Boomers Cum Obummers

^♫Talkin' 'bout my generation.^♫

We are the people who ^♫try to put us down.^♫

^♫Talkin' 'bout my generation.^♫

We did sing ^♫hope I die before I get old,^♫ dint we?

^♫Talkin' 'bout my generation.^♫

Well, our ObamaNation brings us ObummerCare.

^♫My Generation! My generation, baby.^♫

We've laggard so that ^♫Things they do look awful cold.^♫

^♫Talkin' 'bout my g-g-g-g-generation.^♫

^♫Why don't we all just f-f-f-f-f-f-f-f-f-fade away?.^♫

^♫Talkin' 'bout my my my generation, baby.^♫
♫my generation, my generation, my generation,
my generation, my gereration....^♫

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't thank me folks. Thank my troll -- Ms Ann Thrope -- for the inspiration.

At What Cost Comity?

Our dilemma is well known and appreciated by the bastards at the top of the heap. They know because they have been active in its building.

The despot cares less that you love him provided you don't love one another.

Oh he provides alright! Money buys influence and attains power. And once attained, it then can use your money to deploy distractions and discord as the need arises. A.C.O.R.N. anyone?

But that is relatively easy where factions are naturally occurring. But what of infighting within a faction? What then? As Mark Alger reminds us:

In-fighting is invidious. Let's have a little less of it.

Knowing of the tyrant's wishes to sow discord where none exists, and to nurture it into open warfare where it does, finding agreement when we can, comity, is certainly a preferred outcome. We have a bigger fish in need of frying.

However, what about balance?

On one hand, we all know the ludicrous tale of the boy who murdered his parents and then begged mercy on the grounds that he was an orphan. On the other hand, none of us would have faulted George Washington what he was apt to do had he captured Benedict Arnold. These are easy cases. The harder ones need more care. After all, we encumber Justice with her great and omnipresent scales for good reason.

I found cause to disagree with a couple of likable fellows, Roderick Reilly and Life of The Mind, at the Belmont Club early today. They had commented favorably on a well heeled, well spoken, often diplomatic but always partisan Democrat, the late senior senator from New York, Daniel Patrick Moynihan.

Never, never, never, revere any politician too much, because they all have feet of clay.

Moynihan said many nice sounding things which made him seem well-anchored in principle, such as his famous “Defining Deviancy Down.”

The Tax Reform Act of 1986, pushed by Reagan, was very popular, and pretty much remains so today except by the Left. As head of the Senate finance committee, Moynihan shepherded the bill through very well. Sounds like he was uniquely bipartisan and had the well-being of the country in mind right?

Well, he inserted into the tax code, at the last minute of conference committee sessions where committee chairs are rarely challenged, words written by lawyers at one company that hugely benefited that company.

That section of tax code solely targeted every engineer and programmer in the country, while costing the taxpayers more as well. That company was run by his wife’s family. Anyone who thinks he didn’t benefit directly from that is beyond hope.

And then there are those who will know or accept what I just said is true, but will be members of the apologist brigade. Their line is “So what? They all do it.”

There is the problem in a nutshell. It’s similar to those who defend RINOs when they help the GOP attain a majority (no matter how Pyrrhic a “victory” it be).

When personal gain and betrayal of principles become acceptable in any republic, even long after the fact and after so many others have followed the same path to personal gain (via passing law that restrict liberties and eradicate constitutional restrictions), how do you ever hope to regain order? You should remember your acceptance of betrayals when you later bemoan threats to your personal liberties.

Betrayal, too often dismissed, will be costly. It should have been costly to the betrayers, but instead it costs the acceptors of the betrayals and their posterity.

The evil that men do lives after them; the good is oft interred with their bones -- Shakespeare

How especially true it is (because others watch and see no downside to perfidy) when we remember too kindly such men.

I chose to record this exchange here at my blog because it touched on a very important aspect about seeking justice when we find someone has betrayed our nation -- as did Senator Moynihan when he chose to carry his own water albeit in "expected" fashion. He knew we knew he knew better. So much more the shame to whatever good may have been a part of his legacy.

