There used to be a time when being discovered standing over a dead body with the murder weapon in your hand was considered damning evidence, but it seems that the liberal mindset has relegated the smoking gun to mythological status, the veritable Pegasus of admissible probability. It is child's play to deny any wrong doing simply by denouncing your discoverers as liars and declaring the notion of your capacity to kill as ludicrous.
There are people who truly believe that George W. Bush and Dick Cheney covertly planted an intricate network of bombs throughout 220 stories of the Twin Towers with no one knowing a thing about it, or that anyone who did know has remained silent all this time. They believe it just as surely as they know the sun will rise in the East, despite the overwhelming logistical impossibility of it. Yet, these same people cannot conceive of a scientific cabal hellbent on economic and social domination even though the evidence is both abundant and mounting.
It is simply ridiculous, they will say, to think that so many people could possibly be in collusion, and the incriminating emails recently revealed prove nothing. Bragging of "tricking" temperature data or imploring colleagues to destroy potentially damaging emails has been "taken out of context", we're told. Then they will - with straight faces - accuse the deniers of being part of an oil-funded conspiracy to destroy the planet. Does anyone see the sick irony here?
While liberals are given the benefit of the doubt by their counterparts in the media, conservatives are condemned on here say alone. Tom Delay was run out of town because someone accused him of gerrymandering in Texas, yet Charles Rangel rolls on unimpeded as Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee after it was revealed that he failed to pay taxes. (The committee he chairs writes the tax laws). Timothy Geithner is the Secretary of the U.S. Treasury even though it was disclosed that he failed to pay his income taxes.
These are not new revelations, I know, but they must be taken in context with the grand Global Warming scheme, for just the mention of a Lord Monckton draws snickers and derision from the left, who cast him as a charlatan. It is much easier to avoid a serious discussion when the opponent is classified as unworthy of consideration rather than given a chance to be heard. The left simply cannot risk lending any form of credence to such "blasphemy". (Al Gore has been running from Monckton for quite some time now). And so they agree en masse to stifle any damaging discoveries and sneeringly scoff at accusations. And the media willingly abets.
I pray that James Inhofe and any like-thinking associates hang onto this like tenacious pit bulls and force it out into the mainstream. We have just witnessed the CRU being thoroughly embarrassed and supported to the hilt by a press that too fervently believes the lies they've been told. What's worse is that they are now less curious about the truth and more eager to perpetuate the lie, which is precisely why they are on the same page in portraying this devastating disclosure as no big deal. If they reported accurately on the news, too many people who may not have had the AGW belief firmly ingrained in their psyches may begin to doubt.
That would be unacceptable to a crowd that not only clearly subscribes to the lessons of Goebbels, but has managed to out do him. Keep lying and never stop denying. And if we can get more than half of the people to lie, then it must be the truth.
Sunday, November 29, 2009
There used to be a time when being discovered standing over a dead body with the murder weapon in your hand was considered damning evidence, but it seems that the liberal mindset has relegated the smoking gun to mythological status, the veritable Pegasus of admissible probability. It is child's play to deny any wrong doing simply by denouncing your discoverers as liars and declaring the notion of your capacity to kill as ludicrous.
Friday, November 27, 2009
We are once again being treated to the various approaches certain news outlets take to particular subjects. Fox News is complaining that the "mainstream" media is ignoring the bombshell caused by some hackers' release of Climate Research Institute emails. That is simply not true, as CNN has mentioned the story, but from a different perspective; they are doing what they can to downplay the significance of the event.
Despite their vehement denials of having a liberal agenda, left-leaning news outlets have habitually protected the liberal ideal whenever possible. Ignoring the abundant and overwhelming evidence of Obama's radical views and associations, the mainstream media sought to destroy the opposition ad nauseam. Even as the obvious stench of radicalism emanated from the Obama universe like a giant, gaseous cloud, it was of no concern to liberal media types. They were more interested in sending swarms of intrepid "journalists" to Wasilla, Alaska to go dumpster-diving for dirt on Sarah Palin.
Predictably, the furor over the release of environmentalists' emails is not about the damning nature of the emails but over how they were obtained. The leftist bloggers are righteously outraged over "this criminal act". The Huffington Post's Katherine Goldstein and Craig Kanalley write:
Despite the lack of evidence of some sort of conspiracy in the scientific community, this criminal activity has created fodder for right-wing groups and websites to promote their own agenda that global warming is not real. This comes at a time when international attention is more and more focused on the climate crisis in advance of the UN climate talks in Copenhagen in December.It is funny then, how HuffPo was not so concerned about private emails during the 2008 presidential campaign, or at any time they could damage Sarah Palin. In a November 14th article titled McCain Campaign Emails Contradict Palin's "Going Rogue", Sam Stein shamelessly writes:
Sarah Palin's much-discussed book, "Going Rogue," hasn't even been officially released yet and already its accuracy is in question.Apparently to HuffPo writers and other liberal pundits, the possible success of Palin's book is of such paramount importance as to warrant the procurement of private emails, while the economic enslavement of the world is trivial. Nevertheless, they may try to ignore the eco-cabal collapsing like a portion of the Larsen Ice Shelf on a mid-summer day, but it doesn't make it any less true. Sphere: Related Content
The Huffington Post has obtained internal McCain campaign emails -- addressed to and by the former vice presidential candidate -- that directly contradict or cast serious doubt on several of Palin's assertions.
