Anticipate; Designate; Mitigate; Dissipate

• You are major strategist for a large government program.
  
• You know you will meet strong resistance.
  
• You review your plans to pinpoint where you are weakest so as to know where your opposition should attack.
• You discover that your weakest point cannot be adequately fortified.
• So, might there be there some way to blunt your opponent's attack?
  
• One strategy, a priori to widespread disclosure so that opponents lack time to ally and amass into too big a number, is to select an opponent -- preferably a hot-head -- who you fully expect will initiate an attack under circumstances controlled by you.
  
• What sort of circumstances would you choose, and what kind of opponent?

Arrange a forum where you choose the moderator and only comments and not debate are permitted.

Choose an opponent who has a checkered past or questionable connections and with whom other opponents would not choose to be allied.

• Expect that the reports of the interchange will be limited.
• Expect that your allies will connect all who attack your weakest position with the initial attacker whom you chose because others do not wish to be associated with him.
  
• Expect dissipation amongst attackers on your weak position as they labor around the obstacle of that opponent you picked.
• Expect opponents to bicker amongst themselves over whether or not his being there is good or bad or matters or doesn't matter.
  
• Expect many big names from whom you otherwise expected opposition to now exempt themselves from the battle. They've positions of respect to protect, and will not risk their reputations by attacking an obvious point that is closely tied to that pariah you had the foresight to pick.

The following video is of Ezekiel Emanual, BHO's chief health care advisor, being excoriated by an historian, who "coincidentally" works for a Lyndon LaRouche organization, at a forum where only comments are permitted.



Fully expect MSM to tar with a Lyndon LaRouche label all who point out the many ways ObamaCare really does resemble something out of the Third Reich.

The Cause of the Coming Conflict, Summarized

No man, and no lesser god, has the right to decide who may live and who may die in the manner that herds of animals are kept in check.
The difference between a life affirming religion and all the other belief systems is this central message.


Update: Obama says "We are God's partners in matters of life and death."

And So, What's the Consequence of Being Deemed Unuseful?

This story finally breaks the illusion that fear of radical human population control is nothing more than the product of a fevered imagination.

For instance, what is one to make of that item under the title Utilitarianism? "Saving the most socially useful?"

Mind you, this was no crackpot publication this appeared in, The Lancet, penned by Health Care Czar Ezekiel Emmanuel. And as you read on, as you should, you'll find there is much more to be opposed to in the proposed health care legislation that our country's leadership is trying to rush through Congress.

Here is the one thing that I think every American should mull over in their minds, most especially those who revere those who fought World War II, "The Greatest Generation."

Obama's health care geniuses* think that the term “useful individuals” is now safe to use in public, but it is for the first time since its frequent use by the Third Reich.

*-------------------------------- Update ------------------------------------

Friday, July 10, 2009 10:31:11 PM

posted by Avoiding_Sulla

Comment no. 27 to the FR thread inspired by the zombietime.com article John Holdren, Obama's Science Czar, says: Forced abortions and mass sterilization needed to save the planet:

Adding this to the recent “Electing God” thread ... even I am finding it hard to believe that our alleged supermen think they can be this brazenly open.

It is amazing how rapidly this sort of thinking went from “Hush, don’t wanna disturb the sheep” to “Oh, what the hell?”

When this sort of thinking was relegated to but a few comments here and there, and when the only high profile websites were lunatics like the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement (VHEMT) and The Church of Euthanasia, many of you could sit back and say “Oh, it’s only a bunch of lunatic fringies and some Ivory Tower Elitists.”

Well, guess what? That thinking is now ruling in our White House.

I pray you all think that now is the time to spread the word, given this mountain of evidence, that the lunatics have taken over the asylum right at the top.

Abnormal Futurists

The oddly constructed word postmodern was invented by "Progressives" to refer to the future they envision. It is mostly a suggestive word.

Whereas normal people say "but who can really foretell the future," after they tell us of their plans and wishes, "Progressives" know normal people may not like their plans. So when they observe that some thing or action is to their liking, rather than become enthralled and proclaim: "Yay! That's more like it!", they may observe that it is postmodern, and then laugh and say "whatever that means."

To comprehend how postmodernist thinking incrementally assails normal thought, notice how often you hear "whatever that means" whenever somebody uses the adjective normal. Indeed, did you use it before completing that sentence? That is a postmodernist reflex inculcated into us by those who we have permitted to dominate our culture.

The more you think about postmodern, it is hard to imagine a word that better proves how abnormal "Progressives" and their goals for the future are.

The Grievances that Incited the American Revolution

"Your country is a den of dopes," snarked Ms Ann Thrope.
"Your fans who run my nation's propaganda mills were too easily seduced for you to gloat," observed Pascal.

We are often gifted by Hollywood with productions that have a patriotic theme.

I viewed two clips from one of them put up today at the Belmont Club. It was from the 2008 TV series John Adams starring Paul Giamatti.

It was filled with a good mix of characters, some renowned, some unknown. Much of the action was filled with bathos, where with help from a swelling score, we are driven to patriotic nostalgia. Aside from the saccharin melodrama, there was something far more disturbing.

The film staged the first public readings of the Declaration of Independence as might have happened all around the colonies. Good. The actors in different scenes got to read and react to, or simply react to the reading of, our Declaration. Fine. And it was all put together in a good collage that conveys the feelings of hearing it for the first time.