Such shame is certainly not lessened when we find someone in our own faction has been aiding and abetting the other faction a bit too much. Another reason we so distrust MSM is that it frequently bestows a glow of approval to the word bipartisan. But it is horrid to the individual who discovers -- as if burgled by a thief in the night -- that the sum total of his liberty has been diminished due in great measure to his very own representative agreeing, in the dark of some committee, to allow power-seekers to override limits on our government that had been written into our constitution for the good of all time -- solely because someone demanded that each "crisis" not be allowed to be wasted.

Bottom line? At what cost do we gain comity? Do not for a moment deny to yourself who pays.

Betrayal, too often dismissed, will be costly. It should have been costly to the wicked as justice would discern. Someone will pay. When wrong-doing is too easily (or shortsightedly) forgiven, the costs are shifted to the acceptors of the betrayals and their posterity. Indeed, that is the greater crime.

So Much to Say That Focus Suffers

Even though you've picked up the pace of your blog entries in the last two months, there are times when there is quite a bit of news and yet you don't seem to publish. Why Pascal?

I really haven't been idle these past few weeks. The thing which has troubled me is: "to whom should you address your thoughts?" I find that I'm not that far ahead of many people, and indeed sometimes lag. Thus it may be less effective if I continue to address my essays to the ordinary person. I could write with scorn directed at those who think and -- what is worse -- behave as if they are better than ordinary people. I've done that a few times already, and it is not without effective precedent. If you look at the introduction at the top of this blog, you can see that I believe we may achieve some relief by writing in that manner.

The question arises: Will anyone in higher stations notice such an affront to their self assessment? In at least one instance, I know I have pierced those who afflict us, so I know it is possible.

Here are the working titles of incomplete essays (often because Mr. OCD is not satisfied) and the dates I started on them, along with a short synopsis.

1. The "Progressive" Sneer - Aug 16 - The stage that follows brazen.
2. Repression Viewed As Progress - Aug 28 - Going over a comment I made in 2007 about the film I Am Legend that foresaw our present political state.
3. "Reactionary" -- A Reorientation - Sep 6 - Now that they own the Establishment, it is a designation that better fits "Progressives" who wish to retain their power rather than the "conservative" individual who merely wants to be left in peace.
4. Know Your Role - Sep 8 - One cannot rely on professional politicians to preserve your rights.
5. America Once Viewed Egotism As Disqualifying - Sep 9 - I suggest we need to restore humility and gratitude as a key cultural value: the meaning of Thanksgiving. Perhaps if we demanded more humility of our leaders we might actually receive better government.
   
6. The Ruling and Subject Parties - Sep 9 - The professional politicians versus the rest of us. Betrayal is too often dismissed when it should be costly. This involves reviewing and reworking one of my very oldest analyses of political reality in order to understand what it is that is fighting us.
   
7. What Convinced You That the Death Cults Were Going Mainstream? - Sep 9 - Reviewing the earliest months of GWBush's presidency.
   

In many ways, each of these topics overlap many others, some not listed above; individual ragged-edged pieces of an immense jigsaw puzzle. If anyone gives a damn what my opinion is on one or more of these subjects, please leave a comment or contact me by email. Maybe you will help me focus on what is most important -- at least in your opinion.

"This is MY Townhall Meeting"

More evidence of shamelessness, although somewhat less brazen given this Congressman's closing lines.



To his constituents attending the meeting:

"This is my town hall meeting for you. You are not going to tell me how to run my congressional office. The reason I don't allow filming, because usually the films that are done end up on You Tube in a compromising position."

Compromising position congressman? Damn, facts sure are stubborn things; wouldn't want any hard evidence of them now, would we?

This is not the language of a public servant with very much humility. This sounds more like a member of a ruling class.

Apologize to your children: "America never had a ruling class before. I am very sorry that I allowed one to spring up during my generation. Please forgive me."

