Thursday, March 31, 2016

Abortion, Politics, Morals, Penalties

An Echo, Not a ‘Choice’ - WSJ:

There seems to be universal political agreement that even if Roe-V-Wade was overturned and states were allowed to protect the unborn, killing them should be a "victimless crime".

I'm CLEARLY not a politician  -- so that probably is the only "reasonable / non-crazy / winnable / etc" POLITICAL position. I'm surprised, but I'm surprised a LOT these days.

Morally though, it seems to me that taking the life of an unborn baby is either wrong or it isn't. If it is not wrong, then why would it ever be made illegal? If it IS made illegal, how did we get to the position that it is "politically insane" for there to be a penalty for breaking the law?

Let's say that Jamar Clark's (black man killed in scuffle for policeman gun in November up in Minneapolis) girlfriend decided that after probably being beaten many times, maybe with huge emotion, soul searching, reticence, etc that she was going to take matters in her own hands and kill the bastard.

Now depending on circumstance -- was he in the act of beating her, did she "fear for her life", etc, she may well get off with self-defense (and I'd be fine with that) ... however, if after a certain beating she just decide when she got up early to eviscerate him with a butcher knife, there would be a trial and a penalty. "Soul searching, thinking she had no options, etc notwithstanding.

I know I'm WAY out on a limb here -- even the WSJ asserts that "nobody holds the penalty position".

My question then is whether the battle for the unborn is not already lost then. Jamar Clark had a nasty criminal record, had beaten his girlfriend bad enough for EMTs to be called and was interfering with them forcing them to call police. This information was considered (as it should be) immaterial relative to his life being lost in a scuffle with police. He was "innocent until proven guilty". Had the officers been found to not have acted properly they would have been charged with some level of "manslaughter" -- or possibly even murder.

If a baby in it's mothers womb is NOT human life, then why regulate abortion at all? It can't be "killed" any more than your appendix can -- which is why pro-choice people hold the position that they do (at least the ones that care about morals).  No "tissue rights".

Is it possible for the pro-life position to have any moral standing but not deal with the question of there being a penalty for killing the unborn baby?

I can't see how.

 I don't say that the penalty for "first offence, especially underage, extenuating circumstance" has to be large, but we definitely live in a society where if an underage male is accused of ANY form of "sexual harassment", there is no compunction whatsoever for the system to identify them as a "sex offender" with a trail that may follow them for life.

I think Trump handled the question badly for sure, but I had never realized that the official position of the pro-life movement was that there could be no penalty for women getting an abortion if Roe V Wade was ever overturned.

Given that moral position, I can't imagine how it ever will be.

'via Blog this'

Narratives, Unarmed Black Victim, Domestic Violence

No charges in Clark shooting draws a strong reaction - StarTribune.com:

I continue to subject myself to an hour or two of MPR a week, and since November, a liberal might say that I've been "the victim" of WAY more coverage of Jamar Clark than a rational person should be subjected to.

During the hours that I listen -- typically in snippets from 9:30 AM to 1:00PM, the coverage of this has been INCESSANT, and the CONSTANT is "Jamar Clark, unarmed black man victim of police shooting in Minneapolis". MANY times we also covered the "witnesses say he was handcuffed and on the ground at the time he was shot" -- sometimes they even said "executed".

When you have your hand on an officers gun you are NOT "unarmed", and when you are shot, you are a "suspect" or now "perpetrator". Let's try this out -- "Jamar Clark, a violent domestic violence perpetrator was shot and killed in a struggle for a police officers gun"!

COUNTLESS representatives from "Black Lives Matter", "Justice for Jamar", NAACP, the University of MN, black political leaders and various community members and activists were given a HUGE amount of time to talk, and to summarize their points:
  1. The Minneapolis Police Department is racist, "their narrative" should not be covered AT ALL.  
  2. The entire idea of "police" is "White Privilege", the entire idea of "law" as it exists today is "White Privilege". MPR is racist, continues to dispense the "racist police propaganda". 
  3. The idea of "truth" as a "racist construct". The ONLY truth that counts here is the TRUTH of the Black Community -- Jamar Clark was handcuffed, on the ground, and executed. 
Here we have a short summary by the local head of the NAACP from the article.
"Your entire narrative today was to push the propaganda of the Minneapolis Police Department," said Raeisha Williams, communications director for the Minneapolis NAACP and a candidate for the Minneapolis City Council. "You, Mr. Freeman, did not give a fair and accurate portrayal … and let me tell you: If the city burns, it's on your hands.""
We FINALLY heard the police side yesterday -- not very much in the article above.
  • Jamar Clark beats up his girlfriend at a party bad enough that EMTs are called. 
  • EMTs arrive, they get the girlfriend in the ambulance, clark is fighting with EMTs trying to get at girlfriend again, EMTs call police. 
  • Police are less than two blocks away, they arrive, tell Clark to get hands out of pockets, he refuses. 
  • Officer Ringgenberg takes Clark to ground and Clark continues to resist, he gets his hand on Ringgenberg 's gun,  which Clark has moved toward  Ringgenberg 's back. Clark has hand on gun, Ringgenberg  is fighting for control and tells partner -- "He's got my gun!"
  • Partner Schwarze puts gun in Clark's face and says "Let go of the gun or I'm going to shoot you!" 
  • Clark says "I'm ready to die" ... Schwarze feels that in order to save the lives of his partner and possibly himself and others around, he has no option and shoots him. 
  • Clark's DNA is found on the gun and Riggenberg's belt, No DNA from Clark is found on the inside of the handcuffs, there are no marks on Clark's wrists from handcuffs. 
  • The "20ish" witnesses variously say "he was handcuffed in front", "he was handcuffed in back", "he had one handcuff on", "he was not handcuffed". 
 The BLM narrative usually consists of merely "he was handcuffed, on the ground and executed" -- I've never see them asked to extend this any as to what we have to believe to believe their story. It would have to be something as follows:
  • Two racist police officers get a call, they show up and find a black man scuffling with EMTs.
  • They grab him, handcuff him, throw him to the ground, and within 60 seconds of their arrival they decide that with two EMTs standing there plus about 20 witnesses, it is a good idea to execute him in cold blood, so they do.
Could that happen? I suppose, but if this is what police forces in the US are like, especially in heavily Democrat states and cities like Minneapolis, one would expect at LEAST 100's if not thousands of young black men executed by police each year in this country. Our news media and for certain MPR would not have the hours to do the coverage! They would need 10-20 stations in the Twin Cities alone just to cover the police killings of "unarmed black men". 

Since Fergusson MO it has been clear that "The Party" (TP-D) and it's media arm wants to whip up racial tensions to increase turnout for the 2016 elections, so EVERY opportunity is fanned to fit the story line of "white police murder unarmed black man". 

Left wing narratives are so ubiquitous that we often don't see how selective they are. When the violence is Islamic, we MUST NOT generalize -- there are no "root causes" except possibly "W invading Iraq".  The incident is the incident -- nothing more general can or should be discovered. 

When there is a mass shooting in the US, we MUST generalize about the "problem of gun ownership". What may appear to be the proximate cause -- the perpetrator is a raving lunatic who ought to have been locked up long ago, such complicating factors are "avoiding the REAL issue of guns in America". The blood is "really on the hands of the NRA and every gun owner in America". 

When a black man is shot by police, we completely ignore proximate causes and purely generalize to "racism" in police forces and the general public. In the Clark case, it is interesting that nobody cares about the girlfriend and the relationship of domestic violence and substance abuse to the incident. 


In 2011, the most recent year for which such data is available, black females were murdered by males at a rate of 2.61 per 100,000 in single victim/single offender incidents. For white women, the rate was 0.99 per 100,000.
If Clark had not been beating up his girlfriend there would have been no call and no death. He also had a blood alcohol level over the legal limit as well as evidence of other drugs in his system. Perhaps if he had not been high he would not have been neither abusing his girlfriend or resisting arrest? But substance abuse is a "victimless crime".

One more case where the vast majority of the public are simply sheep bleating to the narrative that TP and it's media arm choose to apply to fit whatever story they seek to use to increase their political power and control of the masses. "Follow the money" is indeed a worthy maxim, but "be aware of the narrative" is possibly even more critical as TP consolidates it's power over a largely blind public.

