Monday, September 29, 2008


Chavez is Going to Develop a Nuclear Program...

He's already purchased and continues to purchase massive amounts of weapons (particularly odd for a country that is threatened by no more than it's autocrat's paranoia and delusions). It can be fairly assumed he will also be looking at long range missiles on upcoming shopping lists.

Perhaps the great Obama will win America's presidential election and sit down and talk with him "with no preconditions" (after all, Chavez holds views virtually identical to those of Obama's mentors).

Time to live out all those movie fantasies where the big bad U.S. works behind the scenes to "eliminate" troublesome communist idiots.

We've been letting this clown off the hook way too much and for way too long. Waiting for him to toss a nuclear weapon at the U.S. a few years down the road is not an option.

If we offend some socialist brats in Europa and "the world" -- too bad.

Chavez has been ranting since day one that the U.S. is seeking to eliminate, what the hell are we waiting for?


"We Need [a Lawyer] who Cares About People"

I've only now finished listening to the recent debate between Obama and McCain. Thank god, or at least innovative technology, for podcasts. No doubt many people were very impressed by the lawyer among the two candidates. Indeed he speaks well and speaks, a lawyer. McCain lacked charisma but everything he said came across as genuine (I think). No dramatic flourishes but no B.S. either. He didn't come across as sounding like, "hey! Vote for me!" Obama has sounded like this since the period following his speech at the Democrats' national convention four years ago. McCain mostly just stated his case and was actually a bit weak in stating it fully. Obama's class rants were wide open for attack, as were his phony attempts to sound like a hawk in the war on "terrorism" (Islamo-fascism...and friends) and confrontation with America's enemies. In the end, I think McCain's dry but trustworthy approach will resonate with voters better (at least in "middle America" – outside cosmopolitan enclaves).

When Obama says things like "this is the greatest country in the world" it hardly comes across as even vaguely sincere. He should just not bring the topic up rather than offending his base and the common sense of average voters. There are just too many times and too many close associations (i.e. William Ayers and Jeremiah Wright) that make it clear he doesn't believe America is even somewhat "great."

Obama is a socialist and an internationalist. Of course he now has to pretend to be a moderate – or even conservative – on a variety of issues. In spite of the need to play to the voting public, he would be more convincing and honest if he just said he didn't like the U.S. and won't like it until it is drastically reduced in power and it's government is radically increased in power. That wouldn't win him the election of course, but it would be consistent with the "message" he has articulated in the past and with the people who mentored him.

In the Vice Presidential race, I still don't get why the talking heads can say Sarah Palin is not qualified when four years ago they thought John Edwards was -- or, Governors Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter were for that matter. We also hear much about Palin's unavailability to "the press" forgetting that this was a big issue earlier in the year with Obama who was actually angering one of his biggest blocks of support – elitist news manufacturing clowns – who couldn't seem to get access to him.

Notice too that, of the several opinion polls conducted, the major media outlets seem to have a preference for noting the ones that show Obama far ahead (most polls still have the candidates within a mere few points of each other). This is a media classic similar to the polls that tell us that the president's approval rating is in the low 30's (not unlike Clinton's in his last year of office) while keeping it a virtual secret that the same polling organizations find the (Democrat dominated) congress's approval ratings at less than 10% (!).

If Obama loses, there'll no doubt be all sorts of screaming about "racism" and other concocted reasons other than...."he [simply] lost." Why can't Democrats just lose and politely acknowledge that they lost. There's always got to be some phony excuse about being denied their just rein. The historical record is clear on this one; Republican's don't do this, and it's certainly not because they haven't had cause to (the Nixon / Kennedy election being the best example of shady play on the part of Democrats).

At this point, undecided voters should consider that if they vote for Obama they are also voting to give Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid's philosophy of government absolute authority over the way the U.S. functions in the next four years (not to mention court appointments) -- that would not be a good thing for anyone. "Gridlock" is always preferable to one party railroading it's every desire through the legislative process.