Hat tip to DrewM

Dinged By Webdings

A couple of days ago I published this entry. Somehow, possibly because I had added ♫ to the video screen subheading, the Blogger editor invoked webdings font into its style designation -- automatically. I did not know that this had happened because my version of firefox does not respond to such font designations. I suspect many other firefox users have a similar non-response.

But if you use IE, you saw half a page of gibberish instead of this ^♪♫ Cuz they're power hungry and malicious. ^♫♪ Where letters should have been, Webdings sprawled unintelligibly across the page under the video screen instead. The "Progressives," whose behavior I was declaiming, could not have been more pleased. (IE is a product of Bill Gates --- hmmmm.)

Anyway, thanks to the concerns of helpful readers who use IE (I don't normally), it has since been fixed. Thank you very much.

I hope you all have seen it. Tim Hawkins' The Government Can is humorous and dazzling.

More Brazen

Here is more evidence of what I say is true.

I keep telling you folks to reveal these things to other folks: the "Progressives" facade has moved on to the brazen stage. This sample I've presented today reveals more than simple hypocrisy.

In order to get them to do their classic "two steps forward, one step back" dance, you must be the one to apply pressure, cuz Minitru ain't gonna do it unless the particular hack is out of favor with the higher ups.

Where you don't get them to back off, they move on. You will not like their next stage.

• Do you think you'll have the nerve to fight back then?
  
• Are you absolutely sure you'll still be able?

The Government Can

^♪♫ Cuz they're power hungry* and malicious. ^♫♪

Hat tip to Ace.

*As I've labored for ages to convince the gullible (as only the government accredited skooled can be), this has always been what drives the "Progressives." Their drive is so insatiable that, left unchecked, it must lead to deaths in such massive number that most decent individuals are unwilling to believe such megalomania exists.

Our Hollowed Institutions

What used to be hallowed are now so hollowed out that cynics and fear mongers spend real money to make appeals to our sense of loss and betrayal.



The segment I found most startling was when he sticks his head through the "glass" facade and sees the vast emptiness behind. I felt a touch of Neo's nausea when he found out the truth about The Matrix.

Don't you wish that this ad was to alert you to a new, basic American values, political party?

Yeah. Me too!

I've Not Yet Begun To Fight

You may recall these scenes from the video I highlighted last October.





















Well, this morning I found this on the web to signify that my wished for Turnabout has not yet turned about.




I have friends and relatives represented amongst the Obamacized lemmings above (some may call them Eloi given the industry that has sprung up for spare human parts).

I have not yet begun to fight.

How about you? Maybe you can start small, as in this sticker, bumper or not, discovered and promoted by Og last night:

Desperation Exploited

Seen on the web:

RINOs will never come to their senses; they are the most disingenuous liberals there are. They’re not even honest enough to call themselves Democrats.

Sarah Palin has enormous appeal to the American mainstream, and the MSM fools that sought to marginalize her defeated themselves by giving her so much press. Now the people know who they can count on. She speaks the honest, unassuming language of truth.

The set up is text book Orwell.
Suckers will respond to what they want to hear and the statists knows what that is, and the Ministry of Truth will give it to them. I was the first -- in early September last year -- to predict that a Palin Derangement Syndrome would top Bush Derangement Syndrome.

Persecution of her has been deliberately ginned up to play conservatives, gallant by nature and values, for suckers. There are enough Christians among them to have read or heard the teaching, "You will know them by their fruits," But that thought will be only momentary. The unfairness and intensity of the hate campaign against Palin overrules our judgment over some of her liberal stances, such as social policies and environmental views.

Yes she SPEAKS truths we all want to hear from national politicians. I for one have longed for someone to address the misanthropes, and so should have welcomed her speaking of Death Panels. But there has to be more than just speaking of things I want to hear spoken of. Her inclinations to accept AGW hogwash is inconsistent with fighting negative population growth (death seeking) policies. That is one big inconsistency!

