Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year...

'Outta here for awhile. Maybe I'll get something up in a few weeks or so. Please glance through my "Big Rants" or archives and have your ideas reinforced or your anger aroused. Either way, do have a nice "holiday" which for most people in America (where I'm originally from) and several other parts of the world is, CHRISTMAS (not some generic vague non-event).

When Ramadan comes around again, try telling a Muslim to have a generic vague and secular non-event and see where that gets ya. Most media outlets and academia certainly won't find your greetings on said occasion very "inclusive." So what's wrong with being inclusive to the millions who, religiously or not, celebrate Christmas?

Ho, Ho, Ho...

Generic Observations From a Guy Too Busy to Write Anything of Substance Before the "Holidays" (i.e. Christmas)

While “early to bed” may offer health, wealth, and wisdom, “early to rise” is to be avoided at all costs.

The imagined past and imaginary future are in pervasive tension with a willingness to accept the real present.

God created the universe;... and since then it's all been pretty much just an act.

A fine symphony is as if beauty itself had been cut from the air by a mind lathe.

Death is when all of life becomes nothing but memory.

It is a fact of human psychology that we can be "having a bad time" when in fact, nothing bad is happening. And, conversely, we can be having a good time when nothing particularly good is happening.

I don't think that god comes in a book.

There's something sad about the future when it becomes a memory.

Those who fail to see the magic aren't blind...they're stupid.

My shoes even hurt when I'm not wearing them...

Some sheep have no problem with the smell of lamb chops.‏

“How can you say such things?” ...well, easy actually. And the ease of saying them is facilitated by the fact that they're true.

Edland Follies

To Learn what this cliche' exercise in pedegogy is, see the post after it.

 

More Nonsense In Edland

Below is an example of the typical "lesson" in learning English in Japan. Like America and a host of other countries, the actual subject at hand has now taken a secondary position to proselytizing politically correct views on the environment, race, war, internationalism, etc.

I certainly have no objection to the idea of recycling or even occasionally noting the benefits of doing so before students but...This stuff is just plain stupid. This text comes from an English language class. Where many of the students can barely say, "Excuse me, where's the bathroom" they devote their energies to leaning the "three R's" (which, ironically used to mean basic classroom curriculum).

Later in the book, a lesson began with an overview of the life of Stevie Wonder. I thought, "great!, finally something of interest without a left-wing aftertaste." I was wrong. After the introduction it went off on a tirade about Apartheid and AIDS. The issues were relevant to Stevie Wonder's life but to see them creep into the text I couldn't help but note it was just a continuation of each unit's purpose as cheap political theater (instead of instruction).

This nonsense occurs regularly in the U.S. of course and I saw it first hand -- classes full of kids who literally know nothing but "know" that the Earth is doomed and it's "our" fault.

So...learn to recycle, save the Earth, and support the latest Jacobin fad but, by all means, don't simply learn a school subject for use in later life -- that would be "selfish" of course.

 

The Anti-Obama

An Accurate Depiction of Leftworld's Way of Disscussing the Issues

This is great.

Some Random Observations

A political party chastising another for “being partisan” is like red accusing blue of being a different color.

Saying that the U.S. should be more like Sweden or Denmark is like saying England and France should be more like Lichtenstein or Monaco. They are all completely different countries in a host of ways.

Freedom has its drawbacks. The worst being that people are free to allow themselves to be enslaved (and usually bring others along with them in the process).

Insight and honesty does not necessarily correlate with intelligence. In fact, all too often, the intellectuals have exhibited a remarkable lack of common sense, insight, or honesty. In the realm of ideas simple is often better.

A truly honest politician would disavow the need for their to be politicians.

Few communists (and even many socialists) go into a "revolution" with the specific intent of erecting a police state, but it's always the inevitable result. Most "revolutionary" wannabes probably aren't evil killers but it could virtually be guaranteed that if they were told that they now had unlimited power to "fix" things, the blood would start flowing.

NGOs are non-governmental organizations that promote the growth and authority of government organizations.

A government that doesn't fear its own citizens doesn't deserve to exist.

Regarding attempts to “facilitate” voting (i.e. “postcard registration”):
An individual who is informed and conscientious will typically vote. The type of people who choose not to vote are the types of people who shouldn't be voting anyway (unless the end goals of your society are decay before the passions of a mob or some hollow catch phrase like, “yes we can.”

America's greatest sins are:
Acting in its own self-interest, and success. The first, hardly unique in the world of nations, the second, hardly sinful.

The weak-willed mud of post modern neo-marxist sophistry has so permeated media and education that a renewed confrontation between America and Hitler himself would find much of the world cheering for swastika flags. Feigned intellectual sophistication has never been so misguided, careless or corrupt.

Evil, Greedy, Selfish, and Cruel Capitalism

Thank god for common sense. Milton Friedman sets Phil Donahue strait. (Hat tip to my friend Steve).