Thursday, November 26, 2009
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Our Near-Death Experience at the Hands of Global Warming Alarmists
History is rife with examples of the value hindsight could offer were it not so aptly named, for its very nomenclature suggests the tardiness by which it is presented. The utter destruction of many past societies, when examined by the cooler heads of historians, could have been easily averted if only the participants at the time had the benefit of such counsel.
In the computer age, it must be acknowledged that hackers and writers of malicious code are usually of the criminal element, certainly. But when the unscrupulous stumble upon a scheme more nefarious than their own, and when they expose it for the good of their fellow Earthly inhabitants, I believe that some leniency may be in order.
The people responsible for the release of the incriminating emails of the perpetrators of the Global Warming Scam may have done more to save the Free World than they realized. Of course I could be wrong. They may very well have known exactly what they were doing, which to me would only enhance my gratitude to them. Unfortunately, the American media establishment suddenly sprouted "consciences" and refuse to report on this major development because the source is tainted. Please...
So very near to their goal of a New World Order were these alleged scientists and their accomplices that carelessness got the better of them. They were on a clear, unobstructed trajectory - on auto pilot - to the landing strip; Copenhagen. Then someone spilled their beverage on the console and the plane demanded human attention, but those in the cockpit were novices. It seems that the folks in the tower had it right all along.
As for those who squawked the loudest about this myth, even the antithesis to Lord Monckton, George Monbiot, was humiliated as he stated, "It’s no use pretending that this isn't a major blow. The emails extracted by a hacker from the climatic research unit at the University of East Anglia could scarcely be more damaging. I am now convinced that they are genuine, and I’m dismayed and deeply shaken by them." Monbiot mentions the illegality of this bombshell but still concedes that "there are some messages that require no spin to make them look bad."
The entire argument that "the science is settled" has been erased in a swift revelation by some person or group of people who will be classified in the coming days as being anywhere between the unprincipled to the intrepid. To be sure, the left will attempt to fixate the public's attention on the actions of the hackers to deflect from the broader issue of what they have discovered. It seems that the media today is less interested in truth and more cognizant of what would be considered admissible evidence.
Nevertheless, the damage inflicted thus far is damning to the tyrannical and a blessing to free people. Thankfully, our population seems to have recently awakened from a warm, comfortable slumber and will no longer tolerate the dictation of news dissemination by once-noble news sources that have long ago watched their own souls depart in nearly transparent, ghostly vapors. While it admittedly took the shock of having our nightcovers suddenly ripped off of us on a cold night, we have the political opposition to thank.
Nothing like a cold slap in the face to revive the contest. Sphere: Related Content
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Before anyone out there begins frantically dialing up Janet Napolitano, rest assured that this is not a threat to our president. As hard as it may be for the Left to believe, despite the fact that I am a staunch Conservative, I am not a treasonous racist. And lest the painful memories of ropes and chains cause trauma to any readers, I use them for ballast rather than for any menacing purpose.
There is an incredible irony in the fact that America's first African-American president is not descended from slaves. Perhaps this is because - in my mind, at least - a valid argument could be made that if Obama were indeed a descendant of slaves, it would explain his intended enslavement of us as a sort of vengeance. But there are several fallacies in such reasoning, such as the fact it is not only Caucasians who will be his victims, but everyone, including those with bonafide ancestors of bondage.
Obama's Utopian socialist vision is not about race, after all, but about domination and control. For as wealthy as he has become as a beneficiary of a free society, the money is never enough for those of his mindset. It is the insatiable quest for power that is the driving force for men such as he, and the table has been set. He is preparing to feast.
Despite the horrible history for past victims of the society Obama hopes to create, there are still far too many people aiding and abetting our march to a gray doom, a colorless landscape of despair and universal poverty. The visions of desperate people imprisoned in their own country by the Berlin wall apparently is not enough evidence for those who anxiously await the same fate at the hands of a totalitarian Obama.
Satellite photographs of a pitch black North Korea at night - where the only lights shine in the compound of the Communist ruler - are not enough of a deterrent for this segment of our nation. Visions of long lines of Russians hungrily hoping for one loaf of bread have seeped from their memories, if those visions ever existed there in the first place. It could very well be that those who applaud his maneuvering have become conditioned to believe that this - existence in America - is the Hell they wish to escape. Poor, misguided souls.
Equal misery for all has long been my own understanding of the end result of Obama's - or Saul Alinsky's - plans. There have been no signs to sway me from that opinion. To the contrary, his tacit approval of the governance of places like Cuba, Venezuela or even Iran make me all the more wary. And the nauseating apologies to the world for our success is nothing short of frightening.
Knowing that it would be impossible to raise everyone up to the level of a Bill Gates, the only way to achieve the insane goal of total equality for all is to level the mountains and make us all a plain. Young adults today are the first victims of such a mentality, having grown up playing games instead of competing. Drummed into their little skulls was the notion that there was no need to keep score because it didn't matter who won. There would be trophies for all whatever the outcome of the game.
Removing the desire to excel has been part of the plan, and it seems to have borne fruit. The work ethic of our youth today is dismal, to be kind, and the sense of entitlement staggering. So it is that when the carrot of "free" stuff is dangled before them that they will follow blindly, fixated on the carrot alone and oblivious to where their feet land. That is a dangerous, myopic march, one that removes peripheral vision and allows for nefarious events to go undetected.