'via Blog this'

Wednesday, March 30, 2016

NC Bathroom Law, Numbers, Pedophilia

Why the lawsuit against North Carolina’s ‘bathroom bill’ is a huge one for LGBT activists - The Washington Post:

First, let's put a little proportion into this nonsense, according to one of the HIGHER estimates out of the NY Times we are talking about 700K people here in the whole US ... many estimates put it as low as 150K total.
Another paper, published in 2011 by the Williams Institute, used survey data to attempt to count the transgender population. It estimated that 0.3 percent of the population, or 700,000 adults, identified that way.

So let's be VERY generous here and conclude that transgender is a "real problem". I assume that even the most jaded among us would consider being a paraplegic a "real problem" and conclude that a very few of them are "faking it". 

So WHY are we AT ALL CONCERNED about people with "gender issues" having to use the bathroom that fits with their biology? 

Do we think it is HARDER to be dealt this unfortunate blow of feeling like you are not comfortable with your gender than it is to have to deal with not being able to move your legs? 

It looks like about 7 million people of all ages, 2.5% of adults, are blind. How is our national level of concern for the blind as opposed to the "transgender"? 

We have sports teams, states and cities talking about boycotting NC because they officially state that men should use mens bathrooms and women should use women's bathrooms. 

Not a lot of solid information on the incidence of pedophilia ... Wikipedia lists it as "less than 5% in males" as an incidence -- COMMON compared to trans at .3 or less!  Does access to a women's bathroom give better access to pedophiles that want to prey on young girls? 

The insanity in this is so great that it defies comprehension: 
  1. We are paying COMPLETELY INORDINATE attention to one very odd group of people many of which are quite likely are most simply "disturbed", while other groups of similar size who are CLEARLY disabled and forced to deal with MUCH more difficult circumstance (paraplegics, blind, etc) are of very little concern to the elite. 
  2. The exposure of children and vulnerable adults in the 99% of the population so that the <1% "don't feel embarrassed" is utterly insane. We are in the process of GLORIFICATION of "trans" people -- see Caitlyn Jenner. "Trans pride" will vie for "gay pride" in the elite quarters. Why would they hide? 
The bottom line here is again the attack on all of created order -- destroy the Church, destroy the Family and now destroy Gender -- this is important PURELY to destroy the natural order. That is the complete and total reason for this happening! 

Tuesday, March 29, 2016

Love Vs "Logic"

http://m.christianpost.com/news/evangelicals-love-donald-trump-because-they-are-in-love-with-the-world-pastor-says-159889/

The linked article is OF COURSE about Trump -- only it really isn't. Is it REALLY so hard for people to figure out why Trump is popular and actually could win? Is the media and everyone REALLY this dense?

He's BATMAN! He is even from "Gotham City". Here is a whole Psychology Today article on why people love Batman.  (hint, he's interesting)

Duality and obsession, his enemies’ and his own, fill Batman's stories. His enemies reflect and distort facets of himself. What psychopathologies lurk in the minds of supervillains like the Joker, the Riddler, Two-Face, and Catwoman? Are they really rogues and villains, or simply misunderstood victims of a heartless society? Do Batman and his foes depend on each other?
Figuring out Trump is easy, but is Hillary the Joker or the Penguin? She seems quite a bit more off her rocker than Heath Ledger's Joker, but she looks a lot more like the Penguin. Oh, and people like villains too -- LOTS of people liked Ledger's (and Nicholson's) Joker! If people didn't like villains, Hildebeast (nor Satan) would stand a chance!

Oh, and we REALLY DO love Batman -- here is a whole article on just how much money all the Batman movies have made (so far).

Of the eight Batman films, four of them broke the opening weekend record. One of them came in third. One critically-dismissed (and eventually rejected) installment snagged the seventh biggest debut of all time while the current item has the eighth biggest debut on record as of today. Heck, at this moment, the 8th, 9th, and 10th biggest debut weekends are the last three Batman movies.
What is all this malarky about "Evangelical Christians would repudiate everything they believe in to vote for Trump"?


  1. The media called them hypocrites for voting for Reagan as well -- first divorced president, not a regular church attender, product of evil Hollywood, bad father, hated the poor, warmonger. This is supposed to be new? Clearly, from the POV of the MSM, ANYONE that votes for ANY Republican is stupid, immoral, greedy, evil, Nazi ... oh, you get the point. 
  2. So they should vote for Hillary??? She has DECLARED that she is all for abortion, at least Trump CLAIMS that he has "repented". Evangelicals actually believe in repentance -- but it isn't like any of the past Republicans including Reagan have got rid of abortion either! 
Humans are NOT rational, we are RATIONALIZING! Love is blind said the beautiful woman as she kissed the Moose (well, cow, but same thing). Trump says that he will "Make America Great Again" -- and most of his supporters hang whatever their view is of "Great Again" on that promise just like all the BO supporters hung their view of "Hope and Change". The difference for the media though is that they were so thrilled with BO, it never occurred to them that they were being driven by emotion. 

CERTAINLY humans are motivated by their "hearts and loves" rather than by "their heads and logic". Damn, NEWS AT 11! Have these people missed Madison Avenue 101? Have they ever watched a beer commercial? A car commercial? ANY commercial?  

The article is VERY right that Evangelicals are "in love with the world", their services have become too much like TV shows, their preachers often look pretty much like Trump, etc, etc, but that is nearly as true about Rubio as it is about Trump.  At least some of us Lutherans have traditional liturgy for just that reason -- but we still have trouble with "loving the world". MAYBE the Amish do "better", but I doubt it (whose buggy is nicest, whose horse is more expensive, whose crops are better ... ) ....  AGAIN, "It was for this reason that Christ came into the world!" ... we are saved by GRACE, NOT WORKS -- which of course the media (and apparently evangelical preachers see as "foolishness". 

For a media that is COMPLETELY disgusted that anyone could EVER fail to vouch for the Christianity of BO, their judgement of Trump and evangelicals might contain just a tiny bit of hypocrisy! 

Who is the most interesting candidate in the race? Is that REALLY a "hard question"? Movies, commercials, songs, novels, women's clothes (like a bikini, enough material to cover the subject, but not so much to lose interest!). 

Add on top of this the fact that I've pointed out a number of times that after Slick Willie, four hour erection commercials,  constant profanity, etc, etc, THE STANDARDS HAVE DECLINED!!! 

BO proved that you didn't have to have ANY experience running ANYTHING to be president -- Hell, Trump is a model of preparedness in comparison. 

Slick Wille proved you could have morals that made tomcats look like saints and be president. 

I'm willing to grant that BO's birth certificate was OK, but the media / Democrats / intelligencia could have cared less if BO was a citizen or not -- just like they don't care about Benghazi, e-mails, etc. 

There are NO MORAL STANDARDS remaining for president of the US! (Bill Clinton) 
There are NO STANDARDS OF EXPERIENCE remaining for president of the US! (BO) 

The elite powers that be have been JUST FINE with establishing this as precedent, so why the hell not just elect somebody "interesting"? 

LOGIC? After the last eight years somebody wants to talk about LOGIC??? 








Trump Supporters Disrupt Muslim Worship

Worshipers feared for their lives during Easter Mass at St. Pat’s | New York Post:

Oh, never mind ... animal rights protesters disrupted EASTER services at St Patrick's Cathedral in Manhattan, using bullhorns and screaming about people eating tasty animals!

My standard points:
  • This is the most subtle and effective of media manipulation techniques. The media doesn't care about Christians and it is generally fine with PETA types. Ho hum, hardly hear about it. You can't react to what you never hear. 
  • HOWEVER, if some Trump supporters really did interrupt a Muslim worship, ALL HELL would break loose! The media plays us like marionettes!!!  
This was St Patrick's on EASTER! EASTER is **THE** holiday for Christians, it DEFINES Christianity! If our media had .00001% as much interest in "religious tolerance" for Christians as they do for Muslims, this would be a BIG STORY! 

It isn't, so we know the truth.

'via Blog this'

Monday, March 28, 2016

Hypocrisy, Whores, Nuns

Supreme Hypocrisy | RealClearPolitics:



I'm not paying much attention to BO and TP as they whine about the SCOTUS nomination. But Sowell had a very good conclusion to this column on the obvious. If the SCOTUS interpreted the Constitution rather than making laws as they are sworn to do, SCOTUS nominations would probably sail right through.


Chief Justice Roberts himself practically repealed the 10th Amendment's limitation on federal power when he wrote the decision that the government could order us all to buy ObamaCare insurance policies. When judges act like whores, they can hardly expect to be treated like nuns. 
Politicians, journalists and judges should all spare us pious hypocrisy.
'via Blog this'

Easter Greetings From Islam

Pakistan bombing: Taliban targets Christians, kills 69 - CNN.com:



The "religion of peace" aided the Christian celebration of Easter by killing 69 and wounding over 300 others, mostly women and children at a park in Lahore Pakistan.