Remember too that when Obama promises a "tax cut" for 95% of the country's citizens, that 40% of them don't pay any federal taxes to begin with (McCain should have definitely railed Obama on this bogus con). That's more than faulty math. What Obama promises is what all socialists promise; income "re" distribution. I put the "re" in quotes because income is not "re-distributed." It's never "distributed in the first place. People work for their incomes. Whether through, labor, mental effort, or risk and innovation, the source of one's wealth is not the result of some kind of "distribution" system. Obama would raise taxes considerably on those he believes are wealthy (he supposedly knows what is fair in this regard) and simply issue vote-buying government checks to others. Bread and circuses. Good to appease "the masses" temporarily but a downright stupid thing to do to a productive economy – even one in need of repair (especially one in need of repair).

I expect the next two presidential debates to be similar to this recent one but with both candidates being a little tougher on their opponent (on the advice of their staffs). The Vice Presidential debate will be fun and I fully expect Palin to clobber a gaffe drowning Joe Biden.

The "gotcha" style of entrapment journalism used on Palin in her recent interviews were just too obvious. These media clowns (i.e. Gibson and Couric) haven't' asked the same kinds of on-the-spot questions to Obama or Biden and the viewing public knows it.

Unlike the typical leftist Democrat, I'm not going to get all psycho if "my guy doesn't win." Tantrums are for control freaks and there are plenty of them on the left. In fact, I'll be mildly amused (damage aside) if Obama and his Democrat congress win because it will be a virtual guarantee that they'll go down in flames during the next election. Either way, conservatives win.

Saturday, September 27, 2008


Instructions and Commands

If there could be one all-inclusive comment regarding “human nature” it would be that we simply don’t come with a set of instructions. While some thoughts and behaviors are rare or eccentric (even dangerous) to a particular context or humanity as a whole, all are “natural” by virtue of the fact that they occur at all. This doesn’t of course mean that all human behaviors are equally preferable or even acceptable in a Just or civilized society.

“Instructions” as how to live or act are often seen in various religious texts or the dogma of pseudo-religious political ideologies. Sometimes the “wisdom” of their proclamations is apparent, if for no other reason than mere practical consideration – eating pork 3000 years ago would have been a risky indulgence. Regardless of the occasional wise phrase, “instructions” born of religious thought or political creed must ultimately be accepted on faith and faith is not necessarily logical or even verifiable. In objective appraisal, we always find ourselves back in the same situation -- humans come with no instructions. We can only hope that the ones drawn up by fellow humans are practical and keep most of us relatively free, safe, and in a state of potential progress.

All too often, the instructions of “men” are no more than commands to obey the whims of control freaks with too much time on their hands and to little genuine productive capacity. Although a tyrant may see their imposed standards as being good for all, “all” may not agree (it’s virtually impossible that they all would).

Instructions are good for airplane models, small appliances, and Christmas toys. To outline standards for living amongst diverse human character, ...maybe not so much.

Monday, September 22, 2008


Bush Was Hitler: Palin Derangement Syndrome and the Gross Intolerance and Rage of the Demented Left

“Bush is Hitler” but instead of taking over the world with “his friends from Haliburton,” it looks like he may just be going back to Texas to spend some quality time with his wife on a ranch. Who’s going to fill in the bleeding brain-cracks of leftists when he’s gone? Voilla – how opportune for those seeking shadows to box! Margaret Thatcher is back! She’s intelligent and experienced, has simple common-folks roots (sure to enrage any elitist socialist snob), and she’s hot…Palin is Hitler – obviously.

Palin was – as is noted more by foes than friends – a “beauty queen” (she wanted the scholarship prize money and described the experience in negative terms later). Let’s be honest, by far most professional “feminists” (angry female leftists) are decidedly not beauty Queens. Although many view themselves as queens of sorts, they seem to more often have appearances that go with their personalities – that is, not a pretty sight.

The Palin phenomenon has certainly rattled more than a few feminists, garden-variety socialists, and unemployed multible-pierced vegans – ‘must be those trendy glasses Palin wears.

A million and one myths regarding McCain’s running mate choice continue to spring up daily. Fortunately, as soon as a socialist con-image sprouts up from the lefts rabid underbelly, it’s shot down quickly. In the end factual appraisals indicate that Palin is nothing more than a conservative (gasp!) and represents nothing profoundly terrible beyond conservatives’ usual desire to limit government’s growth and centralization, reduce taxes, and cut spending. Surly a sane opposition could endure such opposing views. Unfortunately, a sane opposition to conservatism dissipated decades ago when the neo-Jacobins got their first feel for power within the system. Now they will accept nothing less than paced or full-throttle socialism in America. If an old-fashioned conservative stands in the way of their “hopes for ‘change’ ” the specter of Hitler no doubt does embellish their imagination (one must remember that these are people who think Castro was a benevolent “leader”). Tupperware is probably “Hitler” to these clowns.

