The Knee Jerk Pattern

I think provides strong evidence of double-think.

Here is an example.

At second of two community meetings last night.

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

Brazen Bunglers

Ever fearful of admitting their CIC's (Zero's) stupidity, his spinners have chosen to brass it out:

White House Aides: ‘We didn’t know that they were going to Swift Boat Bergdahl’

Charming.

Update:
Hillary, Monday, stated her position

'We try not to Benghazi any of our soldiers on the field.'

Okay. Okay. She said "leave" and not "Benghazi." But "at this point in time, what possible difference does it make?"

Well, it's all rock and roll to her -- and SOP for her chief adviser, Slick.

Too Big to Fail

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.

Anyone have an answer?

Upping the Cynicism Quotient for Democratic Candidates

White House gives its blessing to Senate Democrats who want to campaign against its new global warming rules.

H/T to AoSHQ

P.S.: Speaking of cynicism. Who expect the GOPe will allow the GOP to exploit this news?

The Prog War on Womb Man

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.

Rodger Family Statement: All Hollyweird Should Be Sterilized

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: 

"Rodger Family Releases Statement Supporting Gun Control"

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.

Wasting Time Exposing Court Jesters

I must admit I found Ace's title intriguing.

Paul Krugman Gets Pwn3d Like a Loudmouth in a Woody Allen Movie

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.

$200 Reward for a Verified Copy '82-'83 Reagan Speech

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 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. 

Consider the Possibilities

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.

Rivals DirecTV and Dish team up to sell customized political ads.

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.

Statist Tools: Compliant Media Editing

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?

What does Dr. Evil think of CBS News?

"Unbiased"

Counter-Propaganda

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.

A Shining Example

Given the inconvenient turn in climate outlook, this is much more fitting than the Jack Nicholson original.

Al Gore is finally a Shining example

CAGW Bunkos In the Bunker

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.



Just so you know (I had to be informed by my Aussie friend KG) "Chris" is Australian climatologist  Chris Turney. This Leader of ill-fated Antarctic expedition, Professor Chris Turney, defends voyage
tells you how much this embarrassment burns him. ["Don't worry. He should make a very good clown." LOL]

If it so moves you, for extended chuckles you will find a copy of the screenplay of the Mawson segment below the break.
----------------------------------

What Are the Chances

that certain of you members of the Washington ruling class would have this happen to you?

OBAMACARE: Doctor's Office Spends 2 Hours On Hold With Insurer For Surgery Authorization, Before Giving Up...

H/T Drudge Report.

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.

Like a Bolt of Lightning

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.

About an hour later it hit me.

I'm within two years of his age. Jeesh.

Adults Needed for the Anti-Statist Movement

JWF posted the following headline from the Washington Examiner. It ought to be pissing the adults in the country off.

"Democrats will pay political price for Obamacare in 2014"

Hardly.

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.

Bush Lines

From Fox News we read:

The next Bush says he’s more like Gingrich than presidential uncle, grandfather.

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?)

Projection: "Soviet-Style" Being Used by Media Itself

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.]

and my reply to him (unanswered) was:

@marklevinshow C'mon Mark. Go the full step. Relabel the MSM as the SSM -- the Soviet-Style Media. For some history: http://t.co/Z11XtCz5t8
— Pascal Fervor (@PascalFervor) December 1, 2013

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...."

@DRUDGE_REPORT C'mon Matt. Go the full step. Relabel all MSM as the SSM -- the Soviet-Style Media. Some history: http://t.co/Z11XtCz5t8 …
— Pascal Fervor (@PascalFervor) December 1, 2013

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.

The Tragedy of Consensus

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.

More anon. Soon I pray.

Art of the Moment

This artful pic was captured yesterday by one of my offspring while escapading.

Click to view in original size