Form Your Own Conclusions

This guy is currently on trial in the Netherlands...for having a viewpoint and expressing it (no, he's not attending an American college).

He hates Islam and the Koran and he tells people why he feels that way.

...Should that be against the law?

Jacobin Consistency

The Marxist/Leninist left (and affiliated rabble) lost their footing in 1989-90 when the Soviet Union collapsed and international authoritarian socialism lost it's prime poster boy for "world revolution."

It's no secret amongst us folks on the right that many, if not most, of these clowns wandered aimlessly for a brief period before finding a home in the environmental movement. This is of course not to say that the cause of preserving a clean environment is not a good thing. I also, wouldn't begin to claim that anyone who believes in the benefits of recycling or reducing carbon emissions is a communist agitator. But(!), any self-respecting believer in limited government would be deluded to not notice the fervent familiarity of spirit amongst many "environmentalists." The leadership is clogged with old-school Marxist and garden variety "anarchists" (more old-school Marxists).

The overarching plan and purpose among many "environmental" groups today seems to have more to do with leveling capitalism, weakening (or disposing of) the United States, and imposing strict international authority over the lives and actions of the world's free citizens. Even the most passionate green-comm knows that "redistributing" (distributing) the world's wealth and forcing people into a lifestyle of subsistence or decline will barley make a half a degree difference in global temperatures -- over decades. They know this, but it's not about temperatures or "the environment," it's about the usual rage and rebellion amongst "angry white males [and females]" who just can't stomach the idea of other people leading other lives.

The video link in this post's title is a graphic example of the spirit of the left. It's philosophy is always red and the fact blood is the same color is probably not a coincidence.

Wealthy Capitalists Movie Makers...who hate capitalism

Reason TV captures the issue well.

Living in Interesting Times

I seldom involve myself in the time-consuming and angst producing debate that occurs on message boards and comment sections after timely articles. It just doesn't seem worth the time or effort – I mean, so what if someone far away is among the millions who disagrees with you? Are you really going to change his or her mind? (Very doubtful). And since I'm fairly well informed and like the concept of individual freedom first and foremost, I'm not likely to be convinced that maybe the government is a bit too small and needs to be placed into the hands of unelected bureaucrats a little more. So, call me stubborn or inflexible like almost everyone else, on the issues of the day I'm likely to be pretty consistent. “Islam is really a religion of peace” and “most Muslims have no desire to see their belief spread (through violence if necessary)” -- you've got to be kidding me (!). I get that often espoused idea that most Muslims are themselves not violent, but the fact that they're fine letting the more fervent wings of their cult “do the heavy lifting” doesn't in my eyes see them as being just like the local Christian church down the street. Of course, folks in some Muslim dominated suburbs in the capitols of Europe have a better perspective on just how adaptable and freedom loving Mohammad’s warrior cult is . In America the size of the Muslim population (relatively small) affords them the luxury as a debate subject worthy of defense by many “progressives” (while they continue their perennial attack on anything capitalist, Christian, western, or American).

On "immigration," I'm one of the many people who can see the obvious; that people sneaking into a country and sucking it's resources dry while bringing a net rise in violence is not “immigration.”

Such issues are debated daily in the world's press, coffee shops, schools, and of course on line.

Against my better judgment of time constraints I recently took the time and got pulled into a back and fourth debate on these issues (something I try to avoid at all costs).

Obviously I won't hint as to who or in what context the exchange took place as that wouldn't be fair to the individual I debated these issues with. I realized, however that all the writing I had done would be useful as a post on this blog thus allowing me to first, get another post up (my posting here is rather scant lately) and also, to layout some of my basic views on things – which is what this blog is all about anyway (an exercise in personal complaint agreeable to or disdained by others...depending on the observer). I'm sure the person I “debated” is a nice enough fellow but his views (clearly intelligent and well-informed) were just too darn cliche' for me. I've heard it all before crouched in the same cloak of being “reasonable” and nice. (The only reason I'm not posting the other person's comments is because I don't have his permission to do so and If I were to get his permission than it would only be fair to then continue a time-consuming back and fourth debate – something I have no time for). I realize that most of what I write in this regard is also “cliche'” from the standpoint of those who daily defend the “religion of peace” in it's noble goals of world Jihad, and the illegal flow of migrants across America's boarders in the name of “immigration.”

So, fairly unedited, I cut and paste my last response in a debate on some important topics of the day:

Like anyone who takes passionate interest in such things, I thought of all the things I'd write in response but realized it's rather impossible under current time constraints. I seldom participate in message board and website comment sections even though I really would like to, and such back and fourths really don't accomplish much aside from honing one's debate style.

