Saturday, July 26, 2008


Random Observations III

Belief in 9/11 conspiracy theories (attacking our country's citizens couldn't have possibly been done by Muslim extremists, could it?) has now become so widespread that it would be accurate to say that those who believe in such conspiracies are, in a sense, accepting the "official version."


"Matter can neither be created nor destroyed."

That concept can probably be taken a step further. Matter is ultimately a manifestation of an archetypal principal (see the writings of C.G. Jung) – the crystallization of form.
It is more precisely base archetypes that can neither be created or destroyed. Being-ness can only Be, fragment, dissipate, diversify, and its pieces interact in either harmony or discord.

Matter is just the most obvious "thing" in this process -- to us at least -- but we're made out of matter so no attempted insight by us can ultimately be all-encompassing.

(I know. This has been already said before by many in one way or another).


In its most basic essence, socialism is envy and theft -- envy of others' success, achievement, power, and status and the desire to wrest control of that success, achievement, power, and status without having to possess the substance and character required to attain the aforementioned.
All one requires to be an effective socialist is to envy others and use the brute force and violence of "revolution" or the force of guile in legislative decree (or follow and support those that do either).

Envy + Arrogance + Coercion = Socialism


The motive behind socialist "revolution" isn't just an idealistic notion of "making a better world." It's largely a visceral need to mete out punishment against perceived forces of "oppression" – usually the system that has showered abundance upon the very spoiled brats who seek its' destruction. In the end, motives for the socialist vision are more about punative authoritarian anger than about any desire to do good.


One can’t really fault humans for their weak resistance to the siren song of state sanctioned “free” stuff. One can fault socialists for continually taking advantage of this weakness for the cause of their own mere quest for moral authority and political power.


Remember; Capitalists are bad because they've got stuff. And, we're good because we don't have as much stuff. However, we'd continue to be good if we had more stuff because we're better people. So,...give us their stuff.

Saturday, July 19, 2008


One Man's Comfortable Philosophical Musing is Another's Bloody Death at the Hands of Islamo-fascists

I heard it again.

I get sick every time I hear it, "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter."

This and other bogus philosophical escapes into relativism are the types of meaningless chatter one expects to hear over a coffee or beer. 'Kind of on par with, "do we really exist or is this all just a dream..."

Contrast these pathetic musings with the reality of random lives deliberately targeted in the U.S., Spain, Bali, England, the Philippines, Thailand, and everywhere else the fascist Caliphate seeks to reestablish itself (and has attempted to do so in decades past).

On one side we have public school educated (indoctrinated) armchair philosophers and on the psuedo-"side" they ultimately defend; wanton destruction and death, all for the goal of establishing a fascist theocratic police state. The fools argument typically assumes they are merely "understanding" the "other" view, they "don't necessarily support it [why does "necessarily" always have to be included in such statements?]"

"Freedom fighters," my ass. No Islamic terrorist group today even claims to be fighting for freedom. The only people who believe such nonsense are the same people that thought Joseph Stalin was creating a paradise by enslaving and executing Russians.

I'm so glad that when Hitler was on the rampage it wasn't popular in many circles to say stupid things like, "One man's NAZI is another man's freedom fighter."

There's "sophisticated" and there's stupid and the difference should be obvious. Relativism in a time of confrontation with autocratic thugs is stupid.

The next time random citizens are deliberately slaughtered to promote the Islamic Jihad (this is now almost everyday somewhere in the world), remind someone who said "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" that they actually said such a stupid thing, just so they know that some of the blood on their hands is due in part to their own misplaced sympathies.

Monday, July 14, 2008


Real Character vs. Media Concocted Character

The establishment media has been in overdrive since day one showering accolades upon his highness of moral virtue, B. Hussein Obama. The tilt in reporting is so blatant it just may backfire as the voting public may resent the manipulation and insult to their intelligence.