Because of the innocent setting, an unusually high number of those injured were women and children. But the attack, claimed by a splinter group of the Pakistani Taliban, intentionally targeted Christians, the perpetrators say.
It would be a real shame if anyone would "falsely characaterize" such an attack as having ANYTHING to do with Islam!



The religious group [Christians] makes up only 2% of the population, and tensions are high between them and a hardline Muslim core which wants to see a strict interpretation of Islamic law take precedence in Pakistan's legal system.
I'm sure that "Islamic Law" really has nothing to do with Islam -- perhaps BO will wag his finger at us soon and enlighten us!





'via Blog this'

Pull the Trigger! Vote Libertarian

To Grow Third-Party Politics in America, Make John McAfee the Libertarian Party Nominee:




It's important to realize that the 3rd party people are not all a bunch of cranks! They have level headed thinkers like Zoltan of the Transhumanist Party, who has a lot of well reasoned thought of exactly the kind you can hear from 3rd party people nearly every day -- sometimes MULTIPLE TIMES A DAY if you have a wide enough circle on Facebook!

I have come to one realization about 3rd party types. The way you discover you have met a 3rd party type is the same as how you know you have met an Atheist or a Vegan.

THEY WILL F**KING TELL YOU !!!!!

LOTS of times ... and point out how YOU should be one too! They make street corner preachers and Mexican hawkers look shy by comparison.

For those of you not up on the intricacies of transhumanism, here is their party platform:

In addition to upholding American values, prosperity, and security, the three primary goals of my political agenda are as follows:

1) Attempt to do everything possible to make it so this country’s amazing scientists and technologists have resources to overcome human death and aging within 15-20 years—a goal an increasing number of leading scientists think is reachable.

2) Create a cultural mindset in America that embracing and producing radical technology and science is in the best interest of our nation and species.

3) Create national and global safeguards and programs that protect people against abusive technology and other possible planetary perils we might face as we transition into the transhumanist era.
A lot of third party thinkers primarily thrive on abusing the 95% of people that think mundane problems like 19T in debt, unfunded liabilities of 120T, less and less people working, more and more on the dole, and Americans dying of substance abuse and suicide in droves and the rape of the Constitution are of passing interest. How boring.

Guys like Zoltan are more positive -- for starters, ending human aging and death in 15-20 years, probably in the morning! So far, it isn't "97% of scientists" like Global Warming on this bandwagon, just an  "increasing number". But hey, wouldn't you want to live forever even if the temp went up a degree or two?  I've written on this kind of technical positivity before, Zoltan is not alone ... See Singularity.

I found the following paragraph to be especially "3rd partyish":

Personally, I despise the Two-Party system in our country. It’s completely un-American, and is just another form of monopoly—except with two heads ruling instead of one. To help fight it, we should embrace explosive personalities who can destroy a political system that favors big money and special interests—neither of which Sanders, Trump, or McAfee need or are beholden to. 
Come November, the race will likely come down to Trump and Clinton, but the real winner might be the growing Libertarian Party—and by implication, other Third parties—by putting forth a loud personality who can get America cheering in a very different way. That is progress, indeed.
I'm sure that Zoltan despises death and aging as well, and don't we ALL despise "big money and special interests"? Well, special interests other than our own of course!  ... and were we to come into some "big money", I'm guessing that the more honest among us might not despise that as much anymore either!

But he DOES have a point, which is actually the one that 3rd party people are ALWAYS, incessantly, constantly ... oh well, you get the idea ---- making.

We have to do SOMETHING different!

Any weirdo put forward by one of the existing parties is inherently NOT DIFFERENT ENOUGH! For most 3rd partiers, the difference of a Trump or a Sanders is lost because ... well, they are NOT A THIRD PARTY CANDIDATE ... ergo, "not different"! It's kind of like sporting a mohawk, a bone in your nose and maybe horns screwed into your head. Don't you get it??? I'm DIFFERENT!!!!!!

However, Zoltan is way more specific than your typical 3rd partier. He realizes that 3rd parties have a LOOOOOOOONNNGGG tradition in America of LOSING -- by A LOT! Like the "good ones" maybe pick up low single digits of the vote. So, Zoltan wants to ACTUALLY do something different -- he isn't a stick in the mud like other 3rd partiers that want to just run "Gary Johnson" again.

Last time out, Gary picked up .99% of the vote, more than the other 3rd partiers combined, and the most for a 3rd party since 2000! Talk about "making a difference"! Why 95-99% of the people remain so stupid as to not see the significance of .99% of the vote is something a 3rd party person will NEVER understand.

Well, Zoltan thinks John McAfee would be the kind of excitement needed to maybe BREAK 1%!!!!

My view is what they REALLY need is "McAfee - Zoltan" --- I even did their campaign poster for them!

I think the McAfee poster at the top of the post would be something that BOTH the Republican and Democrat establishments would seriously consider if it looks like Trump is winning -- which I guess just goes to prove that "both parties are the same"!

'via Blog this'

Fidel Chides "Brother Obama"

Fidel Castro says Obama’s ‘syrupy words’ were enough to cause a heart attack - The Washington Post:

Hmm, well, the Dictator Summit maybe didn't impress EVERYONE! The old revolutionary Fidel has some harsh words for his "brother Obama".  I'm guessing this will get very little play -- we know what a greatly admired international statesman BO is!

“We don’t need any gifts from the empire,” Castro wrote in a scathing article, addressed to “Brother Obama” and published in Granma, the Cuban Communist Party newspaper."
'via Blog this'

Post-Apocalyptic Conservatism

https://pjmedia.com/trending/2016/03/14/preparing-for-the-post-apocalyptic-conservative-movement/?singlepage=true

The column author is pretty sure that Trump means the end of the Republican Party and current conservative movement. I found the key part of his thesis to be here ...
The nature of politics is such that campaigns must offer something of value. If you tell a guy that he needs to solve his own problems, then what does he need you for? There must be an answer to the question: what are you going to do for me? Many conservatives don't like that, feeling that the only acceptable limited government answer should be "nothing." But "nothing" will never be a winning campaign platform. There has to be something. There has to be a product with features and benefits, and it has to be better than what the competition is offering.
He seems to be starting from the "pinata model of politics" -- "what's in it for ME"? His answer to what the "future" of a conservative movement ought to be is "no racists and lots of education".

Something tells me that no matter what happens, "Conservative / Republican / Liberty / ???" or whatever the "old Republican party" becomes, or possibly what a new 3rd party is about has to be A LOT clearer than the current Republican party, which as pretty much returned to the pre-Reagan  status of "Democrat lite".

First of all, The Democrat Party, "The Party"  (TP) is EASY to define:
  1. Socialist / Fascist economic policy.
    •  FREE STUFF!!!!  Medicine, education, food, drugs, housing, abortions, birth control, cell phones ... keep thinking, TP will try to give it to you! 
    • Leveling -- no matter what somebody does, or doesn't do, "outcome" ought to be basically the same. 
    • NO RESPONSIBILITY! ...  to work, stay married, take care of your kids, take care of your parents, etc. Don't want to have a baby? KILL IT! 
  1. NO traditional MORALS!  58 genders and LOTS of "preferences". If you want to live life leading with your sex organs, this is your party! Drugs? No issue! Telling the "truth"? No such thing other than what TP says it is! Theft? TP takes from who they want, keeps what they want and gives the rest to who they want. Lawlessness is as close to "virtue" as they come. 
  2. Anti-Christian. Muslim is great.  Wiccan? Far out! Whatever -- just keep quiet on that "Jesus stuff"! 
  3. Anti-American. TP would rather be part of Europe. America was bad -- sexist, racist,  imperialist. That is why TP killed it and are very happy they did! BOistan is NOT America! 
  4. Anti-White. Since the Immigration Reform Act of 1965, the TP has been replacing white people with browns and blacks. They are pretty much done -- and in 10-20 years this is a non-white country. White people -- TP hopes the door whacks your ass on the way out! 
  5. COMPLETE LOYALTY TO TP!! No unapproved speech. Certainly no guns, TP is "giving" (stealing and transferring) you everything to make you "happy" -- so BE HAPPY and SHUT UP about anything political except praise for TP. Got it??? I

Here is my cut at a start of what a new party needs to stand for:
  1. Philosophically rooted in the value of Transcendent Principles, No specific Federal Church, but certainly States are allowed to have churches that support the agreed and understood Transcendent Principles. (See "Ideas Have Consequences") (Islam is not one of those religions) Religion and Philosophy are the roots of the nation -- politics and science are servants of the eternal order. 
  2. Capitalism and decentralized markets are the basis of economic policy. 
  3. Individualized education that seeks to bring out the unique gifts of each individual while insuring that all that are able have a deep understanding of religion, philosophy, rhetoric, language, history and classical literature and the arts. None may take part in any aspect of governance unless they can pass rigorous standards in the history, meaning and imperatives of culture and civilization.