For as much as the Democrats have opposed every attempt at keeping illegal aliens from entering our country, don't be surprised if they suddenly experience an epiphany and endorse the completion of the wall on the border with Mexico, or the construction of one on the northern border, as well.
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Now that the blame for America's economic woes is being laid at the feet of businesses, Pelosi wants to wall them in to prevent any chance of their fleeing to more fertile grounds. In effect, she wants to imprison them here so that she and her insatiable cohorts can finally bleed them dry. Oh sure, it is not being portrayed as imprisonment, but attempting to make the surrounding landscape just as unappealing as the grass on this side is tantamount to offering no choice but to die or die.
Rather than reducing the money wasted annually by the government - thus enabling the lowering of taxes on corporations - the Democrats want the rest of the world's nations to raise their own taxes to be as equally prohibitive to success as America's. More accurately stated, they want competition erased, havens for prosperity eliminated and our neighbors' lawns to beckon to no one.
And far too many Americans - those who form their political opinions based on blaring headlines and tantalizing sound bites - have been conditioned over the years to loathe the entities who not only provide the very goods by which they obtain their information, along with myriad other staples of their lives, but who also provide the jobs for which they hunger.
So successful has the divide-and-conquer strategy of the Left been that stemming the tide of all-out socialism in this country - once a ludicrous notion - will now require Herculean efforts by those who still love Mom and apple pie. Even as people yell from the rooftops their opposition to everything from universal health care to massive deficits to confiscatory taxation, the Democrats cavalierly march forward and audaciously claim to be "fighting for the American people".
Perhaps there is a gratuitous preposition in that phrase, as they more accurately appear to be "fighting the American people". Losing all of their false campaign humility the moment their oaths are sworn, the controlling Democrats begin the task of undermining the will of those who voted them into office. When the electorate protests their actions, they belittle them without a modicum of respect and then begin the unheard-of practice of holding votes critically important to more and more of their constituency on weekends, when they think no one is watching.
Our elected officials have lost the American ethic of improvement through hard work and sacrifice on the part of the people, preferring instead to lower the bar, scrape the excess off the top and plop it at the bottom to equalize the masses. They vilify the entrepreneur to curry favor with those below who await whatever scraps may fall their way, rather than enabling the wretched to climb. Once they had finished sawing the bottom rungs of the ladder, they took to the task of plucking those at the top and throwing them downward.
Speaking at a news conference on the prospect of imposing higher taxes on financial transactions, to prevent Wall Street jobs from moving off shore, Pelosi said that it would have to be an international effort. "It would have to be an international rule, not just a U.S. rule," Pelosi said at a news conference. "We couldn't do it alone, we'd have to do it as an international initiative."
Wars in foreign lands were once the only endeavor in which our Congress sought international support. Now they apparently seek the same global approval in their war on their own people. God help us.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
I struggle, I truly do, to find a way to make people understand what they willfully inflict upon themselves in the name of the "greater good". I shake my head in wonder at the ease with which they have been conditioned to march blindly into the bayonets, all the while thinking that theirs is a noble journey. Liberals routinely lay claim to intellectual superiority because they read the most popular and prestigious propaganda rags, but the ideologies they espouse are entirely emotion-based and rely not on logic.
The assault has been waged by this mindset in true militaristic fashion, with the planners and commanders (Liberal punditry) guiding the foot soldiers (the protesters) and dutifully reporting their successes, thus encouraging ever more bold incursions. Their front has been advancing for decades almost unchallenged, and they began to feel invincible. Who would ever dare stand in their way? Then they hit the stone wall of the Tea Party movement.
What I would only describe as a "guerrilla" resistance, the Tea Party movement - contrary to how the Left attempts to portray it - is the modern day version of the Minute Men, with ordinary citizens once reticent or otherwise preoccupied to the point of inaction to mobilize, have finally had their water lines breached. They are pushing back, and the Left are beside themselves and in chaotic, flailing disarray. To the further dismay of the Left, the punditry of the Right are mere witnesses, themselves amazed at the spectacle unfolding before them, perhaps to become the retroactive generals in the battle.
I have read in recent days from fellow bloggers who exhibit nothing but scorn for we who wish to return to more simple times, times of low taxes and less government intrusion into every aspect of our lives. These well-written essays have claimed that it was those very simple days which are responsible for the state of our nation today. One in particular stands out in my mind. A Liberal writer asked if we were better off back in the '50's or '60's or today, which is a fair question, yet an ambiguous one, as the definition of "better off" is so highly subjective that it is moot to debate. Since I am fond of an argument, however, I will entertain the notion.
I grew up in the very early '60's and my mother never worked. I lived in a three bedroom house with a basement that my father finished with his own hands. It was a palace to me. We also had a small cabin cruiser on which we spent every weekend across the bay at the beach, and life was grand. I thought we were rich. Little did I know. While my father made only $77.00 per week back then, we had a very comfortable lifestyle, but he worried constantly, though he never complained and seemed genuinely happy. They retired on his salary (which obviously progressed over the years) and my mother still never had to work.