But something was missing -- literally.

The viewer is given little more than a sense of pride in the product, plus much tight jawed resolve and dread due to --- what? Irritation? Discomfort?

Somehow, no doubt for editorial reasons that are above Joe Biden's pay grade, the long litany of abuses by King George III, written out at length in the Declaration of Independence, were completely left out of this reading. Not a single outrage was mentioned, many of which could have afforded the actors to demonstrate the hard feelings of the times.

And what is worse, I am sure most students today, and likely few of their parents, ever set eyes on that list of British excesses visited upon the colonies. Who ever reads the Declaration in its entirety?

Well, apparently I did. Long ago. It made an impression on me. Enough of an impression that I noticed the meat of the matter was written out of this Hollywood production. It is a production that could easily become part of misleading indoctrination for the next generation of grade school students.

Enough of an impression that its absence drove me to complain and publish after five months silence.

For your benefit, especially when you know people who are totally in the dark who might be awakened thanks to you giving them the facts, here is the list of grievances that our forebears found so intolerable that they formally revolted against the country that inflicted the tyrannies. My personal "favorites" are reproduced in bold type.

• He has refused his assent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
• He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
• He has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of representation in the legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
• He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
• He has dissolved representative houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
• He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the legislative powers, incapable of annihilation, have returned to the people at large for their exercise; the state remaining in the meantime exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
• He has endeavored to prevent the population of these states; for that purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migration hither, and raising the conditions of new appropriations of lands.
• He has obstructed the administration of justice, by refusing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers.
• He has made judges dependent on his will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
• He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.
• He has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies without the consent of our legislature.
• He has affected to render the military independent of and superior to civil power.
• He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states:

For cutting off our trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing taxes on us without our consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of trial by jury:

For transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offenses:

For abolishing the free system of English laws in a neighboring province, establishing therein an arbitrary government, and enlarging its boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule in these colonies:

For taking away our charters, abolishing our most valuable laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our governments:

For suspending our own legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

• He has abdicated government here, by declaring us out of his protection and waging war against us.
• He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burned our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
• He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the head of a civilized nation.
• He has constrained our fellow citizens taken captive on the high seas to bear arms against their country, to become the executioners of their friends and brethren, or to fall themselves by their hands.
• He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare, is undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
  

I considered inserting little editors notes along side some of the items in the list. For example [Ruby Ridge] could easily have fit along side one of the items. I decided against it because I simply want the grievances highlighted in one place because they so often are forgotten (as all statists would wish).

I invite others to add what they wish to this list at their own sites. But better, simply print out the list (maybe edited a little) and give it to one of your "liberal" family members. Ask them where the list originated. The ensuing discussion could be helpful.

The Ministry of Truth: Almost There

In the dystopic world of George Orwell's 1984, all news and historical records were governed by the Ministry of Truth.*

I have played with this cognomen over the years by identifying the mainstream media (MSM) with various appellations such as the Ministry of (mis)Information, and MinInfo whenever MSM's manner of coverage of a story revealed its bias favoring most any form of statism.

Over the last two years, unlike any time in my long life, the MSM has warranted the name Ministry of MisInformation more than ever. It got to be an open joke among my acquaintences of how open the bias could get.

"Have they gotten around to framing every picture of Bush wearing a dunce cap?"

"It can't be long before every frame of Obama has him walking on water."

As the bailouts came into play last year, I observed that once news sources like the AP and newspapers like the NY Times were bailed out, they would be well along to becoming official state organs along the lines of the USSR's Izvestia and Pravda, reporting and printing only what those holding their purse-strings wished to see made known.

Now, as if the MSM hasn't done enough to show they can be trusted to be good Ministry of Truth employees, I have to hand it to my old buddy Fran Porretto for succinctly showing how much more they are worthy:

America got to its current state because of permanent government deficit finance, government debasement of the dollar, government redistribution, and government meddling in the economy, most particularly the credit market. Not one of these things was contemplated by the Founders or authorized by the Constitution of the United States. Washington proceeded with them anyway. Not one economist of any standing would disagree that our troubles are rooted in the very policy arrogances I just enumerated. But politicians, to whom government is the one and only "solution" to any and every "problem," have proposed that we address our difficulties by intensifying the very practices that produced them.

It is a sad fact that such a concise review of the why, and excuses for, the Obama stimulus and the TARP before it, can only be found on a relatively obscure website. Nowhere in the MSM are they discussed as a consistent group of related issues where logic would bring the listener or reader to Fran's conclusion. The fact these facts are never allowed to be built into an argument filled with legitimate observations and concerns anywhere in MSMdom tells us how in love with total state control visible MSM employees either are (true-believers) or think they must demonstrate they are (cynical self-servers).

With such able employees already well stationed in various MSM outlets, how soon before the Ministry of Truth emerges, fully grown and indomitable?

[*Editor's note: In later years Pascal Fervor began referring to American media as the Agency of Lies because he saw that we were not an Orwellian world quite yet, and felt it best that he speak the truth while he still could. He also used the acronym SKUNCs instead of RINOs for much the same reason.] 

Gore This Tune Out of Your Head

H/T to The American Culture