The same game was played to force conservatives to defend W. We spent so much time fighting completely crazy charges against him, that those things he did do, of which conservatives disapproved, appeared minor in comparison. And there were no end of RINO influenced conservatives who lumped in with crazy Democratic critics all of us who legitimately criticized W's socialist policies. We wound up fighting amongst ourselves, and W successfully put Dem favorable policies in place.

In short, the stupid charges essentially overwhelmed the meaningful ones. And Statism continues to advance and tighten its grip.

Stop being so desperate to hear a leader who says things that your opponents know you want to hear. They can arrange to elevate their own opposition. W was never the opponent we needed against Democratic domestic gains and corruption. I sorely suspect Palin would not be either.

This Statist ploy to exploit conservative decency and hopes tires me so.
I wish I could convince many more of my fellow Americans to tire of it too. We need to fight the meaningful battles and find champions not of our opponents' choosing. I will never forget that McCain chose Palin, and then Dems and RINOs and even McCain forced us to defend her.

Small Fuses Ignite Big Bombs

The following interchange in the comment stream to an Andrew Klavan commentary published at Pajama's Media may serve as good soundbites in the fight against the Obama Health Plan.

Them: but, regardless, the [end of life] counseling part of the bills that lead to the death panel stuff, are an inconsequential part of the bills as i read them....

You: The bigger the bomb, the more inconsequential seems the fuse.

Them: ...what if congress just dropped [the death panels]? How would you feel about the proposed reforms then?

You: After finding and diffusing one mine, better to avoid a proven minefield entirely.

Advice to You who are fighting the ObamaCare proposals that Congress will try to ram down your throats in the coming weeks: Repeat these bold answers in your own words every time you find the chance.

Remember

Remember the motto of the "Progressives" power-mad Statists:

The only thing truly progressive is the next trick that gains us another notch of power. -- Saul Alinsky

Remember: Be it from stated aims or historical results, Malthusians and Marxists are nothing short of misanthropic death cultists in "social" moralist disguise.

Remember: Advancing both movements is the progress of which "Progressives" wannabe tyrants speak.

Remember: Post-modern is "Progressive" repressive-speak for the future. Why would the future need a new word? It signals their pre-modern intentions for YOUR posterity.

"Progressives" in power will morph to Repressives. In fact they are revealing their repressive streak even as I write this by trying to ram their "health" plan down your throats. They will point to your graves and sneeringly laugh at your remainder in chains and say "Blame them! We gave them fair warning."

Remember. Posterity will.

You're Not Surprised 2

The last time you were not surprised, I casually compared Obama's self-important "We are God's partners in matters of Life and Death" to that of Nimrod of the Bible. Since then I've had the delight to be enlightened, supplemented and reinforced a number of times about my observation. The following is a digest of all of it.

The bulk of this came from Og (and his best line has the link).

Nimrod’s error may best be described this way: “He was a great hunter. As his stature grew to where he claimed the power of death over all of God’s creation, so too did his impression that he was godlike himself. (Not realizing it was the ability to endow LIFE, and not DEATH, that made one a God).”

The following is lifted entirely from commenter ahad ha'amoratsim at Klavan's blog:

In Jewish tradition, Nimrod was called a mighty hunter (the Hebrew actually translates more accurately as “trapper”) because he trapped men with his smooth talk and manipulated them with words into making him absolute ruler over them. Nimrod in Jewish tradition is also the one who threw the youth Abraham into a furnace for destroying Terach’s idols.

Hmm, hubris, glib, talks people into giving him unchecked power despite his being no more fit for it than they are — good pick[cf. for Obama]! [emphasis added]

You see? Nimrod in his hubris assessed that he and God should be able to speak eye-to-eye, as equals do. He convinced his people to help him build the great Tower. You may know how that turned out.

The sort of foolishness that reaches so high has forever been associated with Nimrod, and babbling nonsense has forever been associated with mankind whenever it follows men such as he.
The last observation come from a Dicentra left at the Protein Wisdom Pub.

In other words, Obama is a Nimrod.

I can get used to that.

LOL I swear, I hadn't thought of that old schoolyard taunt when I made the connection initially. But given that the dictionary says nimrod means fool, I guess now that we know the etymology of the word, we can tell the difference from a mindless slur and factual application.