If you wish to respond again, please do so but don't be offended If I leave you with the “last word” on the issues. I've got to get back to more mundane matters.
I'm sure, like me, you discuss these very issues almost daily. I've concluded that, in the end, most politically charged viewpoints are ultimately not based on facts regardless of how many facts or anecdotes one may be able to bring to a topic. Most people claim that after they've examined the facts they arrived at a particular conclusion but I think that's nonsense. I no longer claim that to be the case when expressing my own views. It's a rare person indeed who confronts an issue without a predisposition to a stance. It's after that more visceral appraisal is formed that one typically seeks or compiles facts “proving” they are on the right side of a debate. I'm not saying it doesn't happen or that you are not among those rare people who literally have no opinion until they've exhausted all facts available on all sides. If you're like most -- and like me -- you've got a niche on the political spectrum (realizing that there are different styles of political spectrums that gauge different things) and most of the facts you encounter coincidentally back up the world view you had before you found them.

If a person believes in the primacy of the individual over various collective affiliations It's logical that a million and one issues will be appraised in a particular way. If a person views “society” or “the people” as having greater significance, a host of questions are bound to be approached in a predictable style. And, of course there are things like “nature vs. nurture.” It's unlikely that one will hear a person say, “I'm a vegetarian, feminist who teaches yoga and I supported George Bush and Tony Blair in their decision to invade Iraq.” It would be equally bizarre to hear one say, “I worked hard to forge a financially sound position in life and I'm proud of the achievements I've made and wish to keep as much of my earned wealth for me and my family but...I hope the government passes some more regulations over capitalist war-mongers.” I wouldn't say such things would never happen but they're highly unlikely given that there are temperaments and circumstance that predispose us to a certain behavior and belief. There's a kind of cluster of like ideals that are archetypal in nature and usually manifest in predictable attitudes. Because of that, I prefer to “debate” the basic issues and not the fine points or transient topical matters. One's position on those stems from the more basic orientation.

I used to tell my high school American history students that if they believed America was an oppressive racist country, they're right and they can find numerous example to prove it. If they believed that America and its citizens are basically good and a just people who have created a civilization remarkable for it's diversity, pluralism, and achievements and that most Americans are not racist...they too are right and can find plenty of facts to back them up. People tend to just choose a side and run with it. In spite of this, I hardly believe in relativism (thus I think Papal decrees from 500 years ago and Sariah law as practiced now are not moral equivalents).

I have no problem with anyone honest enough to come right out and say they don't like America's political or economic system and prefer a more ordered society that favors global institutions and strong centralized government authority. Some people think Che Guevara was a hero (even though he hated rock music and homosexuals and persecuted both). As the antithesis of the typical leftist take on things, I take no shame in supporting the values of American constitutional government and the values of individual striving, self-motivated creativity, buying and selling, or believing as one chooses with as little interference from the state as possible. I don't think that the fact Jefferson owned slaves somehow makes the Declaration of independence or first amendment irrelevant or the fact that European explorers invading native lands centuries ago justifies letting anyone waltz into the country undocumented in the year 2010. Most (I don't know of an exception but there probably are a few) countries seem to agree on this one. The open boarders that some defend are just not something widely embraced – anywhere. I definitely don't believe that those who favor a powerful state distribution system are somehow more “compassionate” because they believe in spending other people's money or that they are morally and intellectually superior because they can find reasons to defend dictatorships over our own flawed but reasonably open system.

No one can prove that I should submit my individual values and life choices to the dictates of government bureaucracy and someone else's blueprint “for a better world” and I can't prove that I should be left alone. None the less, I choose to be left alone (to make my associations and contributions based upon my own values unbridled by the coercion of state imposed ideologies).

Protest was once called the sincerest form of patriotism...until “tea-baggers” started doing the protesting. Now protest can only mean one is racist...as if top-heavy statist ideals would be openly embraced if a light skinned person proposed them.

Islam may once again hope to resurrect great cities of learning (again after aggressive defeat of those cities and placing non-believers – in the “prophet” businessman/warrior Mohammad – in second class status) but there is little we hear from even moderate Muslims that indicates their satisfaction with anyone in the “non-believer” camp. The very people who espouse concern for feminism and gay rights are mysteriously not only silent but openly defensive of the Islamic inspired regimes that stone or execute people for expressing freely what so many American's take for granted. People who are very concerned about how Christians have behaved through history should at least have a fleeting suspicion of any other religion that harbors very rigid ideals on how others should live.

It seems that now the same people who cried “censorship” when people chose not to buy Dixie Chicks Cd's are completely okay with the idea of death threats dictating what art or cartoons are permitted – that won't “offend” Islam.