Thinking back to those days and trying to imagine life like that today - with no computers, cell phones, et al - is a difficult thought, but I still believe that in those days of limited government involvement life was by far better. Still, it wasn't the government that made the modern technologies we now rely upon a possibility; it was American entrepreneurialism.
But this Liberal writer complained that it is jobs we need now in order to save America and the working people, blaming greedy corporations for sending our jobs overseas. It must be understood that no person ever starts a business for the purpose of putting people to work. Putting people to work is actually a byproduct of a successful business. The business exists to make money, and if there is no profit, the business is pointless. And no homeless person ever hired a single soul. Sorry, Libs.
Democrats decided that in order to fund their perpetually increasing intrusions into our lives, someone had to pay more taxes. Realizing that their popularity would be jeopardized with their constituents, they decided to tax we the people modestly while slamming rich businesses, claiming that they had the money to pay. Naturally, a business taxed to poverty level would seek environs more conducive to the reason for its existence; profit. Add to this assault on enterprise the rise of labor unions and their strangle hold on corporations, with insanely inflated wages and absurd "legacy costs", whereby retired union workers who, in their 80's, are still covered in full by that "evil corporation" for their health care. Is it any wonder that automobiles cost so much and the companies that make them are broke?
Next is health care, which our government complains about ad nauseam. They insisted on taking responsibility for portions of it to "help the people", but now they complain of its costs. What to do? Why, take more control and seize more money from the citizens, of course. If one cannot see the trajectory of total domination by this "benevolent behemoth" of the Federal government, and its machinations toward that end, one needs an expensive pair of "free" spectacles. It is the overreaching ambitions of alleged public servants, hungry for control rather than servitude, who are inflicting upon us the ills we currently face.
Like the insipid tentacles of a cancerous cell invading healthy cells, the downward spiral of America feeds upon itself with the aid of the silent, hoping that it is nothing more than a persistent cough. Liberals are the deadly carcinogens.
Would I trade my technology for a day on my father's boat? Possibly, but I would prefer to have my own boat with wireless Internet and GPS and the freedom to enjoy both pleasures simultaneously, but my servants have become the masters and forbid it. Which was better, then?
Friday, November 13, 2009
So the Obama Justice Department has decided to bring five high-profile detainees from Guantanamo Bay's Camp X-Ray to New York City to "stand trial" for their complicity in the September 11th attacks on the World Trade Center. Such folly can never withstand the scrutiny of history, for there can be no rainbow at the end of this endeavor. While I am forced to question a naive innocence on the part of the president, considering his alleged acumen in all things legal, I further lay the blame for what is to come squarely at the feet of a fawning media and an unwitting and adoring populace.
How could a president who attended Harvard Law School be stupid enough to attempt a trial of terrorists in an American civilian court? How could the same president - who as a student and president of the Harvard Law Review at that academic institution - not see the obvious pitfalls in attempting to build a winning case against Khalid Sheik Mohammed, or any of the other defendants currently making their way to New York City?
The administration is portraying this move as an exercise in poetic justice, trying these bastards for their heinous crimes against New York in the shadow of the buildings they did not manage to destroy. Those who choose to applaud this president without the slightest shred of intellectual curiosity drink up such drivel as gospel. The exercise, however, is a lose-lose-lose proposition.
If I were the attorney for KSM, I would move to have the charges immediately dismissed based on the fact that the defendant was detained without being Mirandized and was denied legal counsel. I would cite the absence of due process and the right to speedy trial by a jury of his peers. To make the sudden, lurching transition from enemy combatant to criminal defendant begs that these motions be addressed. While common sense would dictate that this line of defense would crash and burn, American courts rely more on statutes and precedents and less on emotion. Therein lies the problem.
Democratic allies of the president have hailed this move as evidence of the majesty of American juris prudence, with Patrick Leahy declaring that our fairness would be a beacon of good will toward the world. His claim that our bestowing basic rights on a deadly enemy will somehow portray us as civilized to the Nth degree is flawed, however.
These are rights reserved for American citizens and have no place in an American civilian court for illegal combatants captured in the process of fighting our troops in violation of the Geneva Conventions. Rather than standing in awe of our magnanimous judicial system, as Senator Leahy suggests, the terrorists will sneer at our hypocrisy should we try this cretin in our courts without those basic legal protections. That is the first loss.
Clearly, the only way to even have a chance at convictions will be to skirt those protections in a wave of exceptions. The appearance of fairness thus evaporates as fast as dry spit on a summer Texas sidewalk. A conviction under these conditions will bring wails of outrage from Muslims and liberals alike, which - considering the temperament of each - usually involves burning buildings, overturned vehicles and bloody citizens. Loss number two.
Once this charade begins, with the spectre of either of the previous scenarios already known to be completely unacceptable, it remains that the only other possible outcome would be for these killers to be acquitted and set free, thus completing the loss trifecta. Considering that the American Civil Liberties Union has already heralded this move, it only stands to reason that they will bring to bear the full weight of their influence to protect the "rights" of the newly declared "innocent".
A president so well versed in the law should be painfully aware of the myriad cases in our courts where the obviously guilty are set free due to simple procedural errors. This trial will begin as one big error, and even the most hardcore of patriotic judges will have little leeway for discretion.
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Last week in Upstate New York's 23rd Congressional district, Conservative Doug Hoffman, trailing in the polls by 5,335 votes, conceded the election to Democrat Bill Owens. Believing that he had barely won his own town of Oswego, and only 7% of the vote left to count, Hoffman graciously offered congratulations to Owens.