Palin and McCain favor offshore oil drilling and playwrite Ece Ensler thinks of “rape.” (The Chinese drilling 90 miles off of Florida’s coast with Communist Cuba must just be a consensual kiss on the cheek – though she doesn’t mention it either way).

No doubt the main thing that “troubles” so many leftists (I’m inclined to think there are few or no “liberals” remaining in contemporary discourse) is Palin’s patriotism. She actually wants America to win against the forces of Islamo-fascism in Iraq and elsewhere – the nerve!

Although leftists tell us to not dare question their patriotism they make no secret that they despise the very concept (if it's Americans' patriotism toward the U.S.). Remember, these are people who want to see a candidate win who makes his most dramatic speech to people in Berlin (and, a woman from Alaska “is Hitler?”).

Back to the main point; are these people nuts!? One seldom reads or hears of conservatives reacting with such vein-popping paranoia when the left wins (as when the Democrats won the majority position in congress that they had previously held for four decades). Of course conservatives don’t want to see the left gain more power but I don’t remember screeching cries of the country’s approaching collapse into Hades when Clinton or Carter won their elections.

The far left and some of their left-lite mouthpieces in the Democrat party have had decades to dramatically alter the United States with significant success in doing so but god forbid someone put the brakes on or even role back an array of socialist nonsense. They think, “capitalism doesn’t work” and we think socialism doesn’t work…and we’ve got history on our side.

More than a few websites, celebrities, and journalists have reacted to Palin’s existence (let alone her attempts to actually run for office beyond Alaska) with a level of outright hatred and rage that seems to defy their usual poorly worn masks of being “tolerant” believers in “peace” and “dialog” (they only seem to reserve such good manners for one-party dictatorships and theocratic authoritarians). I think their Palin rage response may just be a remnant of the typical threats they had made in childhood, “if you don’t give me what I want I’m going to hold my breath until I turn blue.” Once a control freak, always a control freak.

When spoiled brats come of age, they want us others in a cage. And, god forbid we – or those we vote for -- hold a different view that may free us from the oppressive whims of the blatantly unreasonable and the passionately bizarre.

Friday, September 19, 2008


Bush Was Supposed To "Steal" Iraq's Oil...And We Didn't Even Get A Lousy T-Shirt...

...But China gets the first major oil deal with Iraq! All Courtesy of socialist Democrats.

God, they're sickening.

Tuesday, September 16, 2008


Justice, Injustice, and Plain B.S.

It would no doubt seem impossible to a socialist, but among the right’s motives for holding their convictions lies a sense of violated justice. Of course we always hear the left in general using the world “injustice” for everything that occurs in the natural scheme of things. Occasionally, they’ve been right. (Real) racism is an injustice, paying people unequally for the same days work is clearly an injustice. But the left’s overused mantra is misdirected when free people seek to merely advance their personal circumstance and everyone doesn’t reach the same pinnacle of bliss.

The left does not hold intellectual property rights to the words justice or injustice. I would add that they should perhaps be given such rights to the concepts of guile and general B.S.

The worldview held by the political right (classical liberals) is often motivated by a sense of injustice at the hands of the left in its various guises (government, media, and the self-righteous demagogues that regularly insult our intelligence – when they’re not personally insulting us).

It was certainly an injustice when a quarter of Cambodia’s population was slaughtered for the hopes of intellectuals to mold perfect “equality” in the human condition, as it was in every socialist so-called “experiment” where the state was given absolute authority over the lives of families and individuals. Of course, these are injustices in the extreme (but it is still worth noting that they stemmed from those on the left who thought they had formulated the perfect response to “injustice”).

When the socialist is in less passionate or coercive states of mind he or she can still be rather skilled at supporting and implementing injustices of various kinds. It is then no wonder that some of us on the right hold our views partially out of a sense of the gross injustice inflicted on us, our families, and friends.