In contrast, we hear or see little of John McCain that would endear him to anyone. He's just that old guy. Here in Japan, many people probably don't even know anyone is running for president other than Obama and the ghost of Hillary Clinton. During the primaries Japanese "news" stations had lengthily segments of dramatic closeup footage of Obama's speeches; chanting his cliche' mantras before cult-like audiences (of receptive and deluded Democrats). McCain, when mentioned at all, was shown briefly (usually, mere seconds) in long shot poses – typically with no sound.

Occasionally, in the U.S. media, a brief note will be made that McCain was a POW in Vietnam.

This link from a couple of weeks ago is clearly biased in McCain's favor (a rare thing indeed), but what struck me about it was how such notable traits of good character are so absent in main stream reporting to the public regarding Obama's opponent.

I'm not saying the same kind of hero worship bestowed to Obama should also be offered to McCain (I cant' even really say I'm passionately "for" him anyway) I am saying that his character appears to have some notable positive traits and I think they outweigh Obama's mere capacity to rally his flock of leftist media clones.

The attributes noted in the linked article above are rather impressive I think and yet we'll hear little of them from most media mouthpieces. We'll just keep hearing about what a swell guy Obama is, and keep not hearing (or having significantly downplayed) his shady allegiances to extremist principals and associations.

Obama; "change, hope, 'yes we can,' "...and nothing else but a cheering section of pampered charlatans in Journalism.

Vote no for the medias' latest choice in socialist nonsense.

Friday, July 11, 2008


What Patriotism Is And What Patriotism Obviously Is Not

I like America. I like what it stands for (particularly -- to some people's horror -- it's free market system). There are many things I don't like about America, but it continues to be a novel event in the history of nation states and has influenced the world in a variety of very positive ways. (Leftist will of course be cringing at this point and the whole list of cliché rebuttals will have risen in their feeble heads like a toxic vapor in a swamp of arrogance and envy).

"Patriotism" is a broad subject and can be observed or interpreted in a variety of ways. I'm not what you would call a "flag-waver" but I like the American flag because symbols are important and the American flag symbolizes America – diverse, innovative, rebellious, eccentric, and dynamic. I don't, however, shed tears over the country's national anthem and actually find such excess a bit cheesy.

So, I have my reasons for liking the country I'm from and can therefore probably be called patriotic on some spectrum.

There are others now who I think can be called unpatriotic. I think we can accurately "question their patriotism," not as McCarthyites weeding out treason but as a reasonable appraisal of people and institutions who don't really like us, who side with our enemies, and who privately wish us and our country ill-will.

This essay at FrontPageMag.Com touches on these issues quite well, particularly in regard to Barack Hussein Obama and his attempts to distance himself from his own incredible lack of patriotism. It is quite fair to question a man's patriotism when he has so clear a track record of not really liking the country he's from (it can also be seen as odd if the man is a millionaire Harvard graduate – but we see that kind of thing all the time).

Some Excellent quotes from the above linked essay:

"I don't know any true patriot who questions the right of Americans to dissent on any issue, whether we agree with them or not."

"The Left's patriotism-deficit has less to do with dissent than a  very real and ingrained hostility toward America."
"Its recitation of our national saga runs from slavery to Wounded Knee, to the wartime internment of Japanese Americans, to segregation to My Lai and Abu Ghraib -- excluding everything else. Liberals love America; they just can't find anything positive to say about it, other than Susan B. Anthony and Rosa Parks."


"Liberals will defend to the death your right to agree with them. When it comes to dissent from political correctness, they are censors nonpareil. The Left controls higher education more completely than any other aspect of American life. Not only is anti-Americanism rampant on the college campus, so too is a uniformity of opinion enforced with an iron hand."
"Campus speech codes are based on the fascist notion that the expression of certain ideas must be punished. A recent example of the academic totalitarian mindset was the firing of an African-American administrator at the University of Toledo for writing a letter to the editor objecting to homosexuals being compared to blacks."
"The left believes in a "patriotism of dissent" for itself, and itself alone -- not on the college campus, not in front of an abortion clinic (which, thanks to the likes of Ted Kennedy, are insulated from protest by speech-suppression, buffer zones), and definitely not when the opinions expressed are alleged to be offensive to certain minorities. Hate crimes laws are the left's most daring adventure in censorship."