That opened the door for Nancy Pelosi to quickly swear in Owens in time for Saturday's House vote on Health Care Reform, a rare weekend vote. Like a football team that knows it must run a play quickly before the challenge flag is thrown by the opposing coach, Pelosi and her cohorts believe they got the snap off in time. The shiny, new Congressman Owens, who throughout his campaign opposed health care reform measures, helped seal the "victory" on Saturday for his party.
But Hoffman's concession may have been a bit premature. There were problems with the counting of ballots in Oswego, we now learn, that may have altered Hoffman's decision on election night. On election night, Hoffman's camp believed they had won Oswego by only 500 votes, but inspectors found that the margin was more than triple that amount at 1,748 votes. According to Hoffman campaign spokesman Rob Ryan, "I don’t know if we would have conceded on election night. I’m someone who doesn’t like to look back. But would we have taken longer to make a decision on election night? Probably, if we knew it was only 3,000 votes making the difference."
Despite the fact that New York State had sent a letter to the House Clerk explaining that it had not certified the election because no winner had been declared, with Owens still leading by 3,000 votes it was ruled legal for Pelosi to officially swear in the new member. Along with Democrat John Garamendi, who also won a special election in California, Pelosi had the 218 votes needed to pass the House version of health care reform legislation.
But there are still 10,200 military and overseas absentee ballots to be counted. While Hoffman's chances to overcome a deficit of 3,000 votes is still remote, it is possible. What that would mean for the vote on Saturday is unclear, but it is certain that Owens would be forced to vacate the seat. Republican Rep. Anh "Joseph" Cao of Louisiana said he voted in favor of the bill only after he saw that the Democrats had the needed 218 votes. If Hoffman is indeed the ultimate victor, would they have a re-vote? And would Cao reverse his vote if the Democrats only had 217 votes?
It remains to be seen, and the ramifications will interesting. It will also be fascinating to watch the reactions of the House leadership if this turns foul for them.
Monday, November 9, 2009
It's to the women and men who in their hands hold a Bible and a gun
And they ain't afraid of nothing, when when they're holding either one - Lynyrd Skynyrd, "That Ain't My America", God And Guns (2009)
Considering the life span of a deity, a single day spans centuries, and so it was after a considerable period of rest that God gave us guns, perhaps as early as the 12th century AD. In terms of God's longevity, it could be argued that this was in response to witnessing the birth of Islam one weekend from Heaven. I believe He knew what was coming.
What that scenario conjures is the remote possibility that God can be surprised. For the truly faithful, contingency plans on the part of the Lord are unthinkable simply because One who is the Creator and the omnipotent One should never be caught off guard. Yet there is the presence of Lucifer in biblical history. Surely God never planned for that nasty bit of defiance...or did He?
Many more centuries would pass since the Gift of the Gun before mortal men, after learning from past mistakes, would finally take their faith in God and create a state (nation) governed by His commandments. (Oh, I can hear the shrieks already forming in the gullets of the liberals). Based on the principle that free men should be ruled by no one but God, America's Founders fought valiantly and at great personal risk to break free from oppression at the hands of other ordinary men and placed their trust in God and good people who agreed to live by the same principles.
It worked. America thrived and rose at a rate unimaginable to past civilizations, and with a harmony in it's maturity that would be the envy of all other nations of the Earth. Comprised of a diversity difficult to comprehend, America grew and prospered while hardly noticing the speed bumps of jealousy amongst new arrivals and those already ensconced. In the grand scheme of things, these have been chalked up as mere growing pains.
Then the trouble started. New arrivals, lured by the freedoms afforded by our military might and our Constitution, and encouraged by those who perhaps considered our success an affront to the poorer nations, began to insist that simple assimilation would no longer suffice. They decided that since America was the Land Of The Free, they were free to embrace their former cultures while enjoying the protections of their new cultures. While their compatriots who arrived decades before them strove to become Americans, they began resisting such "humiliations" by refusing to learn the new language or practicing the same social mores.
Then it became a social stigma to disagree with such a mindset. Liberals, uncomfortable with the luxuries of being who they were, set out to champion the very diversity that would facilitate the unravelling of America's fabric. The very mention of God would become taboo, and the guns would come under similar attack. Behaviors once considered heinous would be portrayed as simple lifestyle choices first, and vigorously defended second as rights.
Once completely ingrained in the American consciousness, it became child's play to begin the steady encroachment of government on the activities of all. Eagerly seizing the responsibility for our well being, government has used that responsibility as the tool by which to dictate our every pursuit. And now we find ourselves on the threshold of complete domination in the form of Universal Health Care.
Even worse, we have become a people paralyzed by our own language, unable to properly label things as they actually are. (The irony here is that while we are chastised for "ignoring the science" of Global Warming, it is science that sustains itself on labels). We are excoriated for calling a terrorist a terrorist because it might offend the sensibilities of Muslims, but the founding religion of America (Christianity) is reviled ad nauseam.
And the worst part of all is the fact that our "leadership" today are the biggest perpetrators of the assault on the nation's foundation. Candidate Obama once complained of "fly-over" America "clinging to their Bibles and guns". And yet - as a wise man once said - it will be the guns that rule at America's end, just as they did at its inception. And the God-loving people bearing those arms will mournfully pray with each round fired.