    All elements of society must guard against the twin perils of education on one hand becoming indoctrination with no room for innovation, and on the other, becoming a value free stew of disordered and undifferentiated data.

    Wisdom is the beginning and the end of education.
  4. Local and State Rights -- See Switzerland. Federal government handles national defense and referees interstate commerce. "City States" are the rule. Thousands of laboratories of what works and what does not, with the freedom to fail, and fail badly being one of the values held in greatest esteem. 
  5. Family, Church and Community are the recognized and cherished building blocks of society. 
    • Excellence in service to God, Family, Church and Community is the objective of every citizen. 
    • Inheritance is important and encouraged 
    • Both the past and the future are more important than today. Family history, Church History, Community History are all items of sacred reverence. 
    • The trinity of Family, Church and Community is the rock upon which the individual can boldly risk much in gaining their unique mission for a meaningful life. 
Well, a raw start. At some point I believe it is critical that at least some have some idea of "where to go from here" once the present state of TP fully fails. Perhaps it will be in a seceded new nation from Texas to the Canadian border -- perhaps the heartland of Canada may join with Alaska to have a great nation from Alaska, Northwest Territories to the Gulf of Mexico abandoning the east and west coasts to live with their chosen depravity. 

I like to dream dreams of a hopeful future. It's Spring, just past Easter ... it is so easy to abandon hope as we look at the mess that TP has wrought, but we need to keep Faith, Hope, Love and Truth alive in our hearts and minds!

Sowell, Socialism and Fascism

http://m.townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/2012/06/12/socialist_or_fascist?utm_content=buffera663c&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

I've covered this a number of times, but it is always worth reading the wisdom of Sowell.
One of the reasons why both pro-Obama and anti-Obama observers may be reluctant to see him as fascist is that both tend to accept the prevailing notion that fascism is on the political right, while it is obvious that Obama is on the political left.

Back in the 1920s, however, when fascism was a new political development, it was widely -- and correctly -- regarded as being on the political left. Jonah Goldberg's great book "Liberal Fascism" cites overwhelming evidence of the fascists' consistent pursuit of the goals of the left, and of the left's embrace of the fascists as one of their own during the 1920s.
The "left vs right" problem is covered in detail here. Since the media lies to us nearly every day on this, it is important to keep the truth firmly locked in our minds!

Mis Or Alternatively Informed? Great Orange Dragon

Why Donald Trump? | FiveThirtyEight:

Not really worth reading the linked article looking for the holy grail of Trumpism -- anger, white pride, support for police vs Black Lives Matter, economic malaise, somebody that cares about the working class ... it's all there and more. Somehow it adds up to Trump,  and the elite of both parties are mystified.

The reporter accidentally ran into an important truth  however when looking into a Trump supporters claim that Hillary had ties to the KKK beyond "David Duke happened to endorse Trump".

"When I tried that, a picture of former West Virginia Senator Robert Byrd pecking Clinton on the cheek popped up. Byrd was indeed once a member of the KKK and had mentored Clinton in the Senate. So Alysha’s claim wasn’t strictly wrong, though Byrd, who died in 2010, had long ago renounced his membership in the organization.

Political science has shown that Alysha isn’t alone in her doubt. A 2000 study by political scientists found that Americans who have incorrect information about public discourse can be divided into two different groups — the misinformed and the uninformed. The uninformed simply don’t know about a given topic; the misinformed are interested in what’s going on, but their sources of information are flawed. Another study, in 2010, found that when the misinformed were told about their inaccuracies, they held onto their beliefs with all the more conviction."
In this post-modern "truth is subjective" era, who is it that decides who is MISinformed vs who is informed?

Even the left has realized that "facts" and "fact checkers" are not being believed as the "powers that be" in the dominant media, academia and "The Party" (TP - Democrat) decree they ought. The New Yorker sees the "post factual era" and strangely decides that facts ought be decided by "a vote", even more strangely claiming Alexander Hamilton would approve! In direct opposition, the WaPo laments a democracy that could potentially elect Trump and seeks to use the Electoral College, an ACTUAL device of Hamilton's Federalists designed to temper democracy to invalidate the 2016 election if Trump wins the popular vote.

When "our betters" in two elite media outlets are in direct opposition on "facts",  and at least in the case of The New Yorker, have lost contact with both history and philosophy, what are "the masses" to do?

The objective of TP,  it's dominant media, and academia is to provide a monolithic view of what it means to be "informed". The fact that Byrd was a recruiter for the KKK and led the Filibuster of the Voting Rights Act in '64 is something that to be "informed" is to accept as forgiven in the sense of Gods Grace -- no longer remembered. To remember it is to be MISinformed.

"McCarthyism" OTOH, something that was vastly over hyped even at the time, is something worthy of being trotted out as a "clear and present danger" at all times, and it's alleged heavy handedness actually used with far more effect than the supposedly horrific original to root out those who might fail to bake a cake for a gay couple, (GASP) fail to call a 60ish male athlete who decides they are a woman by their new female name, or brazenly uttering some "trigger phrase" in the tender hearing of TP youth.  McCarthy, thy name is evil -- your methods when used by TP are GOOD!

The approved answer is "TP saith what is informed and what is misinformed, and to question the word of TP is blasphemy most foul. Truth is the word of TP, all else is evil misinformation.

And then there arose The Donald, and having exposed the Republican Party as a mere subsidiary of THE PARTY (Democrat, TP), he has created great weeping and gnashing of teeth in the land. How may the people know the truth else they be taught by the wise of TP from whence commeth all goodness, wisdom and sustenance?

It seems that at this late hour, when the word of TP was thought to be holy and without reproach, even in the latter days of BO, "The One", the messiah ushering in the age when every knee would bow to TP and every tongue would declare the righteousness of all power being delivered to TP, there has arisen a prophet from the East,  from the holy city of New York.

Will the combined powers of TP and it's now revealed servant "The Beast With Trunk" find the power to slay the Great Orange Dragon (GOD) from the city that sits on seven islands?

Perhaps this is the last chance to be Alternatively Informed (AI).

'via Blog this'

Sunday, March 27, 2016

David Brooks, Trump and Cruz Repulsive

David Brooks: I Have Spent The Last Week So Repulsed By Donald Trump, I Had Forgotten How Ugly Ted Cruz Could Be | Video | RealClearPolitics:

I know David Brooks lives on planet New York City where liberal PC law makes Muslim Sharia law look tolerant, but STILL, as the supposed token "conservative" for the NY Times, shouldn't he have to at least sniff the air of the real world on occasion?

So even the liberal rag "Vox" admits that Bill Clinton has a solid RAPE charge against him. We also know that he has flown on "The Lolita Express". Slick Wille treated women around him including those employed in the White House as "free hookers". Brooks thinks Trump is "misogynistic" -- oh please! Brooks is the supposed "conservative" that went gaga over BO in '08 because he "liked the crease in his pants". Why is this person still showing up in print AT ALL??

Oh, bringing the wives into it? I'm certain that Brooks was all over the Kerry campaign tilt at "Laura Bush was a cocaine dealer" in Sept of '04. Yes, yes, I realize that it is usually Republicans taking the pounding on all negative fronts and getting off nearly nothing of commensurate sleaze in response, so yes, that **IS** new. "Fighting" has tended to be something that Republicans found FAR too "messy" to engage in, while Dems and the MSM rolled out important challenges like "Romney was a bully in High School" and making fun of pictures that included his black adopted granddaughter.

The usual level of Republican political warfare is "we accept your heartfelt apology" after their guts are lying on the floor!

As I said and as everyone says, the reason we have terrorism is not because the Prophet Mohammed came down and not because there is a religion called Islam.
Uh, David, not even MUSLIMS say "The Prophet Mohammed came down". No, he was definitely only human and a violent one who loved hacking off heads and with a taste for girls less than 10 years of age at that! Islam is clearly "the religion of peace", which is the reason that it has been so damned PEACEFUL around the middle east since the time of Mohammad!