My own passions against the left’s attempts to impose their worldview are heated by a strong disdain for what I believe to be grave injustices by the left in issues of morality, principals, and honesty.

A wealthy politician or celebrity decrying the meager life styles and strivings of an average citizen while they live in excess and abundance strikes me as unjust (and obviously phony). A rich movie actor or director calling the wealth of businesspersons, unjust is evidence of…injustice. The same mold of leftist/ elitist thought that regularly ridicules simple working people for choosing religious belief is equally unjust (particularly when they manage to rally defenses for more radical sects that use violence and coercion in their expressions of religious intolerance. (Not all Muslims are terrorists...gut most terrorists today are Muslim).

An entire sect within leftism is an abode of snobs who look down their noses at anyone who fails to prostrate themselves before pseudo-philosopher’s haughty visions and self-appraisals

I think it’s unjust when a guy can literally be no one with no experience at all, and come within a hair’s breath of the presidency just because he’s been aggressively prompted by a biased media that want desperately to see America become a socialist country. It is unjust when this fool’s flaws and gaffes are actively hidden and his mere speaking skills flashed before the public as valid reasons to put him into America’s highest office. Celebrities should earn their fame, not have it bestowed by the agendas of others.

It’s clearly unjust when a rabble of bitter intellectuals can call themselves “feminists” and do all in their power to defame and ridicule a strong, intelligent, and experienced woman to prevent her from earning her place as America’s first female Vice President (and possibly President).

When a philosophy supporting bureaucratic intrusion into individual lives has the ear – and megaphone – of most television news, print media, education, and entertainment, I feel appalled by the blatant injustice of it all.

When people who merely wish to live with a high degree of personal autonomy are caricatured as cruel, “mean-spirited,” or “fascist,” I think it’s an injustice (particularly when those who concoct such labels are so often themselves, cruel, mean-spirited, and supportive of socialist/fascist ideals).

In a world of unelected autocrats, dystopian authorities, and theocratic jihadists, I feel the weight of injustice when my own very adaptable and diverse open society is regularly insulted and chastised as the prime villain of world events.

When schemers and con-artists (i.e. Michael Moore, John Edwards et al.) tell citizens that the trillions spent to expand the authority of the state “isn’t enough” and that wealth and success must be punished for the sake of “equality, fairness, and -- they dare say it -- justice, I marvel at the cunning permutation of injustice in the left’s own playbook.

When classrooms, films, and newscasts regularly tell us that the Earth may soon be doomed because some of us drive cars, while forgetting to tell us that global warming is occurring on Mars, I sense a bit of injustice at work.

The left will continue to rally the hypocrites, parasites, con-artists, and the sheep that support the expansion of socialist authority. They will no doubt continue to scream bogus concerns for “justice” while holding an actual desire to enhance their own egos at the expense of the appropriated wealth of others.

Some of us are disgusted by the injustice we see around us daily and it is that very injustice that often motivates us to hold so strongly to our own convictions and belief in the sober values of a conservative or libertarian worldview.

The next time a leftist dares use the word “justice” in their stale arsenal of semantic B.S. remind them that other people with other views can hold claim to the same word usually with greater sincerity and purpose.

Out there right now there’s a middle class college educated spoiled brat being denied the reins of power over others – oh, the injustice of it all.

Friday, September 12, 2008


More Nonsense from Leftland News

(After posting yesterday's Newsweek cover as example of the pathetic bias in today's media election coverage I found this article. Excuse the poor scanning quality -- cut off at the edges. It's obviously a less obvious example of what I'm addressing but still -- come on! -- why the massive photo of a distinguished and professional Obama juxtaposed with a not so flattering tiny photo of a McCain laughing. OK, the style of photo can be debated as a worthy issue of critique but the size...matters. Establishment media, once again; Absolutely pathetic.)


Posted by Picasa

Thursday, September 11, 2008


The Big Man Takes on The Little People -- Apparently

(The small yellow caption beside McCain and Palin's photo roughly translates as: "Mysterious/Unknown Republican Party Woman -- Palin"


Posted by Picasa


By The Way, Republicans Are Running Too...

