because they disagree with President Obama. This revelation will not faze them in the least.
The real problem:
What is more of a problem are the conservative talkshow hosts who refuse to call this president a Marxist. And you know the old Leftist slogan -- "no enemies on the left." That would explain a great deal why talkers like Michael Medved and others at Salem broadcasting regularly call out others on the Right as traitors to the GOP before they'll call out Leftists as traitors to America. Or traitors to common decency. Or traitors to JudeoChristian ethics (thou shall not covet) such as this genius Gruber.
One Solution:
We of the TEA Party movement need to disassociate ourselves from the "Rightists" on the Marxist political spectrum of Left and Right. Let me repeat Ronald Reagan's vision for you.
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.
I am not on the Right any longer. There are too many Downs over there. I'm with the Ups.
To Hell with Downs like Medved, Hewitt, Prager, and anyone else who thinks like them. They are unfit company for people who need to recognize and fight all the enemies of freedom.
Somehow the Aussies were able to overpower the propaganda stream of the ABC, their govt funded SSM, and threw out the Leftist PM Gillard. Now they have elected a non-collectivist parliament and Prime Minister quite contrary to what we have here in America.
It proves what can be done if common people learn to band together -- no matter their other differences -- for the sake of their very lives.
Now, dear God protect the new movement and its leaders from both lethal enemies and the allure of, and traps set by, those who ply evil ways.
While reading several bits of news, while in IMs with friends, and while reading commentaries at the blogs that I frequent, I remember this clip that I uploaded last year.
I think I may use it more from time to time after I comment on a contemporary story that was not possible in the America of the past.
The shocked American: "You mean there is nothing I can do in a legal way?"
The answer of the circumstance: "Mr. ____: this is not the United States... go back to America!"
For a cancer patient, medical coverage is a matter of life and death. Take away people's ability to control their medical-coverage choices and they may die. I guess that's a highly effective way to control medical costs. Perhaps that's the point. --emphasis added
Perhaps? This bespeaks the fatal naivety of all Americans constrained by PC from stating obvious truths.
What could pass as the Obamacare theme song is now 4 decades old. It has in its frankest of renditions the closing lines:
"Won't you give it a try?
[Boom]
Live and let die!"
For several decades I have witnessed and reported upon the fear in so many to speak of the dark side of the Sustainability movement. It is doubly upsetting to see it in those who claim to be God fearing. God fearing implies you accept the premise that all human life is sacred. Turning a blind eye to reports of a mounting threat to that premise (most unsettling to me when I've witnessed it in clergy) is more understandable when the threat seems hypothetical, but not from someone like Ms. Sundby while suffering the repercussions.
Ms Sundby still wants to believethat the machinations to which she is victim are only her imagination. So she writes "perhaps." I guess it makes her feel better. [Or perhaps the addition of perhaps it was required by the WSJ editor. In a world where damned consensus rules are expected to be understood, I doubt the editor needed to make a direct request.]
In a way, this makes Ms Sundby a martyr to Political Correctness. That she in her present circumstances is found still kowtowing to the consensus (to not speak of the Susnuts) ought to be eye opening for the rest of us. The souls of people who martyred themselves in defense of innocent human life would not be amused.
Please enlighten me how to open the eyes of more while there is still time.
Look at the anger in her expression and be very afraid should she have any say in whether or not you get to see a doctor.
As I posted a few weeks ago, the surname similarity (Jean Sibelius vs Kathleen Sebelius) causes me to associate this cold martinet with the Finnish composer who gifted us with the beautifully elegiac tune "Valse Triste" -- sad waltz. Her being in charge of implementing death panels is as far removed from the nostalgic feelings that an elegy seeks to evoke as anything you might consider.
So it is with some satisfaction to see this picture where the insult implied by the title of the book she has just been handed has finally dented the phony smiling facade of this supremely arrogant public servant who, when asked if she would resign due to stupendous incompetence, snipped "I don't work for my critics."
The sad thing is how much damage she and her bureaucracy will have done to America before we have a chance to legally see that she is punished for her maliciousness. This roll-out has been so bad it could not have been worse had it been planned that way. Heads should roll for such enormous incompetence. The really sad thing is that they won't.
My friend Paul emailed me this questionnaire that has not simply multiple choice answers, but opportunities to offer deeper thoughts on the questions raised.
I am sharing with readers all the responses submitted which were not one of the muliple choices provided. Five detailed responses in all.
I most certainly invite my readers to agree, disagree, or add and subtract to any of the answers I gave.
Additionally, you may find it useful to your own understanding of various issues to ponder these or other questions asked at the site; that is whether or not you submit your answers.
Think of it as a personal interview. Be careful not to be "push-polled" into giving an answer. An example of that is my answer to the question about Iran. At this point I do not know what should be done. Our national policy towards them was destroyed by Jimmy Carter. Every opening where we might have improved our relations were, in my opinion, bungled opportunities at best. All the worse ways of looking at how those opportunities were handled involve hidden agendas which invite open ended speculations which do little to solve the threats of Iran to the world today.
Do you support the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obamacare)?
So many times tort reform has been discussed as the ultimate answer, but it falls flat each time. It may be due to Congress being so full of attorneys and influenced by the lawyer lobby. Also the media so in line with them that this discussion is never given a fair airing or a chance. Medical costs have risen directly proportional to out of control court awards (legal liability passed along to every patient as a natural part of the cost of doing business). Tort reform (in conjunction with a more punitive AMA for bad doctors) is the single biggest solution to the escalating health costs.
The nation would be better served with understanding the legal costs being a major portion of this problem if its media were not so filled with stupid or corrupt people.
Should the United States end its trade embargo and travel ban on Cuba?
If
we keep it, those caught violating ought to be prosecuted. Not
prosecuting undermines respect for the law. It's so bad, it is probably
too late for that. As it stands, open contempt for law and selective
(political) enforcement has become commonplace, which is unfitting for a
republic of laws and more fitting of fascist tyrannies.
How should the U.S. deal with Iran?
I don't know now. Easier solutions were available in past opportunities. Much of the current problem stems from our political system not wishing to admit they failed to take advantage of those earlier and easier solutions.
Should the U.S. maintain a presence at the United Nations?
Should the U.S. continue NSA surveillance of its allies?
Wherever did the notion that we don't keep an eye on everybody become a common understanding? When Ronald Reagan said "trust but verify" that seemed to be a general statement of one of the purposes of any nation's overall foreign policy. When did it become considered to be the symptoms of some form of national paranoia to engage in surveillance? This has been around since the beginning of time, only in less technological forms.
YESS!
The Gantt Guy says:
It really is quite palpable now, isn’t it? For a long time our political elites have fanned the flames of division and discontent, and yet they now seem surprised at the level of discontent they’ve fostered.Pascal says:
“and yet they now seem surprised at the level of discontent they’ve fostered.”In a politician, “seeming” surprised by policy consequences is a survival skill.
View My Stats