The reason we have terror is that young men are alienated and feel they can wage war and a just war against societies that are racist and xenophobic and crushing toward them.
"Alienated young men" are not new, and they are ESPECIALLY not new in Muslim society, which is the reason that Islam specifies that if you die killing "infidels", you get 72 virgins in paradise, while you can't find a single one here because your religion  allows the rich guys to have as many wives as they want.  Islam calls that a FEATURE not a bug!

So yes, they can wage "just war" against any society that isn't Muslim under Sharia Law ... always have been able to and always will! THE PROBLEM is that we are NOT "crushing" toward them -- in general we are inviting them to come on over in huge numbers to Europe and the US where they can rape our women and blow up infidels to their hearts content! They don't care AT ALL if we are "xenophobic" or not -- we are "infidels", or in terms that maybe Brooks can understand, "Targets!!!!".
Yes, that’s the first thing I was going to say. Are we really here? Is this really happening? Is this America? Are we a great country talking about trying to straddle the world and create opportunity in this country?
60 million dead from abortion and Planned Parenthood selling baby parts over wine and salad and Brooks is gibbering about "straddling the world"? When was that? When Teddy Roosevelt was president? We are a DECLINING has-been nation that Russia, Iraq, China, Cuba and even North Korea have less respect for than Brooks does for Trump or Cruz, the only possible nominees for the only party REMOTELY conservative in this borderless disaster that leads in killing the unborn and how many genders you can dream up and swap around for "pleasure".  "Opportunity"? What is that? "Opportunity" to pay more taxes or to live off the taxes of others?

Guess which kind of "opportunity" is growing and which isn't!!!!

Yes, we are really "here" -- which is now thanks to guys like Brooks and BO, is not "America", but BOistan!

Yes, it IS repulsive. VERY!

'via Blog this'

Values, Corvettes, Todays Dollars, How It's Going

In 1978 I started at IBM and $15,500 a year salary. I could have purchased a new Corvette for a little less than $10K. So I went to work for "1.5 Corvettes". It looks like a 2016 that anyone would want to have is $60K, the top of the line pushes at least $90K.

I was dating someone whose dad worked at GM in Janesville and made close to $50K, REALLY good cash in those days, her brother started on the line at $20K with a full month and 1/2 of vacation about the same time I did. I got two weeks -- the benefits were better at GM than at IBM in those days.

A teacher at Barron made about $12K in the early '70s when I was considering teaching as one of the options for a career. A number of them were married to other teachers and had a small home in Barron and a small lake place on Silver Lake about 40 min north. Times were pretty decent, and with the election of Regan in '80, they got a lot better.

Things were just starting to really go berserk in '78 -- prices would shoot up and taxes would shoot up even worse. I remember one great raise I got of something like $50 a week that moved me a bracket or so and I got all of $5 in actual take home pay. Inflation would push 20% and eventually, interest would exceed 20%.

Today a programmer starts at IBM around $60K, so barely one Corvette. According to this, a new GM hire (of which I'm sure there are not very many) hires on at a bit less than $16 per hr, or $33,280 annually. Experienced old hands push $60 an hour for $124K ... hey, so two Corvettes for the old guys (but 5 in '78)! A median teacher salary in Eau Claire is $45K, so less than a Corvette.

According to this calculator, $1 in 1978  worth $3.81 today, so I REALLY started at $15,500 x 3.81, or $59,036 in todays dollars. Todays programmers are basically identical given inflation. The GM worker starting at $20K was making the equivalent of $76K today, so starting manufacturing workers are doing WAY WORSE. The $12K teacher would be doing $46K in todays dollars -- so teachers are doing about the same as well as programmers.

If the $10K corvette had just inflated, it would cost $38K today rather than $60K. The starting auto worker gets less than 1/2, and even the experienced worker would be getting $190K today if they had kept pace with inflation! Yet, the price of the car -- with materials costs down, automation supposedly saving money and WAY less labor input in both cost and actual hours has risen in relative value far beyond inflation!

But let's face it, none of the above really feel that they are doing better today than we did in 1978!!

We sure as hell felt we were doing better in 1988, and even 1998 in many cases, but certainly not today!

So what happened? I'm really not all that sure, but I'll throw out some thinking:

  1. The inflation calculations are lying -- for many things it is much worse than the calculator indicates. The vettte shows us one example.  Sadly, they are lying WORSE than that because taxes are much higher (income, property, state, sales, etc) plus medical is MUCH higher. (think for a second, is government more or less involved in medical aspects today than it was in '78? Which way do YOU think government causes costs to go?) 
  2. The media and "The Party" (D) likes to focus on "inequality", but unless you foolishly believe that the economic pie is a fixed size (which means you don't know enough to even think of economics at all and need to study), what matters is "what you can do with what you make". What someone else makes is meaningless. Teachers kept pace, programmers kept pace, auto workers did terrible -- but EVERYONE in that comparison got screwed in the last 40 years to some extent relative to the vette. 
  3. The chart doesn't show DEBT and UNFUNDED liabilities (FICA, Medicare, BOcare, etc ...  now $19T and $125T respectively. The costs of these problems are starting to siphon off any government funding going into "productive investment" -- roads, research, education, space programs, etc, and requiring ever more pure transfer payments. Primarily from old to young, but also from productive to unproductive as more and more votes are purchased to keep the rising percentage of government ever growing even as GDP is stagnant or shrinking. We started "eating our seed corn" with the stench of BO arriving in earnest. 
  4. I suspect if we looked at medical or government jobs we would see some people who have improved their relative position a bunch since '78 -- "administration" is the REAL "growth area" almost everywhere. More government = more bureaucracy = more administration and less productivity. Even worse, government tends to keep the numbers -- "the house wins"! I've covered the GDP and Inflation shenanigans.  We are being lied to -- A LOT, which is why EVERYONE inside the beltway is DESPERATE that neither Cruz or Trump get elected!

A lot of government taxation and spending has been increasingly hidden at the state and local levels due to "Federal Grant In Aid". 



Add this together with increased Federal spending and you get the following.


Remember, this chart is RELATIVE TO GDP ... so when we are doing well economically, our spending can be high without increasing the % of GDP much if at all. WWII and BO are the big events. From the '90s to BO we can see the relative prosperity, and then the disaster of BO struck!

Certainly, for manufacturing things went bad starting in the '80s, but neither teachers or programmers as examples are ACTUALLY keeping pace with inflation because the numbers are cooked. We can see it is bad, yet it is WORSE than that and all we are being told is "the rich make too much".

BULLSHIT! The government TAKES TOO MUCH!!! Sure, some of that sticks to some palms more than others (try Hillary going from "penniless" in 2000 to worth $100M in 2016! You can still buy A LOT of vettes with $100 Mil!)

This is not one of those blogs that I feel satisfied with -- "work in progress". I feel like there is a lot more truth hiding in plain sight here, but I'm not seeing it yet. Later.

Air Force One Returns From Cuba

I was glad to see that at least some good came from the Dictator Summit in Havana. As you can see from the picture, not all the refugees mistakenly trying to trade dictators made it, but with the present state of the world, falling from a 747 to your death is at least quick! 

Viva BO, viva Castro! 

This was featured in the Onion -- one of the few factual media outlets still in operation! 

Tenerife, Easter 2157

Ask the pilot - Salon.com:

2007 was the 30th anniversary of 583 people being killed when two 747s collided on the island of Tenerife on a foggy Sunday afternoon. Next year will be the 40th anniversary, but the 27th will be a Tuesday and Easter will be the 16th of April.

Easter fell on the 27th in the years 1622, 1633, 1644, 1701, 1712, 1785, 1796, 1842, 1853, 1864, 1910, 1921, 1932, 2005, 2016, and for those that are interested, the next time it will be on the 27th is 2157.  I have faith that Easter will be the most important day for all eternity to me on Easter 2157 -- but for those of no faith, time will have long ceased the next time Easter falls on this day -- as it did for 583 people on the non-Easter Sunday afternoon March 27, 1977 on a little island off the coast of Morocco.

It was the spring of my junior year at UWEC, a little over a year later in June of '78 I would start at IBM, but eternity started for those people that Sunday. Easter in '77 was April the 10th. I certainly remember the horror at the accident, but was affected more by American Airlines 191 Memorial Day 1979 losing an engine on takeoff from O'Hare in Chicago. The picture of the stricken jet rolling to the side and the loss of all 270 aboard was especially horrifying. I had and would fly out of O'Hare and would fly on a DC-10 a number of times -- they shook and flexed a lot on takeoff, usually a few of the overhead bins would pop open to add to the effect.

