Saturday, June 28, 2008
Campus of Nonsense...
I just finished watching Indoctrinate U, an excellent and often hilarious inquiry into the nonsense that has become a college education today.
Even though I had gone to college during the 90's (that's not necessarily a comment on my age) It appears that little has changed -- socialists still rule and rule as they always do, with an iron fist.
I'm not going to go into a lengthily review of the documentary but would like to at least say that the films director takes on a politically charged issue in a style much more honest and appealing than the left's Morgan Sperlock or Michael Moore.
What particularly enraged me during the film's interviews and attempted interviews was the blatant arrogance of the leftist bureaucrats and faculty. I've seen this demeanor first hand, at college, and later in the public schools systems. They know they've effectively taken over academia and education and they will allow no dissent. Students and fellow teachers must parrot the party line or succumb to any number of punishments or chastisements.
These clowns are Stalinists plain and simple. They may hang out at local bars and shop at local grocery stores but if they had a nation state to rule over, I have no doubt they'd fill the prisons and graves with anyone who dared question their view.
An excellent film. Definitely see it.
If you're a leftist, look in the mirror and ask yourself how you can really believe you are a force for good in the world. ...Now, put that magic kingdom in your head away and leave the rest of us alone.
Monday, June 23, 2008
“Compassion, Empathy,” and Legal Frameworks for Individual Freedom (and How they are Completely Unrelated)
I’m in utter awe that an inexperienced socialist that most people know nothing about has gained the following that could hand him the powerful executive branch of the United States government. This is probably more a comment on the effectiveness of public non-education and polemic riddled “entertainment” and journalism than any real perception of issues in a presidential campaign. To be sure, there are always issues of grave importance during any election, but the U.S. on the whole is kind of doing okay (especially when it’s state of affairs are compared with other countries that accept wars, recession, and “crises” as the usual state of affairs. The U.S. unemployment rate is still remarkably low, though critics juggle the numbers in a variety of ways to make things appear to be at their worst. The “war” in Iraq has dwindled in effect to the status of Bill Clinton’s good war involvement In the Balkans.
Gas prices are “sky high” but Obama certainly has nothing in his hat that will alleviate that problem. There are no indications that he plans to change his position on drilling off the Florida Coast (as China and Cuba are currently doing) and a tiny area of Alaska. He also opposes the building of new refineries and the use of nuclear power. (He’s a dedicated follower of the Al Gore sky is falling religion).
B. Hussein Obama certainly has an approach to the matters at hand – though they’ve come under amazingly little scrutiny thus far by the media establishment circus. Virtually everyone in Obama’s list of family and friends have hard-core Marxist backgrounds, affiliations, or sympathies. Many have open hatred for the country Obama seeks to become president of (his wife being a mere footnote to that issue).
In the past Obama has made much of the need for court appointees to be people of compassion and “empathy.” That sounds nice of course, almost like warm milk and cookies (I won’t reference the overused “Kumbaya” analogy). This clown is supposed to be a constitutional scholar!?
The constitution of the U.S. is neither “compassionate” or not compassionate. It’s a document that restrains the powers of government and outlines the rights of individual citizens to (recently extended to non-citizens as well apparently) freedom, and their chosen pursuit of happiness. This has nothing to do with compassion or empathy any more than a good auto mechanic’s ability is enhanced by a sensitivity to small furry animals.
The left in general always seems to want to load “compassion” down our throats with a legislative jackhammer and then paint anyone who sees the folly of it all as a villain in a Dickens novel.
America’s constitution says nothing about state sponsored group hugs. It can be interpreted to allow them of course (though not state-sponsored) and can also defend the rights of individuals to not join in group hugs. This doesn’t mean that the constitution is somehow tragically flawed. It means that its purpose is clearly stated and unrelated to emotional bias regarding the functions and boundaries of government authority. It does what is supposed to do – limit government and preserve individual freedom (yes, it is that simple).
America’s court justices are supposed to consult a very clearly written document to see if laws brought before it are in accord with its clear instructions (and yes, its instructions are very clear for all circumstances and times – note specifically the tenth amendment).
The left has done their best over the last several decades to remold the courts into an auxiliary legislative branch so they can pursue their relentless goal of state imposed “compassion” and “cooperation” (“cooperation” with them).
A court justice’s degree of “empathy or “compassion is completely irrelevant to the task they are entrusted with. Of course, leftists (and so-called “liberals”) claim such a statement of fact is, in itself, lacking empathy and compassion, but that’s just another one of their polemic games. Everyone is supposed to follow the left’s commands for a compliant collective or be branded as lacking “compassion.”
Demanding that the law be used to cram bogus compassion down everyone’s throat does not render anyone more compassionate.