Given the nature of the man and the nature of the people who adore him: WOW!

I swear, I am not that good a wordsmith, I stumbled upon this vision, and I doubt I could have done it alone.
I have many friends to thank, and if I missed anyone, please let me know -- or quick, go and hide!

*********Update***********

Sdferr's image of Obama doing his Nimrod imitation.

Boomer-Geezers: Still Laughing?

In case you never got the significance of the incidental dialogue at the end, maybe today you will.

Two well dressed travelers skip on past the ghastly crew.





Who was that?
I don't know.
Must be a king.
Why?
Hasn't got shit all over him.

Ain't that always the way when kings reign over us? In the UK it's called N.I.C.E.

Synopsis of Pascal Fervor

 Last updated:  March 19, 2011

What I mean by Pascal Fervor is suggested at the top of my sidebar. Blaise Pascal disliked those who destroyed things and especially people he thought good. These destroyers so aroused his ire that he dedicated his genius to defeating them. I, your humble commentator, call that sort of dedication "Pascal Fervor." I've tried to take clues from Pascal so as to move somewhat in the manner he did. However, lacking his genius and position of  influence, my efforts to overturn those forces that would destroy the American Dream may not be anywhere near so successful.  As a result, I sometimes call myself Pascal (the derivative.) That is, I have endeavored simply to move in the direction to which he was pointing.

The inclination of Blaise Pascal operating on a fixed moral plane.

This page was composed to inform you what this blog has concentrated upon most. If you'd like to help me in my battles, I provide a simple start at Irrationality Topples Kings.

What troubles me about our contemporary world is no secret. I've written about it repeatedly here and on my old website. Nearly every institutional policy and event that leaves us shaking our heads and thinking "I don't understand" may be explained by it to some extent. We tend to think of ourselves as so very advanced, but we humans are falling prey to the same sirens that have trapped us and killed us since antiquity.

The single most debilitating thought in our world is not often spoken, but I see it underlying everything today.

S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y.

Sustainability is the arch concern of "very important" people who are acting on behalf of the fear -- but disguised as prudence by invoking the high sounding "Precautionary Principle" -- that there are too many people on earth. It forms the foundation for what I call their new morality. Unceremoniously, incrementally, they have been superseding the Judeo-Christian morality that is core to the culture that created the United States.
It means that a minimum number of people aim to maximize human decline with a minimum of fuss. To reduce the fuss, old wounds and feuds and prejudices and covetousness have been rejuvenated. We will be permitted to reduce ourselves. This blog remarks on the numerous instances where the evidence for this shows itself.

That is the short explanation of what is going on. I bet it's not enough for most "advanced" people. So, should you think you may need it, I've more.

————————————

What I am trying to do is pass along to you in this blog are observations driven by intuitive inquiry and conclusions reached by means of analytical skills I use as an engineer. Reading them may help you protect your life. Any difficulties you have in understanding me may not only be because I can be too esoteric (obscure) or too concise (insufficient details), but also because writing is a skill that I'm still developing and not easily.  If you're unsure of anything, please don't be embarrassed for me or for yourself. Be inquisitive and ask me for more details. I will attempt to answer.

It is my hope that many of you can simplify what I am saying to reach many more people than I could ever hope to do. That is the only way I know to maximize my impact -- to rely on decent people to get my warnings out to those they care about and build blocs to block the machinations of those who would eliminate all unselected individuals.

————————————

Those who find themselves in positions of power and influence tend to be pessimists. Why that is I have done a bit more than speculate on my own and other sites. But why is not nearly as important to you, the individual, as first recognizing that the pessimism is there, in horrifying amounts, and then comprehending where all that angst is leading.

I find it logical and significant that Malthusianism which preceded Marxism came into being at roughly the same time that mankind achieved unprecedented liberty and then quickly gained the ability to thrive as never before. I also find it compelling to note that both deadly ideologies -- one from the start, the other proven to be -- have been and are heavily fostered and accepted by the highly positioned and/or the well-to-do who have self-styled themselves as Progressives."