There is something odd about human thought relative to time. We feel emotionally quite different about dates prior to our birth, than we do about dates far enough in the future that they are certainly beyond our deaths. None of us existed for Easter in 1701 or 1712 either, but at least for me that feels differently from Easter 2157. Even my precious granddaughter who will turn 1 this year, would turn 101 in 2116 if she is so lucky -- her grandfather will be LONG gone!

We know we had a beginning, and things before our beginning when we did not exist don't bother us. But as we look into the future, we either sense or imagine that "we will be somewhere". Or is it just Christians that that feeling?

Over two thousand years ago we know that Christ died on the Cross and then appeared to over 500 after his resurrection. We separate time into BC and AD because of that event of all events. For Christians, it is THE EVENT of eternal significance.

It makes Easter 2157 a joyous prospect.

'via Blog this'

Saturday, March 26, 2016

Obama: "Don't Stigmatize Christians or Gun Owners"

Obama condemns attempts to "stigmatize" Muslims in wake of Brussels attacks - CBS News:

Oh, never mind, he said don't stigmatize HIS people, MUSLIMS! (at least the people he LIKES!)

Christians and gun owners are SHIT ... shoot them, arrest them, have the IRS audit them, WHATEVER!

How easily the sheep are led in the WRONG direction. Can you even IMAGINE BO saying that gun owners ought not be stigmatized by what some crazy that obviously should not have had a gun at all did in a mass shooting? Fat chance.

It's hard to even come up with a case where some violent person commits some act in the name of "Christianity" --  a couple cases of anti-abortion violence, but those are generally of the ilk of "protecting LIFE".  In a world with any remaining decency (not ours in general), people seeking to protect the lives of MILLIONS of the innocent would be seen as heroic.

Certainly far more so than "Black Lives Matter", blocking traffic, marching, calling for the killing of cops, destroying property and using violence to protest the justified killing of thugs attacking officers as was the case in Ferguson -- and looks like will be the case in Minneapolis again with Jamar Clark.

Our values are inverted, but what else is new when the Satanic rules!

'via Blog this'

Friday, March 25, 2016

Shandling, Cringeworthy, Not My Universe

Garry Shandling, father of all that is cringeworthy - The Washington Post:



Sometime in the '80s I pretty much quite watching TV other than Star Trek Next Generation, Football, and the occasional odd show. "Miami Vice" was one of the last shows I watched "most of".



I do recall Garry Shandling as a name, but I'm sure I never saw one of his shows. I've probably seen like "20" Seinfeld's, so I know what that is. Most of the names listed in the column -- never, and apparently I missed a whole genre of comedy.

Works of comedy are now often judged on their “cringeworthiness,” which is a shorthand way of describing an exact combination of hubris and humiliation, in situations that are once absurd and yet universal. Its ingredients include neurosis, self-absorption and the certitude that hell really is other people. It involves being a kind of loser, but never a clown.
I'm reminded of one of the few Seinfeld's I recall (other than "Festivus") about "spongeworthy". Once sex is reduced to an amoral "social activity" like going to a movie or sporting event, devoid of other meaning, then a prospective participant can be "rated" by an a priori metric -- in this case, relative to using up a contraceptive sponge.



That made me cringe -- but it didn't make me laugh. I'm not certain if that means I "got it" or did not get it.  As I said, I've missed a genre of "comedy"



... let’s just say it, in 2016 Lucy would have to accidentally defecate in her pants through some preventable fault of her own,because that’s universally cringeworthy and that’s what happens (all the time) in Judd Apatow’s world or Amy Schumer’s, or Kristen Wiig’s, Seth Rogen’s and all the rest. They all owe Garry Shandling. In particular, “Curb Your Enthusiasm,” “The Comeback,” “The Office,” “30 Rock,” “Veep” — their debt to Shandling is notable.
I'm not sorry I missed it. It does help me understand how we got the Clintons, BO, Trump, etc, but I don't really see where that can be of any assistance. In a meaningless world, people will come up with things that take up their time between birth and death. The vast bulk will not "have the time" to take in a Good Friday service, but would rather be "occupied" by something from the paragraph above.



What surprises me more is that people are aware of all this and STILL don't understand why we have things like mass shootings, rising suicide, substance abuse, etc.



"Father forgive them, for they know not what they do".



Christ died for ALL, and he asks us to love ALL! Somehow "cringeworthy" falls far short of the emotion of sadness, guilt, false hubris, utter inability to understand, embarrassment, despair, emptiness, ... that putting such a column and the fact of Good Friday together stirs in my soul.

'via Blog this'

Thursday, March 24, 2016

Rockefeller Republicans Vs The Unwashed

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/433163/two-gops-resentment-republicans-aspiration-republicans

The linked column splits the Republican party into two parts -- the "Aspirational Republicans" -- Reagan, Buckley ... positive, sensible, educated, successful, urbane,  ... the good guys".

Then we have the the "Resentment Republicans" -- TRUMP! ... racist, mean, angry, poorly educated, anti-trade, anti-wealth ... dark, evil, losers.

Simple.

Somewhere post-Reagan, the Rockefeller "Country Club, Ivy League, Brooks Brothers, Blue Bloods" took over the command bridge of the party, decided to re-write history as if they had liked Reagan, and decided that making nice with the 98% of the government bureaucracy that is Democrat, and making sure that they were living the top-shelf lifestyle was a lot more important that any "principles", let alone IDEAS!

So we have columns like the linked ... let's jettison something like 30-40% of the Republican party, along with what? 10, 20, maybe 30% of the Democrat party that were once "Reagan Republicans" ... Blue Collar (that's "poorly educated" to Williamson).

National Review and the proud "establishment" simply doesn't want them. They are not "their kind of people" -- which is odd, because Williamson has done some excellent reporting on how those poorly educated whites are dying in droves. Does he want them to become "house crackers" like the Democrat party treats blacks?

Republicans should shed lots of tears in print for their plight like the Democrats do when a black youth is killed by the cops, but turn a blind eye as 6K gun each other down in cold blood every year. Is the Republican party to be a party that follows suit by lamenting that poor whites are dying of drugs, alcohol and suicide, but then laugh heartily about them as in: "When somebody makes a buck— or a few more bucks than they have — they see conspiracy, favoritism, the hand of the wily Oriental, the sweaty Mexican, or the nefarious Jewish banker at work, depending on how far down that sorry road they’ve gone." 

It might be possible that people dying in droves might support someone like Trump vs compliantly feel shamed by somebody like Williamson. 

It seems completely clear at this point that the Rockefeller Republicans primarily "aspire" to canap├ęs and cocktails at the Hildebeast inauguration parties! 

Newt On Trump, A Little Reality

Newt Gingrich discusses the merits of Donald Trump.:

It's very much worth just going off and reading this -- it is entertaining and insightful. I've always liked Newt relative to his intellectual grounding and quick wit. Yes, yes, I realize he is far from a moral paragon especially relative to women. King David actually wasn't either, and he was a "man after God's own heart" (I Samuel 13:14).

I especially like this exchange:

Mr. Speaker, we are talking about a possible president here.You are talking about a guy who was smart enough to build Trump Towers, build lots of hotels, build lots of casinos, and own the Miss Universe contest. He is not stupid. For many people, that seems to be inconceivable because they have a university Ph.D. theory of being smart.

Didn’t you write your Ph.D. thesis on the Belgian Congo?


I did, and I wrote my master’s thesis on Japanese and Russian railroad construction in the 19th century.

So why are you bashing people with Ph.D.s?


Because I have been in the real world, doing real things, and I understand the limitations of academic knowledge. I think it’s greatly overrated.

Look, you read a lot of books about how the world works, you are an educated person, you care about policy. When you hear Trump address subjects like NATO, it doesn’t worry you—


No. I read what he said about NATO, and I think it has been grossly taken out of context. What he said about NATO was the Bush–Rumsfeld position, which is that the Europeans ought to pick up more of the slack.
I'm a country bumpkin from Northern Wisconsin, but I consistently find people trying to show that they are intelligent by how well they can parrot "the standard narrative".  Really? If it is the "standard narrative" isn't it by definition something that is understood by those of "average intelligence",  if not less than average? As Paul Harvey used to say, what's "The rest of the story?!".