As Christians, they will not pray for sexual euphoria upon their own deaths, but for the souls of those they reluctantly have slain. If our new president cannot make this distinction, I will offer my service in his stead. It must be said.
In closing, please enjoy the song, which was part of the inspiration for this post.
Sphere: Related Content
Sunday, November 8, 2009
When the United Negro College Fund's board allows a member of the Ku Klux Klan to participate in its activities, or Planned Parenthood announces its newest member in Michael Phelps, the vile anti-abortionist who protests at fallen soldiers' funerals, then maybe I'll be able to reconcile the United States military's practice of allowing the enemy to join its ranks. Perhaps the biggest problem, however, is that no one has the fortitude to call the enemy the enemy.
Certainly there are Muslims serving honorably in our armed forces, and not all of them have nefarious intent, let me make that clear. But how do we weed out those who are engaged in infiltration for the purposes of killing our young men and women where they sleep? Do we always have to wait until 13 are dead and 30 wounded? And do we ignore the behavior of those who cheer jihadists' "victories"?
What President Obama calls "healthy diversity" in our military amounts to an Army Major praying to Allah for the defeat of his own "comrades" in both theaters of Iraq and Afghanistan. What Obama sees as a different point of view is the same Major who equates a suicide bomber with a soldier falling on a grenade to save his buddies. Even after shouting "allahu-akbar" as he murdered those who trusted him, Obama cautioned against hasty judgement, a caution he himself failed to exercise in the case of the Cambridge police.
It must be understood that even the most well-mannered wolf would never be accepted by the sheep as one of the flock. Why are men so damned stupid, then?
In March of 2008, Hassan Abu-Jihaad, a signalman on the guided missile destroyer USS Benfold, was convicted of providing classified information on his battle group's movements in 2001, putting his ship at risk of attack in the Straits of Hormuz. Abu-jihaad in e-mails praised the October 2000 terrorist suicide attack on the USS Cole - in which 17 sailors died - as effective psychological warfare and a "martyrdom operation."
At Camp Pennsylvania in Kuwait on March 22, 2003, Sgt. Hasan Akbar rolled three grenades into three tents, killing two officers and wounding 14 soldiers of the 101st Airborne Division just before the invasion of Iraq. He was convicted and sentenced to death in 2005. Prosecutors said he was concerned about U.S. troops killing fellow Muslims in the Iraq war. And he shouted..."allahu akbar!" during his heinous act.
Geraldo Rivera wrote a neurotic piece concerning the latest Muslim attack-from-within, making the case for the "15,000 Muslims serving honorably in the Armed Forces, and the four to five million more who are law abiding, patriotic citizens of the United States." Forgive me, Geraldo, but my sympathies are strained for that number of Muslim voices whose best protestation of radical Islam is little more than a muffled murmur.
And demonstrating perfectly the left's angst at these attackers not being named "Smith", as so eloquently stated by C. Edmund Wright of The American Thinker, Rivera makes the ridiculous comparison of Nidal Malik Hasan's actions to those of the Columbine shooters':
But considering all we've been through, two nut-jobs do not a trend make.Like all good liberals, Rivera believes that if our heads are buried deeply enough in the sand that no harm can come to us. I do not suggest purging every Muslim from our military, but I do beseech the Command to - at the very least - immediately remove any Muslim who exhibits the slightest proclivity toward jihad. Sphere: Related Content
To me, the accused Fort Hood shooter has more in common with the murderous duo in Columbine High. He's a Palestinian-American version of Eric Harris or Dylan Klebold; a neglected, frustrated, impotent, sociopath who attempts to couch his murderous rampage in the psycho-babble of larger purpose.
Saturday, November 7, 2009
It is bitterly funny to recall how - only a year ago - the left shrieked hysterically about the preciousness of freedom and liberty and the alleged assault on those principles by George W. Bush. My, how perceptions radially shift with the reins of power. While we still retain the freedom to protest and demonstrate for the time being, our voices may as well be mute as it is clear that our public servants cannot or will not hear them.
In blatant and arrogant defiance of the will of the people, the House of Representatives not only is ignoring the citizens, but is also brow-beating its own members who are reluctant to vote for the health care fiasco touted by the Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Scheduled for a vote today, the measure may be pushed back a day or two because the leadership is having difficulty securing the requisite 218 votes for passage. This is somewhat good news in an atmosphere of doom since the longer it takes for a vote, the more scrutiny the bill receives.
Even as the opposition points out the obvious flaws in the bill, quoting from the very language of the document, the Democrats flatly deny its nefarious intent. Ranking Member of the House Ways and Means Committee Dave Camp (R-MI) has posted a letter online from the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) in response to his request for confirmation of the penalty for non-compliance with the provisions of H.R. 3962. The bill clearly states that individuals who do not maintain “acceptable health insurance coverage” and do not pay the required penalty face fines of up to $250,000 and five years in prison.
Some frightening excerpts from the JCT letter:
“H.R. 3962 provides that an individual (or a husband and wife in the case of a joint return) who does not, at any time during the taxable year, maintain acceptable health insurance coverage for himself or herself and each of his or her qualifying children is subject to an additional tax.” [page 1]The key players in this mess, Obama, Pelosi and Reid keep repeating the talking point "choice and competition". Well, here is your choice if this monstrosity gets passed; You can forfeit a minimum of $15,000 per year for government healthcare, you can pay 2.5% of your income for the new individual mandate tax if you don't buy coverage, or you can pay $250,000 in fines and rot in a cell for five years.