The furtherance of these ideas has become such accepted thinking in the splendid halls of "intelligentsia," that any who dare utter an optimistic word -- such as those who believe in a God who has promised to always provide -- are shouted down, marginalized, and persecuted.

And generic hatred of mankind other than oneself -- misanthropy-- underlies it all. I've witnessed it as have nearly everyone who is reading this blog when you bumped elbows with them. It is that sense of dread and loathing oozed by some in the upper classes for the "repulsive" middle class that ever strives upward to join them.

Malthusianism lent to the hatred a sense of morality ("we only wish to reduce human numbers so a better man may live on and well").
Marxism lent to it the notion that what is bad for individuals (take from the earner and given it to the one who whines) was in the best interests of the collective and thereby "socially just."

The Marxist/Socialist/Collectivist is a world where brotherly morality has been turned upside down (promote envy of and legalize theft from an owner so the getter needs not steal) is good.

Conclusively, be it from stated aims or historical results, Malthusians and Marxists are nothing short of misanthropic death cultists in "social" moralist disguise.

You're Not Surprised

"We are God's partners in matters of life and death." -- B.Obama

Is that the royal or divine "we" Barack?*
Please show us G_d's signature on your partnership papers Barry.



Readers of this blog and of the archives of PascalFervor.com cannot be surprised by this declaration.

Hear the words of Nimrod in that line folks. Can We's Tower of Babel be far off?

Oh, by the way "partner": you cannot CREATE life. All you can do is intrude your hand in matters related to death. Your pride is showing.

********** UPDATED HERE *************

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
*The same people who oohed and ahhed at Obama's "oratory skills that exceed Lincoln's" will be the first ones who'll deny he implied any blasphemy here. Great orators are always aware of the ambiguities of speech, and will include them or omit them at their leisure. Obama's sycophants will be disingenuous when they apologize for him, and he'll be worse than disingenuous for letting them.

Red-Herring Newsbites

What prompted my preceding blog entry The Great Karnak Sees: "Network News Readers" was an email I'd received that began:

Is this the health care bill (not a bill yet but only a proposal) that everyone is discussing? [emphasis added]

I know where my correspondent got that errant and inane phrase I highlighted. He heard it on the news somewhere. It is part of the DNC talking points that the news media parrots and, in turn, gets repeated by people who still trust professional news readers.

In an effort to take the heat off of them, the Democrats have been attempting to pass off the notion that "there is no final health care bill, so what's all the fuss?"

I had to remind my correspondent that HR3200, like all bills introduced in the House of Representatives, are proposed laws. They must pass a vote in the House, another in the Senate, get signed by the president, then go through conference committee where differences between the House and Senate versions are ironed out, and where committee chairmen exercise the privilege of introducing 11th hour additions, and then they go back to the houses for a final vote and then final signing by the president. If at any time the proposal fails to receive a signature or enough votes, it becomes a failed bill.

But it is still a bill, failed or not, until it becomes law.

I had to remind my correspondent that DNC chairman Howard Dean is running around on TV in attempt to stifle criticism by borrowing from Al Gore the arrogant line: "The debate is over!"

I also had to remind my correspondent that this "not a bill" is the very same "proposal" that Nancy Pelosi tried to strong-arm House Democrats into passing before the August recess (where constituents could attempt to see and influence their congressional representatives as representatives are supposed to do).

In my experienced opinion, that soundbite was a cynical effort on the part of the bill's sponsors to get citizens to argue about what the bill is rather than what is in it. The more time spent on what it is -- a simple notion really, and so sure to occupy OCD minds such as my own -- the less time available to look at and discuss the details in the bill. And as we all know, the devil is in the details.

Well, thankfully, I got back the following response:

You are right it is a bill…as I remember is not a law…yet.

But what irks me so much is that my correspondent still trusts the news media (who misled him on that) to tell him all he needs to know.