Three years ago Riding Sun revealed to the blogospere that Newsweek magazine was deliberately trashing their own country (literally) in an overseas cover image. Before and since then, I'm sure there have probably been many such objectivity disconnects that could be found between American and overseas editions of some establishment media sources. I'm not trying to capitalize on Riding Sun's insightful revelation (a very big hat tip to him), but I did want to note Newseek's cover this week in Japan. They're not insulting the entire U.S. this time, just the intelligence of foreign readers who overwhelmingly want Obama to be elected to the presidency, in part because they're barely aware that another party is even running.

This weeks cover is laughable. An exaggeratedly tiny image in the top corner actually hints that Obama may have opponents in the election. (In the American Edition the cover is about Sarah Palin with the witty – but sarcastic – "word;" Palin-tol-ogy)

Like many others, I've long ago stopped buying Newsweek or any other "news" source that dares insult my intelligence and values with deliberately slanted script-bites for left-wing politics (I still scan over them when I can, but certainly won't give them any of my money).

Many of my adult students here in Japan assume Obama will win the election and most openly say they want him to win (Opinion polls indicate this to be the case around the world). Of course, who doesn't want a weaker, perhaps defeated U.S. in a time when dictatorships and authoritarian ideologies are –- again -- seeking to impose their dystopian vision upon humanity. Remember, under Bush, America has been "unilateral" (so says conventional pseudo-wisdom). And, China, Russia, Venezuela, and Iran have been..."multi-lateral" well qualified alternatives to the spread of democracy?

When I ask my students why they want to see Obama win or what his qualifications are, they typically don't really know what to say and usually express some vague belief that Obama means peace and a less imposing (e.g. weaker) U.S. Usually, I think, its merely because they've been brainwashed (dirtied) by media, education, and entertainment that is incapable of presenting the serious issues of our time with even the remotest sense of professionalism or objective integrity.

Remember; individuality, freedom, and limited government are cruel, evil, and "fascist" while the state will show it's loving embrace to us all by imposing more rules and restricting more aspects of our lives – if we all just learn to "cooperate" more and obey the commands of leftland (and its current mouthpiece, Obama). This must be true. After all, "I read it in the newspaper"...and a magazine.

Tuesday, September 09, 2008


Help the Side that Hates Us

Every country, dictator, and institution that hates America want to see Obama elected president. That surely is a state of affairs that should be well noted by any American who votes.

Monday, September 08, 2008


Concocted Lions and Lambs

Obama Camp Responds to Republican Attack Machine

Obama States His Case in Historical Rousing Speech

Many women are Wondering how Palin Plans to Perform Her Duties and Raise a Family

…Yeah, right. And I guess many women (TM) don’t care that socialist demagogue John Edwards was having an affair while his wife is dying of cancer (and lied about it publicly)…Leftist Democrat -- one free pass.

Many are Concerned Regarding Palin’s Brief Term as Governor of Alaska…

…but, Obama’s zero experience in running anything is not an issue and his allegiance to friends including a radical terrorist and bitter haters of the United States is yesterday’s – brief – news…

Palin is one of those nuts who goes to a church where the pastor talks about Jesus (imagine that in an age when we’re supposed to only don our tolerance caps for topics related to Islam).

Obama only attended a “church” for twenty years where the pastor regularly expressed bitter hatred for the country Obama wants to be president of.

Etc. etc.


I don’t know about all media outlets, maybe I missed it, but here in Japan when John McCain’s family was briefly shown, there was no comment about a black girl standing with them. That’s John McCain’s adopted daughter from Bangladesh. Attempts were once made to suggest she was an illegitimate “love child.” Cindy McCain brought her back with another girl requiring urgent medical care and adopted her. The McCain’s also paid for all the expensive life-saving medical care of another girl from Bangladesh (and facilitated her adoption by a friend).

My question is that, if Michelle Obama had done the same thing, does anyone really believe it would not be a non-stop news item in the mythology of the exalted Barack Obama?

The establishment media bias of our time (along with the mythology producing channels of “entertainment”) has reached absurd proportions. Many arrogant and pampered journalism majors leave college each year just like public school teachers; on a mission to “change society” (the school teacher’s levels of weak perception and dishonesty are on par as well). “Changing society” for them means of course the stale old standard of imposing a more powerful government authority upon the lives of others, all for something called, “social justice,” or “equality.” Of course it’s really just old socialism, one of the most unchanging schemes to be fostered upon the ignorant and the innocent.