I want to get back to what Trump is doing, and we both know he is playing on impulses
—No, no we don’t. 
We don’t?
What we know is that Trump has had the nerve to raise questions in a clear language because he represents the millions of Americans who are sick and tired of being told that they have to be guilt-ridden and keep their mouth shut. 

So why are Trump’s negatives so high, if he is giving a voice to the masses?Look, Trump has been campaigning in a Republican primary with harsh language and has been routinely attacked by the elite media as much as they can. Reagan went through the same cycle. Do you know how many points Reagan was behind Carter in March? 
It was double digits, right?Twenty-five. Not just double digits. Twenty-five points. So if you had talked to me in March of 1980, you would have said, “How can I support this crazy right-winger who makes movies with chimpanzees and is 25 points behind Carter?” And I would have said, “Because I think he can win.” Which, by the way, he did. 
Is there really nothing that worries you about this guy? The way he deals with reporters, his campaign manager, etc.? You are not at all worried he has authoritarian tendencies?
No. No. [Laughs.] Which part of that is supposed to bother me?

We ALL have very selective memories -- Moose memories are just less selective because we don't have the intellectual capacity to do as good a selection as others -- and even worse, we tend to not want to just remember what everyone else does.

Reagan was WAY behind -- NPR was CERTAIN he could not win right up to 5:30 or 6PM Central on election day when I was driving home from work listening and NBC called the election for Reagan. Listening to NPR you would have thought that Christ had just returned and informed them that killing babies in a mothers womb was a sin!

Just as they likely would then, they referred to a "poll of their listeners" taken that day that they were POSITIVE was "representative" that showed Carter winning with 75% of the vote, so they were able to completely discount the "obviously wrong" NBC call! As people at CBS HQ in New York commented, "It couldn't be true, we don't  know ANYONE that voted for Reagan"!!

That is the sort of brilliance that a PHD will give you if you are not careful.

Oh ... the MSM didn't enjoy it very much when Newt was elected Speaker of the House. Try to even imagine a major US media source attacking BO before he even took office at this level!



'via Blog this'

Wednesday, March 23, 2016

Slick Willie Tries Truth, The Awful Legacy of Last Eight Years

Bill Clinton Trashes Obama: 'Awful Legacy of the Last Eight Years' | The Weekly Standard:

I assume that Slick will indicate that he "misspoke" here ... kinda like when he "Never had sex with that woman ... Hillary ... oh wait, Monica ..."

Occasional honesty -- even if retracted later is a wonderful thing to see in our screwed up country these days!

'via Blog this'

Getting Small, Trump, BO, Hildebeast

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/03/trump-slightly-smaller-not-large/474900/

Can people write and read such articles and not see the obvious??

  1. Trump has a Clinton-sized victim’s complex -- OK. How about BO? How many times have we heard him complain about Fox News, Talk Radio, Tea Party, racial animus, etc. W really was a victim of constant media pounding -- I'm just not sure I ever heard him say it 
  2. President Trump would seek to shield himself against criticism -- Uh, yeah? How about Hildebeasts "vast right wing conspiracy"? BO has brought up "the fairness doctrine" more that once. Have we EVER had a President that DID NOT seek to shield themselves from criticism? Maybe Reagan, but I'm sure he didn't love it either! 
  3. Trump’s policies are neither left nor right—nor even center -- and that is a BAD thing? I thought that the media was all bent our of shape about "ideology"? Sanders is clearly a populist, is THAT bad? 
  4. Racial issues are a blind spot—at best -- This is based on Trumps unwillingness to buy into the "Black Lives Matter" narrative of racially biased policing. According to WSJ "Black officers make up just 12% of all local police officers, the survey by the Bureau of Justice Statistics showed. The overall U.S. black population is 13.2%, according to estimates by the U.S. Census Bureau." Wow, they are under-represented in police forces by a whopping 1.2%. I understand that the D candidates have no choice but to parrot the BLM narrative, but seriously? We are ALL suppose to? 
  5. Trump struggles with the truth -- and? Are they buying that Hildebeast has never told a lie? Did BO both end the war in Iraq and NOT end the war in Iraq? If we like our country, will Trump let us keep it? Can anyone write on something like this directed at a single politician and ever be believed again? I don't think so. 
  6. Trump may be the most insecure person in politics, which is saying something -- Do they have a meter or something? You mean less secure than Hillary named after Sir Edmund who climbed Mt Everest after she was born? Who landed in Bosnia under sniper fire (she didn't), who tried to join the Marines (she didn't) who was hounded by "the vast right wing conspiracy"? ... or BO, the man with no history prior to Harvard. With "composite white girlfriends", who wrote two auto-biographies prior to turning 50 ...  How exactly does one rate insecurity, "struggles with the truth", narcissism, etc in our leaders? Absolutely BO and Hildebeast are world class schmucks, but we have gotten the time to get to know them WAY better than we would have liked. 
So the Atlantic comes to the conclusion that Trump is a "small man" -- with a thinly veiled reference to his penis size. Classy. We may yet survive BO -- pretty much the definition of a clinically narcissistic limp wristed wuss. I understand that the Atlantic is just a partisan rag, but REALLY? They seriously think that ANYONE compares Hildebeast, the wicked witch of the west without the good looks to be in any way a "larger person"? She fails the "person" part for Gods sake!  Have you ever seen her try to fake a humanoid emotion? It is a sad spectacle! 

We are a small small nation with a microscopic media outlook. 


My White Male Privilege (WMP)

Got in a discussion today with some other "Privileged White Males", and we decided that we DID have ONE rather large privilege.

We are the only remaining group in America that is not absolutely expected to think a specific way about politics. We are allowed to have some diversity of thought.

Nobody is going to tell us "There is a special place in Hell for white males who fail to help another white male" as Madeline Albright said about women and Hillary.

We aren't like blacks or hispanics who are expected to be universally Democrat or not be "REALLY members of their own race".

I'm being incomplete I know -- Indian (both Native and from India) and various orientals are not so pigeonholed, but they are small enough groups that "The Party" really doesn't care about them.

I also realize that for even a white male to hold a position as anti-social and intellectually unpopular as "Republican" or "Christian", or "Conservative" can easily prevent promotion at work, cause the loss of employment, or other things, but the fact remains that we are not considered "traitors to our own kind" for leaving the sanctity of "The Party" thought reservation!

Tuesday, March 22, 2016

Belgium Is A Failed State

Belgium is a failed state – POLITICO:



I got to listen to a lot of NPR driving to and from Barron WI today. Belgium, the location of NATO HQ the head of the European Union is a "failed state".



Why?



Well, you can go read the whole sorry tale, but basically:



  1. Socialism 
  2. Political patronage and corruption 
  3. Fractionalism -- especially in law enforcement 
But that masks deeper structural problems with Belgium’s taxation. The taxes (including social security) on labor have been so high that they encouraged evasion and the development of a sizeable black economy.


Oddly, when you have a corrupt socialist government, you get a huge number of poor who depend on the government, and a small number of rich who get special favors (like they pay their local version of Hildebeast $250K a shot to come talk to them), and the folks that try to work hard keep their noses clean get screwed.  I sure hope that sounds familiar!



I wonder what other "failed states" we could identify? The "Dictator Summit" in Cuba seemed to be going swimmingly today -- I'm guessing the limp wristed dictator isn't faring all that well.





'via Blog this'

Mille Lacs, Government In Action

Mille Lacs walleye season catch-and-release only in 2016 - Story | KMSP:

Mille Lacs, once the "Walleye Factory" will be catch and release only in 2016 with the use of live bait disallowed.

Back in 2006 I did a blog on how great a time it was fishing there, and recalling 2003 when I caught a 27", 28", 27" walleyes on consecutive days along with a good number of other walleyes over 20".

We used to fish over in NW WI before the indians started spearing and netting and those fisheries were destroyed. They started the same thing on Mille Lacs and of course ASSURED everyone that it was going to be "managed" and suitably maligned anyone who protested as "racists".

So Mille Lacs now has the same designation as Dallas-Fort Worth airport. DFW

Government is the fecal Midas -- what it touches turns to shit.

'via Blog this'

Monday, March 21, 2016

BO's Limp Wrist @ Dictator Summit

Obama goes limp | Power Line:



Just go over and watch the video. At the meeting of the dictators, BO goes limp.