I have watched the news; saw videos of town hall meetings. What I saw was a lot of people not letting anyone answer questions, it is disgusting.

He wants me to read HR3200 and show him in black and white "the issues you are talking about." I have long intended to do that, but I also know that he is predisposed to listen to the "professionals" he sees on TV. I know, no matter how well he knows me and trusts me, he'll be biased towards all the nonsense -- like this red-herring notion that a bill is not a bill but only a proposal.

Help me dear readers.
God help me.

Jeopardy Answer: "Network News Readers"

Who personify some of the worst blond-jokes not yet uttered?

I've not yet come up with the category I'd put this in. It's not far off.

-----------------
Or maybe I should republish this under the title The Great Karnak Answers: "Network News Readers"
[tears open envelope and reads:] Who personify some of the worst blond-jokes not yet uttered?

Heroes or Suckers?

Would you rather be a hero to your family, friends and country or a sucker?
Well, it is certainty that our social engineers still treat us as suckers.

What got me fired up this morning was when I read this story suggesting that the WH will drop the option. That's the "government option" many fear is the Trojan Horse designed to lead to a single payer (taxpayers) by killing off private health plans. That's the health plans that polls say 85% of Americans are satisfied with.

The bottom line of the story: the White House is about to offer us all a compromise.

Red Alert. Red Alert!

Many years ago I wrote of how social engineering works: Here is an summary of a key point made there that is germane to this discussion:

Why use extremes of differences rather than less extreme ones? Because, as we know from other forms of engineering, the greater the polarity the easier to overcome resistance.

They who wish to drive social change to their advantage see well the potential in entertaining extreme differences so that they may achieve smaller ones (theirs) along the way.

1. How this game works is that the players have placed what they want in the path of the extremists.
2. Extremists are counted on to make demands on the rest of society that certainly will be met with resistance.
3. The game player's front men then step forward to offer "a compromise" to the wishes of the extremists that the resisters will accept.

This is why the idea of backing extremists is such a delightfully subtle tool of social engineers. If an extremist does not already exist where needed, they will manufacture a crisis to make sure one will materialize.

And now we have a health care crisis smack-dab in the middle of an economic meltdown primarily held together by the spit of the termites who hollowed out our institutions. Our economic system is in danger of collapsing at any moment, and the chief agents who aided that looting (government led or government regulated institutions) are the same whom we are being threatened with to take over that which we seek when our very lives are threatened by health issues.

"Nuh-uh!" we cry. And right on cue we are offered a "compromise."


Do you now understand how social engineers manipulate factions and fears? This health care "crisis" bears all the earmarks for political paybacks of social engineers.

We are suckers to accept ANY compromise at this time. The fight must continue even as the RINOs whom we would be foolish to believe are our watchdogs on this are preparing to accept any offer made by the WH.

Again, do not waste what ground you have gained by letting up now: Don't buy any of the "snake oil" being peddled from D.C.

Post-Altruism

Post-Altruistic would be the most accurate title of our new age should the "Progressives" succeed. Of course, the Ministry of Truth would never permit to be broadly spoken such a mockery of what it is they tell us they are doing for us. So I'm posting this title now before it and your author can be officially denounced.

The "Progressive" agenda has been pretty much laid bare for all to see.
Our Leftist/Marxist crazies are rapidly deploying in response to the orchestrated acquiescence of our Rightist/statist schemers who helped install Obama.
Any who are still deluded are about to learn that altruism has always been eyewash for the masses. The Progressives have only claimed that altruism was their aim.

The least useful of the well-to-do have always loathed the working class simply because a worker bee so demonstrates how shallow are the drones. Our human drones simply cannot abide the implied insult.

Pretty simple really. No matter how high on the food chain a human rises, if he knows he has no really good traits to call his own he will despise all who do.

So forget all that phony baloney that the Progressives mean well. Post-altruism deigns how we'll be treated as we blithely permit the Post-modern Luddites to condemn our descendants to the life of premoderns.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A regular reader of my material suggested this title. He said he was inspired to it by the Progressive's progression I laid out here.