"Patriotism is one of those concepts that's difficult to define in 25 words or less. "
"But I can tell you what it's not. It's not "America has been killing people on this continent since it was started." It's not "The only true heroes are those who find ways to defeat the U.S. military." It's not "America is the greatest sin against God." It's not "America is the No. 1 killer in the world" and "God damn America." "

Yeah, really...

Monday, July 07, 2008


The Unknown Perpetrator


Posted by Picasa


The Paradox of Demanding Peace and Tolerance Toward a Non-Peaceful and Intolerant Religion

Since the Koran is a book that specifically tells its followers to be intolerant toward other religions (to subdue, convert, or relegate to a special second class status), and specifically commands its followers to commit violence against others who fail to "submit," one is faced with an odd paradox. Simply reading some passages of the Koran itself aloud or conveying their message is, in itself, seen by many Muslims as being "disrespectful toward the Koran" -- go figure.

Tuesday, July 01, 2008


Taking Tantrums to the Streets

In spite of the current stage-set excitement over B. Hussein Obama, I actually believe – baring an unforeseen change in the actual candidates -- that John McCain will win America’s presidential election. I’m not going to write the lengthily list of reasons why I feel this way but can certainly acknowledge that I may be wrong.

I can accurately predict that if McCain does win, his election will not be accepted by many. Being displeased with an election’s outcome and not accepting it are not the same thing.

If Obama wins of course, conservatives and most libertarians will hate the result. We’ll whine amongst ourselves and in conversations with those who are like-minded but we won’t be “taking it to the streets.” An election that fails to put the stamp of approval on “progressives’” so-called “revolution” is another matter. To say they are “sore losers” is one thing. To note the reality of how they react to events that fail to further their will to power is another.

We still hear the well-cultivated urban myth that “Bush stole the election” in 2000 (the facts just don’t bare this out). Any close election is considered “stolen” by a leftist who demands their program finally come of age and be implemented with a vengeance.

John McCain’s not even conservative (though he’s taken pains to act so when it’s politically wise to do so – as has Obama). None the less, to the left, McCain dare not win. He continues to be painted further into a “right wing” caricature by Obama supporters as the campaign continues. Not because he is necessarily right wing, but because he is not far left wing in the blueprint of Hollywood,, and other socialists who now realize that it’s possible to spawn their agenda from a mainstream American political party.

After a potential McCain victory, as under Bush and regardless of actual policies or circumstance, the left will, in typical form; rally, whine, and aggressively demand that their “revolution “ be imposed upon the majority who in varying degrees don’t support their vision.

Even with university indoctrination, one-sided media, and “entertainment” that is profoundly anti-U.S. And anti free-market, most people seem to have the good sense to avoid the moveon-“dot”-Democrat style of socialist vitriol – the “progressive” passion (if a baby’s screams are seen as “passion.”).

America “is human.” America has problems…but, America's system of government is not broken. One of the wise things that conservatives have gleaned from an appraisal of history and human nature is that, “if it’s not broken, don’t fix it.”

Change is a perfectly reasonable course of action when dealing with individual issues. The greatest presidential purveyor of change in recent times was Ronald Reagan, but his style of change is not what “progressives” mean when they say they want change. What they wish to change about America is the fact that it is America. A Cuban style of socialist dictatorship would be completely acceptable to many of them. The more reasonable of them (and, I’m not sure there are now many of them left) hope to transform America into a weak-willed appendage of the withering European Union and its staff of secular bureau-priests. They don’t want America to continue to be exceptional – to be wealthy, powerful, free, and diverse of opinion and lifestyle (a religious Christian family is as much a lifestyle as that of a gay wiccan couple).

Since the late 60’s the neo-comm socialists could taste the power of one-day seizing control over the most productive country on the planet. As they have made their quest a mainstream and acceptable course they have become increasingly less patient with those of us who stand in the way. They want their revolution and they want it now (!). If the voters of November’s election offer anything less, the tantrum will again become overwhelming. They’ll once more take their gripe to “the streets” with all the rage, coercion, intimidation, and meaningless violence of….well, a socialist revolutionary.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?