Obama should possess enough intelligence and honesty to know that there are three branches in America’s federal government. Its’ fine to elect (or reject) presidents and legislators based on their moral goodness, capacity for altruism, or empathy. I suppose it would be nice if they have been noted to shed a tear while watching Bambi as well. A judge can certainly be caring and compassionate, and that’s great (I like nice people) – it just has nothing to do with his or her job (!).
Deliberately appointing someone to a court position that will reject the clear outline for a free society as written in America’s constitution, so as to act on personal “empathy,” is pathetic.
Another reason to vote NO on stupid media-clown preference number one.
Thursday, June 19, 2008
Yes, this is typical and to be expected.
More from the Global Warming con.
"Since taking steps to make his home more environmentally-friendly last June, Gore devours an average of 17,768 kWh per month –1,638 kWh more energy per month than before the renovations – at a cost of $16,533. By comparison, the average American household consumes 11,040 kWh in an entire year, according to the Energy Information Administration."
"In the wake of becoming the most well-known global warming alarmist, Gore won an Oscar, a Grammy and the Nobel Peace Prize. In addition, Gore saw his personal wealth increase by an estimated $100 million thanks largely to speaking fees and investments related to global warming hysteria."...
I've never met an anti-capitalist who wasn't deeply benefiting from capitalism and demanding those benefits be deprived of others (the "little people").
This bloated phony -- and rich -- socialist and his spawn make me sick. None the less, he and his con-game are the hottest thing (no pun intended) in media and "education." There's barely a classroom in the U.S. that hasn't been told to live in deep fear of the future calamities that will supposedly occur if we don't follow the dictates of the socialist plan and Al Gore's obsession in particular.
You do know that average global temperature has not risen in the last ten years, don't you? You do known that 32,000 scientists recently signed a document expressing their belief that there is no scientific or statistical reason to believe that human activity has any significant influence at all on global temperature changes?
Oh yeah, Al Gore continues to refuse to debate the issue with the President of the Czech Republic. As a bonafide religion, Global Warming (inc.) and the hysteria it lives on is "beyond dispute" (even if someone disputes it).
The socialist will continue to try to sneak their "planned society" through the back door (double meaning) in any way they can.
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Marxist "Freedom" Takes Another Stand For Tyranny. Classic...
"Freedom of speech is an American concept, so I don't give it any value,..."
Dean Steacy; an investigator for the Canadian Human Rights Commission, when asked what value he gives to free speech in his investigations.
Monday, June 16, 2008
Is McCain an "Oil Man?"
God, this is funnier than hell!
A friend of mine sent this link to me of some kid (clearly educated in a government school) expressing her concerns in the upcoming presidential election.
If I were John McCain, I'd use this as a campaign ad. It perfectly captures the reasoning behind the pro-Obama world view. "I heard that they say he brings hope and stuff..."
Saturday, June 14, 2008
Who Hates Capitalism?
I worked with a guy who “hated capitalism”
…Actually, I’ve worked with lots of people who hate capitalism. One runs into that a lot in Japan where foreigners from The West typically come from pampered backgrounds or at least comfortable middle-class upbringings. They’ve usually spent the required indoctrination time in a school of “higher learning” and therefore also possess the necessary hatred for the United States and it’s current president – oh yeah, they often want to “save the Earth” too. (I’m sure they really do have a plan to save us all, but initially merely believing in a global warming apocalypse can perhaps buy them time to work out the details).
The guy I initially mentioned was one of those types who called the object of his disdain by name – capitalism. Others use a variety of indirect references or euphemisms like; “materialism,” “greed,” or “excessive wealth.” Sometimes they just ramble a lot of random cliché statements about CEO’s or Bill Gates. Of course, they like their travels on Jumbo jets and more than a few have tales to tell regarding their backpacking adventures in far-away places, but irony is typically lost on them -- just don’t call them “materialistic.”
No one likes “broad brush strokes” or “sweeping generalizations” …but here goes.
I realize there are varieties of view and passion among those who are leftists in one form or another. Indeed, there are many who are just fellow travelers by default because they merely want to "see a better world" and have been effectively conned again into thinking that progressive ideology will bring such a world to pass. Some are just easy dupes of the establishment media and education system and see radical leftism as an abode of "free thinkers" and rebels – everyone wants to be a rebel but few can see the irony in "rebelling" like almost everyone else.