“If the government determines that the taxpayer’s unpaid tax liability results from willful behavior, the following penalties could apply…” [page 2]
Prosecution is authorized under the Code for a variety of offenses. Depending on the level of the noncompliance, the following penalties could apply to an individual:
• Section 7203 – misdemeanor willful failure to pay is punishable by a fine of up to $25,000 and/or imprisonment of up to one year.
• Section 7201 – felony willful evasion is punishable by a fine of up to $250,000 and/or imprisonment of up to five years.” [page 3]
So where does the "competition" come in, you ask? My best guess is whether the government charges you for its compassion or they offer it for free to you, prisoner number 54961A. Sphere: Related Content
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
It may not have been the intention of Jerry Siegel - the creator of Superman - for the comic hero to represent America, but the similarities between Superman and America are difficult to dismiss
Conceived in 1934 by a young man with fantastical delusions of grandeur, Superman would ultimately become the definition for American might and benevolence. And it wouldn't take long for the creative minds at DC Comics to develop villains who - envious of the omnipotence of this hero - would seek the equalizing factor necessary to defeat him.
Our early understanding of Superman was limited to a brief biographical of his arrival from another planet and the rest of the tale was a lead-cased (I couldn't resist) journey of righteous crime fighting devoid of any insight into the man himself. All we knew of him was derived from his exploits when necessary to thwart the deeds of evildoers, with little attention devoted to his "off hours", so to speak.
It wasn't really until Hollywood got involved that we began to understand the Human side of Superman. It took the Liberal Arts majors' intense examinations to discover the rancid worms of emotion slithering in the soul of Superman to truly make him one of us, someone possessing all of the common foibles of humanity; a powerful, sentient being who shared with his flock the traits of love and jealousy while resisting the temptation of hate. What they could not do, however, was change the composition of him. Even as they exposed his capacity for love and envy, they could not find it within themselves to transform him into evil, and as his power was still immense, he remained the humble servant of those he could have easily ruled.
Still the veritable babe of the planet, America as a nation began lifting pianos in its infancy as well, and has grown up to learn the lessons of justice and ...well, the American way. For much of its existence the country has been the dominant force and, at its zenith, was near omnipotence. Like the presence of the comic book hero, the world has come to rely on the assurances of safety offered by America without fear of being forced to succumb to her whims.
The parallel lies in the fact that both were reviled, despite their benevolence, and both forged enemies who found themselves unable to abide power not in their hands. In the case of the fictitious hero, an equally fictitious villain appeared in the form of Lex Luther who discovered that a piece of his enemy's native planet would render him vulnerable to attack as an ordinary human, making him susceptible to defeat, thought prior to be an impossibility.
In the actual case of America, the search for her own vulnerability began decades ago as subversives strove to gain traction in the struggle to rid the world of its lone sentinel of freedom and righteousness. Even as these forces managed to work in unison and cause distractions for the most powerful nation on the planet, however, there was one element missing necessary for the final bringing of America to its knees; the Kryptonite. Now it seems they have found it.
The Executive branch of the federal government has always been the final gate through which potentially destructive legislation would pass, and it has been rare that both this branch and the Legislative have been controlled by the same party. Furthermore, in times past when this has been the case, the Democrats were much less bold in their leftist agenda than today. They have achieved the perfect storm and are wreaking havoc on our nation.
Casting subtlety aside, Obama came out of the gate and began to prostrate himself - and us - before the world, apologizing for our temerity to be great. Mirroring his Utopian vision of "sameness" amongst the people, he projected the same socialist ideology on the grand scale of the world, insisting that America was no better or nor worse than any other country.
The world rejoiced at this sudden obsequiousness from the country that most of the world - even the beneficiaries of our magnanimity - viewed as arrogant. Oslo reacted instantly, offering the Nobel Peace prize as reward for Obama's dropping of America's drawers. Other, less friendly nations rejoiced in a different way.
North Korea and Iran accelerated their nuclear programs and defiantly began firing test missiles amidst the virtual silence of the new administration, and countries like Venezuela and Cuba brazenly ramped up anti-capitalist rhetoric. Suddenly, there was nothing to fear from the United States. And domestically, the tool of the left was busy whittling away at the strengths of America; her economy and her military.
Like Superman, a prolonged exposure to this onslaught will mean death. Let's hope that 2010 ends that exposure. Sphere: Related Content
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
I have long been loathe to stray too far from the Republican party in support of a third party candidate simply because of the prospect of spoiling any chance of unseating a Democrat. Ross Perot comes to mind for he was instrumental in giving us President Bill Clinton. My mind is slowly changing, however, as I come to realize that the party to which I have been a lifelong member has demonstrated lately that it is not all that different from the Democrat party, it is only a different hue.
This was in evidence in New York's 23rd Congressional district on Saturday when Republican Dede Scozzafava dropped out of the race with Democrat Bill Owens and Conservative party member Doug Hoffman. On Sunday, rather than embracing Hoffman, she threw her support to the Democrat Owens, betraying the Conservative wing of the Republican party and revealing that she was a liberal RINO who would have done us no good at all had she stayed in and won. Since Sunday, Hoffman - a third party candidate - has surged in the polls.
