On the Road to America's End

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

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

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

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

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

For Better Grokking "Fundamentally Changing America"

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

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

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

The Left Protects Wildlife to the Extreme; Babies, Nah

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Here's a Fine Example

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

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

Money quote:

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

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

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

Levin -- "Eliminate the IRS"

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

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

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

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

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

Congressional Scholar Bleg

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

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

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

I'm not joking.

And You Thought *I* Was Tough On Progressives

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

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



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

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

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

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

Countering the Undermining of Your Moral Foundations

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

RINO Connotes Thick-Skinned You Fools

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Choking on "The Most Transparent Administration in History"

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

Gov't taxes & fees now included

Did you know?

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

When,  how and why did I got that message?

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

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

Full fare disclosure?

FULL fare DISCLOSURE.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

pascal fervor • 8 days ago

• −

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

1

•

Reply

Diagnosis By a Quack

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

From the top of Drudge this morning.

MCCAIN CALLS YOUNG BUCKS 'WACKOS'...

Hatchet Man At PJ Media

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

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

To whom is endangering PJMedia.

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

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

Buh bye.

Pascal

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

Ronald Reagan's Political Model

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thank you.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

More TEA Party Betrayal

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

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

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

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

Sequence begins.

• thunder2984

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

• Pascal

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

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

Until that time, SKUNC fits.

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

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

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

• Gary

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

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

• Pascal

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

Rove Begins the Split of the GOP

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

Rove Declares War On the TEA Party.

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

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

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

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

What could go wrong?

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

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

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

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

Developing...

Overspecialization and Misanthropy

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

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

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

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

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

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

Happy Gorehog Day

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

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

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

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

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

This Post Cost Me Over $11K

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

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

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

Voter Fraud Institutionalized

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

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

Why the GOP won’t challenge vote fraud.

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

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

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