'via Blog this'

PLEASE READ! ... The Reason for God, Belief in the Age of Skepticism

http://www.amazon.com/dp/1594483493/?tag=googhydr-20&hvadid=53943455438&hvpos=1t1&hvexid=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=7298185130422206397&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=b&hvdev=c&ref=pd_sl_7vqca73v59_b

This book, by Timothy Keller, Pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian Church in Manhattan may save a lot of souls, and possibly even provide a downpayment on saving America and Western civilization. It truly is THAT GOOD!

I tend to write direct and often "in your face". Quiet, reasoned, caring conversational style is not my natural mode in writing -- but I **DO** understand that it is important, and I **DO** very much respect it when I see it. Keller very much has that, plus he has a very well stocked brain coupled with the gift of writing both well and compactly with enough personal anecdotes to make this book more reachable than many of similar depth of content.

In part 1, called "the leap of doubt", he covers a series of objections to God with great insight and hard philosophical backing. They are:
  1. There can't be just one true religion. 
  2. How could a good God allow suffering? 
  3. Christianity is a straightjacket
  4. The church is responsible for so much injustice. 
  5. How can a loving God send people to Hell? 
  6. Science has disproved Christianity
  7. You can't take the Bible literally. 
In an "intermission" between parts 1 and 2 he discusses the various arguments for and against -- "Strong Rationalism" -- essentially "proof of God", which is no more doable than proving our own existence. We then arrive at "critical rationality", the idea of "best fit". Evolution can't be "proven" in a strong rationalism sense given the time scales involved, yet most scientists find it compelling. 

"The view that there is a God, [Richard Swinburne] says leads us to expect the things that we observe -- that there is a universe at all, that scientific laws operate in it, that it contains human beings with consciousness and with an indelible moral sense. The theory there is no God he argues does not lead us to expect any of these things. Therefore, a belief in God provides a better empirical fit ..."

He then moves to Part 2, The Reasons for Faith
  1. The clues of God.
  2. The knowledge of God
  3. The problem of sin
  4. Religion and the Gospel 
  5. The true story of the Cross
  6. The reality of the Resurrection
  7. The Dance of God 
At the end of chapter 9, which is basically my old belief that if you look in your heart, you already know there is a God, he summarizes: 

If you believe human rights are a reality, then it makes much more sense that God exists then that he does not. If you insist on a secular view of the world and yet you continue to pronounce some things right and some things wrong, then I hope you see the deep disharmony between the world has devised and the real world (and God) your heart knows exists. This leads us to a crucial questions. If a premise ("there is no God") leads to a conclusion you know isn't true ("Napalming babies is culturally relative") then why not change the premise
As frequent readers know, Nietzsche and a lot of other lesser philosophers have decided long ago that "God is dead, so power = morality" <might=right>.  The baby of morality goes out with the bathwater of God, and the world ends up arguing in strange gibberish that has been known to be gibberish since the Greeks. It seems to be getting clearer every day that our civilization is dying rapidly without God.

The review could go on forever -- the book is a treasure trove of understanding what the COSTS are for creating a God in our own image. How God is the sworn enemy of the smug -- both the smug because they believe that they "do a better job" of following rules, being successful, etc, AND of the smug that "have a more open and sophisticated mind than the unwashed masses". Christ came to make the comfortable UNcomfortable ! ... no matter what it is in this world that they believe is to their comfort other than serving the REAL Christ, not one of their imagination.

He makes it clear that ONLY in giving our WHOLE life to Christ is there a way out of our broken state.
"It is only Grace that frees us from the slavery of self that lurks even in the middle of morality and religion. Grace is only a threat to the illusion that we are free, autonomous selves, living lives as we choose". 
He quotes a lot of CS Lewis, who I love, he also is high on Jonathan Edwards who is now on my reading list. There are others. This book is a TREASURE to anyone who seeks God and restoration of our broken nation! I can't recommend it highly enough!!!

I'll close with this quote from Lewis on love that is oh so true:

Love anything and your heart will be wrung and possibly broken. If you want to make sure of keeping it intact you must give it to no one, not even an animal. Wrap it carefully round with hobbies and little luxuries; avoid all entanglements. Lock it up safe in the casket or coffin of your selfishness. But in that casket, safe, dark, motionless, airless, it will change. It will not be broken; it will become unbreakable, impenetrable, irredeemable.

I Don't Care About BO Nominations

The Supreme Court and the Hypocrisy of the Left | Power Line:

I haven't written about the BO nomination of Garland for SCOTUS because I could care less about anything BO does anymore, and I hope the Republicans can manage to play hardball politics for a change. Would I have played it this way? No, but they did, so now they better follow through!

I did learn one thing from the linked PL column:
Let’s not forget that Bork had been approved unanimously by the Senate for the DC Circuit Court of Appeals. So much for that Garland talking point.
We are WAY into the age of incivility and NO RULES! The Bork nomination was a great milepost on the slide to destruction. The fact is, if you are partnered with a bad actor and want to survive, you HAVE to play "Tit for Tat" according to game theory and the Bible ("an eye for an eye") as the article mentions.

It's not a bad column, but I really don't care much about BO or Democrats at this point of the after America experience. Let the dictators talk in Cuba. Sounds like BO came out looking limp wristed in the dictator summit as well.

'via Blog this'

Foreign Affairs, Clash of Civilizations

The Clash of Civilizations? | Foreign Affairs:

A little historical context, like a Montgomery martini, VERY dry -- and in this case old. The article I pulled this from in '93. Some of the points that I'm interested in:
"It is my hypothesis that the fundamental source of conflict in this new world will not be primarily ideological or primarily economic. The great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural. Nation states will remain the most powerful actors in world affairs, but the principal conflicts of global politics will occur between nations and groups of different civilizations. The clash of civilizations will dominate global politics. The fault lines between civilizations will be the battle lines of the future."
Remember, this is '93 -- the USSR is just gone, the first Gulf War was 1991, and appeared very economic / Arab on Arab (Iraq invaded Kuwait). The next paragraph covers the

In 1793, as R. R. Palmer put it, "the wars of kings were over; the wars of peoples had begun." This nineteenth-century pattern lasted until the end of World War I. Then, as a result of the Russian Revolution and the reaction against it, the conflict of nations yielded to the conflict of ideologies, first among communism, fascism-Nazism and liberal democracy, and then between communism and liberal democracy.
Everyone thought that the world was going to go into a "golden age" as science replaced religion, but as the 20th century wore on with it's two world wars, Korea, Mao killing millions in China, Vietnam, Pol Pot killing millions in Cambodia,  and scores of regional bloodbaths, religion started to look better than it once id.
The "unsecularization of the world," George Weigel has remarked, "is one of the dominant social facts of life in the late twentieth century." The revival of religion, "la revanche de Dieu," as Gilles Kepel labeled it, provides a basis for identity and commitment that transcends national boundaries and unites civilizations.
I'd argue that in the West -- Europe and the US, religion has NOT recovered and along with it's continued decline, any sense of culture or "civilization" has declined with it. The cultures are less damaged in Europe, but in the US, the culture is on life support at best.

Fifth, cultural characteristics and differences are less mutable and hence less easily compromised and resolved than political and economic ones. In the former Soviet Union, communists can become democrats, the rich can become poor and the poor rich, but Russians cannot become Estonians and Azeris cannot become Armenians. In class and ideological conflicts, the key question was "Which side are you on?" and people could and did choose sides and change sides. In conflicts between civilizations, the question is "What are you?" That is a given that cannot be changed. And as we know, from Bosnia to the Caucasus to the Sudan, the wrong answer to that question can mean a bullet in the head. Even more than ethnicity, religion discriminates sharply and exclusively among people. A person can be half-French and half-Arab and simultaneously even a citizen of two countries. It is more difficult to be half-Catholic and half-Muslim.
So the US is essentially unarmed in this conflict, because there is no longer any answer to "What are you". ... "black", "Christian", "progressive", etc, but NOT "American". Other than at Trump rallies, there really aren't any people very excited about "America" -- let alone rallying around it. No, it is all about "special interests" and "voting blocks" ... women, minorities, elderly, gays, the unemployed, single mothers, etc, etc ... "Americans"? You mean the "Trumpkins"???
Civilization identity will be increasingly important in the future, and the world will be shaped in large measure by the interactions among seven or eight major civilizations. These include Western, Confucian, Japanese, Islamic, Hindu, Slavic-Orthodox, Latin American and possibly African civilization. The most important conflicts of the future will occur along the cultural fault lines separating these civilizations from one another.
So as early as '93, there wasn't enough "American civilization" to recognize -- and there is a LOT less now! I'd argue that we are already not "playing" in this clash, but rather just LOSING.

'via Blog this'