When McCain / Palin wins this election, I guarantee that two to three percentage points of their win will be solely due to those non-aligned voters who are sick of being insulted by media power brokers and their circus of insincerity and bogus pseudo-professionalism -- “Talking Heads” with no brains.

What utter fools.

Monday, September 01, 2008


Messianic Over-reach and Zombies for Change

Last week the chosen one -- B. Hussein Obama -- made his grand acceptance speech in Denver. It was basically the same one he gave in Berlin – in spirit if not content. All that was missing was a suggestion that his followers move to a large commune in Guyana and do periodic suicide drills with koolaid.

The Obama spectacle showed us what Huey Long could have done with better lighting and a Teleprompter.

B. Hussein Obama once more treated the choir to soaring oratory that essentially said nothing. He’s clearly studied his Kennedy and Martin Luther King speeches and has pretty much got the drama thing down perfect. He’s just failed to notice that the issues facing us aren’t quite as dramatic as those that faced great orators before him.

A “health care crisis” is actually a health insurance problem. A housing mortgage “crisis” is another dishonest media label for the mere 3% of homeowners who can’t afford to pay back the loans they should have never been given (after government mandated bank loans were given to people with sketchy credit histories). Now many “can’t afford to pay” – big surprise. Tragic for them no doubt but….duh! “Job outsourcing” still leaves us with an unemployment rate less than most countries of Europe and an average per-family income over $50,000 a year – hardly the Great Depression.

Back to that stupid speech…

The “change” thing was there (of course) along with the basic template Obama has espoused from day one; he’s going to fix everything – even if its not broken. And he’s going to do it in the dramatic innovative way of…making the government bigger and having it tax more (that’s “change” you can believe in).

The telling sentence came in an onslaught of prosaic overkill “we are going to change America.” (e.g. We’re certainly not going to let some Jeffersonian documents on old parchment get in the way). An almost bizarre line in Obama’s speech came when he said, “change doesn’t come from Washington. Change goes to Washington.” …huh? The audience of worshipers went wild but, what the hell does that mean? Really?

I was struck by the grave miscalculation of Obama’s campaign staff. This had become like any Democrat presidential election scam. Bring tears to the eyes of adoring sheep…and assume the rest of America’s population shares the same passion for socialist rhetoric.

I dare suggest that more than a few Americans saw this as mere confirmation of McCain’s commercials mocking Obama's flair for self –absorption. It was all a bit much really.

What we saw in Obama's acceptance speech was not an agreeing crowd expressing sober approval of the socialist vision. No, this was (has become) a full blown cult in which more than a few followers were worked into a frenzy. It was as if Mother Theresa was still alive and could play the guitar really well.

More talk suggesting that America was in full collapse (requiring more government agencies and spending to depreciate things further) all crouched in the cliché jargon of “we must all work together” (always a tip-off in the statist oratory play book). ‘Hardly cause for a tarantella.

America is actually doing relatively well (people seem to forget the circumstances of times like the Civil War, The Great Depression, or the turmoil of the late 60’s). Aside from the usual minor “crises” and fine-tuning that are part of the perennial challenges of a powerful and successful nation state, America is hardly in a state as abysmal as that painted by socialist demagogues like Obama (or John Edwards).

No doubt the quality and passion of the socialist messiah’s acceptance speech will be reenacted many times in the next couple of months, along with the zombie followers of this new cult based on nothing. In the end, they’ll all wonder why their man lost.

Now what's so hard about matching one’s rhetoric to the reality of the tasks one hopes to address? No, instead we get grandeur, drama, and absurd nonsense.

Obama’s coming loss will be well deserved.


In other news...

I'd say many a "progressive" feminist are infuriated to see John McCain's pick for his running mate. It's so weird how many times I've heard this rabid bunch talk of how much they admire a "strong woman who is active in politics" and within the same breath squeal how much they hate Margret Thatcher. Sarah Palin should be just the right dose needed to piss off the hypocrites who don't know what a strong woman is or who simply can't fathom the idea of a woman or minority who is -- dare I say – conservative.

Fun, fun, fun....

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