Okay, so I'll cut some slack to the gullible and naïve. But when I encounter a true hater of capitalism, the passion they embody goes beyond that of the well-meaning part-time hobbyist. The true believers aren't such nice people. More often then not, the people I’ve met who express their passionate hatred for “capitalism” (or one of the other widely used euphemisms for a free market in goods, services, and ideas), are rather selfish, inconsiderate, and greedy (in the truest sense of the word) themselves – really. On more than one occasion I, or people I’ve known, have been seriously inconvenienced, conned, or totally ripped off in one way or another by some clown who often made known their hatred for capitalism. Of course, I know there are “good and bad people” all over the political spectrum but I think that the one’s that whine the most about how horrible commerce and wealth are, are considerably more prone to exhibiting the very attributes they see in the imagined avarice of others. Consequently, I’ve found that the key to honestly appraising leftism and leftists is to “judge them” by their own character which, more often then not, is lacking in dignity, responsibility, or consideration for others. A parasite is an oppressor working from the ground up.
Since this is not meant to be a “scholarly” document I’ll go further in my casual appraisal. After being called a “fascist” numerous times for my belief in free society and limited government (and sometimes merely expressing the desire to be left alone by the state and its minions), I figured it is more than appropriate to express my own informal passions on the character of those among the school of self-absorption and moral perfection. I’ve found leftists in general to be lazier, less honest, and less diligent or organized in their personal dealings with others than conservatives are (yes, really).
Many would of course disagree with what is, admittedly, a not so dispassionate analysis.
Getting to the point – and the answer to this post’s heading – people who hate capitalism are those who are above average in degrees of selfishness. They are more careless regarding their obligations and debts to others, and are more prone to lie, deceive, and cheat. For all their finger pointing, the rabid anti-capitalist is usually a total looser in character and daily dealings.
Now I realize this post is not on the same level as some other more refined essays (and it assuredly is on the same level as some other posts I’ve written here) but I figure I’m occasionally entitled to use the same level of venom that is so routinely directed against decent people who merely seek to use their talents and ideas in the pursuit of individual happiness. And,...I’ve answered the post’s title question.
Monday, June 09, 2008
...Whether you want it or not.
B. Hussein Obama is only the latest in a long line of populist demagogues to chant the dull and witless mantra of, "change."
It's particularly ironic that so many of those who would hate to see change come to a place like Cuba (where non-change has been enforced for over four decades) are so adamant about the need for change in the world's most dynamic pre-programed (e.g. by the constitution) change machine in history. It is particularly paradoxical that the change so often demanded by the left is so NOT...change.
Here's a suggestion for real change. Have Obama and like-minded Harvard lawyer millionaire's be the sole contributers to the causes they demand others address. Put their money where their mouth is. Another good change would be to reverse the process of government growth and centralization -- that would be change! In the mean time, let the U.S. (it's citizens and culture) continue to produce the change that occurs spontaneously in free society.
As for Obama, the move-on neo-comm Democrats, and other "progressives" – set up a commune and those who wish to belong can dance for change at will...and leave the rest of us alone.
Thursday, June 05, 2008
There is a part of leftist thinking that seems to require that the world be a bad place; that people be evil, "greedy," "selfish," and "unjust." One can think one's self quite noble when most of the world is terrible and one can see the need for their own acquisition of power if they truly believe that they have within themselves the unique goodness to "make a better world." If the world is not so bad, and perhaps getting better, it becomes all too necessary for leftists to invent (in their own minds) a bad world to avoid the cognitive dissonance that arises in a bitter control freak unable to confront the demons found in a simple mirror.
The secret (this should be obvious) to genuine revolution is in eliminating employment for bureaucrats and politicians, not simply replacing them or increasing their numbers.
A reality of contemporary media -driven politics is that someone who is left of center by any objective appraisal is now often refered to as "Moderate".
It is then no wonder that an obvious (virtually self-proclaimed) communist like Venezuela's Hugo Chavez is so often refered to as simply left of center.
The Jacobins in establishment media have altered objective semantics that much.
A comment by "boffotmc" at the Libertas web site:
"The Soviet Union used to show the 1940 John Ford "Grapes of Wrath" movie to demonstrate how miserable life is under capitalism. But this backfired, as audiences watched the scene where the poor okies pile into a beat up jalopy in their futile quest for a better life in California The audience's reaction was, "Holycrap! Poor people in America have cars!"
People who "don't care" leave other people alone.
Mature revelation occurs when one realizes that the thing they are is the thing they've always been.
A parasite is an oppressor working from the ground up.
"History is written by the victors"...bullshit. History is written by the people who write history, some who often side with the defeated (regardless of how horrible the defeated institution was).
If Hillary had won her party's nomination and lost in the general election, her loss will be attributed to "sexism."
Now that B. Hussein Obama has won his party's nomination, if he loses the general election, his loss will be attributed to "racism."
...Why is it that Democrats are only permitted this kind of phony nonsense during elections and appointments (A conservative who is black or a woman can only be seen as being rejected because they "harbor the wrong views"). The real irony is that Obama is about as Black in his attitudes and lifestyle as John Kerry, and Hillary is about as much an example of a woman as J. Edgar Hoover.