Politico is also reporting that this is not an isolated movement, as Conservatives are lining up even now in preparation for 2010, and plan to challenge Republican incumbents and candidates alike. Dick Armey, chairman of FreedomWorks, an organization that has been closely aligned with the tea party movement, refers to it as the "tip of the spear". While developing inroads into national politics is most definitely an uphill battle, it is not only possible but, as we're seeing of late, more likely by the day.
The reasons are plain to see. There are many amongst the Republican party who yearn for a return to Conservative ideals for the brand, keeping the party alive while transforming it back to the days of Reagan. But with betrayal after betrayal, such as those of Arlen Specter and Dede Scozzafava, no assurances will any longer suffice. If the mere threat of a serious challenge by Conservatives appears to alter the current course of the Republicans, what guarantees do we have that, once elected, they won't revert back to their liberal ways?
We allowed the left to basically thrust John McCain upon us, thus ensuring the election of the most radical person ever to occupy the White House. After ten months on the job, the only positive Obama has produced is the tardy fervor of ordinary Americans, once reticent to mobilize, to suddenly become a genuine force to be reckoned with, as evidenced by the spate of Town Hall meetings last summer. Certainly it was Democrats who bore the brunt of America's fury but Republicans couldn't possibly ignore it.
But they did, and they continue to ignore it at their own peril. Third party candidates historically have come to the fight naked and alone, offering little challenge and receiving nothing but scorn. Now they lead an army of angry citizens disgusted with the state of our nation and frustrated at their once silent screams; legions of people infuriated at Congress for their refusal to obey the halt order. As we demand that they leave our health care alone, they plow ahead defiantly, not forgetting but arrogantly denying that they work for us.
Well, it is no longer party time. The party is over, but we'll leave the lights on so that a brave new wave of true representatives can see the mess they will have to clean up without tripping over the debris. And the debris is strewn across the nation as the wreckage of a mid-flight explosion of an airliner, on a much grander scale.
Through their obsequious manner - even when they controlled Congress - the Republicans have abandoned us and the nation, paving the way for every imaginable fetish to be normalized. Now these once deviant thoughts and lifestyles are no longer normal, they are preferential in the eyes of government. What was once unspeakable is now portrayed as mainstream, and those who oppose it are the weird ones. How in God's name did we get to this point?
Forty years ago it would have been political suicide to publicly revere someone like Mao Tse Tung, but now a White House official speaks loving of the monster and those who gasp at such a thing are considered the kooks. It is quite astounding.
The only alternative left is to shun both parties and start from scratch. This is as good a time as any to start.
Sunday, November 1, 2009
On December 6th representatives from 171 countries will descend on the city of Copenhagen in a monumental effort to save the planet from doom at the hands of Man. With the Kyoto Protocol set to expire in 2012, these national emissaries - in conjunction with the United Nations - have determined that two years is short time to construct a new mandate on the world's countries to reverse their destructive ways.
There are an estimated 8,000 people expected to attend the meetings - which will run the two weeks from the 6th through the 18th. That number presumably represents the principals only, not taking into account the numerous staff and security personnel required for heads of state and ambassadors. Assuming a conservative estimate of only two additional people per principal, the number swells to 24,000. And then there are all of the world's journalists who will be on hand to tell us how the progress is going in determining how we can reduce our carbon footprints.
There are live concerts held by ostensibly well-meaning musicians and attended by tens of thousands of people who do so out of trepidation about the state of the planet, yet as they raise money to raise awareness, they contribute to the problem that they perceive exists. And the mammoth Al Gore would crush an entire forest underfoot just to save a sapling from dehydration.
Then we have another example of piousness exhibited by the slovenly, obese, wealthy Michael Moore, who complains about the health care system in this country and betrays the financial system that allowed his accumulation of wealth. While offering a dismal example of personal care, Moore actually claimed that capitalism has done nothing for him. And yes, there are people who believe him.
There are members of our Congress who write our tax codes and legislation and can't even follow their own rules. (Charlie Rangel (D-NY) comes to mind immediately). They write the laws that would land us in jail or - at the very least, have us paying a stiff penalty - yet they can flaunt those laws with impunity, even as they chastise the rest of us.
Perhaps the best example of all of this rampant hypocrisy, however, is the way that insanely rich celebrities admonish those who make their lavish lifestyles possible - us - to "help the needy". As we're constantly told that the rich do not pay their fair share of taxes - despite the fact that they not only pay the lion's share, but they do so for services that they do not consume to the same extent as the actual beneficiaries - I would wager that rich celebrities' philanthropy does not quite measure up to that of the ordinary working man, percentage wise.
The very foundation of America is being torn apart by the destructive machinations of a few elites who somehow view our society as unfair, yet the very poorest of our citizens would be the envy of any ordinary citizen of Darfur if those people could even begin to imagine the relative blissfulness of a "suffering" American. Our generosity has been ignored and even denigrated by our government in order to facilitate the seizure of our finances. It is being done so that government can hand out checks drawn on our bank accounts for the purpose of appearing to be the benevolent savior of the downtrodden.
And it is all about maintaining positions of power. After all, who would vote against the hand that feeds them?