Visigoth warriors and migrants occupied the Iberian peninsula centuries ago. Should the citizens of Spain now see that as justification for letting anyone become permanent residents of their country and drawing upon it's tax-funded services today without going through any process of formal immigration? If they would call for official documentation of new residents would that make them nativist racists “full of hate?” (not your words, but the phrase often stated when the issues is addressed by those who can't understand why anyone would oppose a free-for-all system of migration law). Would you let anyone into your home to stay without at least knowing who they are and what their background is (a legal immigration process)? Responses to the obvious absurdity of current Illegal migrant activity that simply note colonial aggression hundreds of years ago sounds great in a coffee shop but has little value in addressing the serious problems currently affecting many of America's local and state governments. I just don't buy the “argument” that we should make citizens of anyone skillful or lucky enough to sneak into the country because Christopher Columbus was able to pull it off. If this was a standard for policy decision, I could rob banks because other people have done so and gotten away with it.

The idiot pastor who wishes to burn Korans will of course be used as an example of America's intolerance in spite of the fact that virtually everyone looks upon him with scorn. These are the same people who look at a nut-case killer of an abortion doctor as indicative of the Christian / conservative world view. If such a person was found to have watched FOX News or read a book by Ann Coulter, they and their “connection” would be a major news topic for weeks. The guy that threatened the staff at the Discovery Channel recently was a devotee of Al Gore and clearly had extremist environmental views. He fell off the radar rather quick if you ask me...what's up with that?

Ultimately I wouldn't be too concerned about liberal sentiments not having an impact. If it's a mega-state the left wants, they've got it ten times over. We're hardly in great danger of cutting D.C. and it's programs down to size. Prior to the mid 90's the Democrats controlled the house of representatives for four decades. That was taken in stride. When Republicans gain control as they briefly did in the mid 90's it will no doubt again be viewed as the result of “angry white males.” After all, how could anyone simply be for less taxes, less government, or a more positive appraisal of one's country unless they were just plain evil racists (and of course – horror of all horrors – white or male)? The left (in a general sense) currently hold control of both houses of congress, and the executive branch (which is now huge with it's massive edict declaring bureaus and “czars” etc.). Aside from the much maligned Fox News, the dominant media in the country is left of center (I'd be rolling my eyes up if one claimed the contrary -- of course Marxists find anything right of Mao Zedong to be “right wing”). Colleges, public schools, movies, and TV shows all tell us that we essentially are a bad country that needs to be transformed into a weak apologetic bureau-enterprise. Howard Zinn and Noam Chomsky are required reading to the captive audience of many college and high school classes and we're still made to believe that public education is somehow reinforcing the authority of “the man” (“the man” is always a wealthy white male...therefore, the current president is not “the man”).

Maybe “progressives” will get their wish. Maybe anyone who wants to sneak across the boarder will be made instant citizens. Maybe the “flag of Islam will fly over the nations capital.” Now, wouldn't those be improvements over a diverse, pluralistic constitutional republic with a high per-capita income and chains of fast food restaurants (our dreaded “materialism”).

There are a million sites on the web that span the spectrum and convey the same things you and I have expressed. Don't assume that anyone who is a conservative or libertarian (similar to conservatives in regard to economic issues) is automatically, ill-informed, ignorant, racist, mean-spirited, or otherwise unqualified to take a valid stand on today's issues. I know you didn't say that but it is often the case that the conservative viewpoint is treated as something basically invalid and unworthy of addressing (and some wonder why conservative books are now best sellers and the left can't pull off talk radio no matter how many millions George Soros or Hollywood producers put into it). Conservatives (one must remember that like the left, there is a range within that general label) can only be addressed and depicted in such negative ways for so long until they start making it a point to vote in every election. 'Bad move on the “progressives” part (suicidal actually in the upcoming election).

For Those Who -- Still -- Don't Get It

"Today, when a concerted effort is made to obliterate this point, it cannot be repeated too often that the Constitution is a limitation on the government, not on private individuals--that it does not prescribe the conduct of private individuals, only the conduct of the government--that it is not a charter for government power, but a charter of the citizens’ protection against the government."

-- Ayn Rand

The Anti-Obama

This is what I like to see in an executive position.

I'd love to see this guy be the one to undo the Obama socialist "revolution" and get back on track being a secure, prosperous, dynamic capitalist society.

Screw the "Yes we can" nonsense.

Buy This Book...

For "The People," from "The People," of "The People" etc....

In Denial...and, Missing the Point Again...

A Crowd of "tens of thousands" [estimated at three-hundred thousand actually] of "mostly white conservative" citizens rallied in Washington this weekend...

You'd swear at this point that the journalists and politicos of leftland actually want to lose this next election. How stupid do they think the public really is?

Yes, It Sucks

Awesome "hate speech." Andrew Klavan does it again. Truth, facts, and humor.

Stop The Thinking And Do As You Are Told...for a better world ®

...We need to stop taking things so seriously and start taking things more seriously -- I'm serious.

We need a new change, a big change, some spare change.

We need you, you need us, we need we, and I need me.

Jump on the band wagon and ride for the world, but don't pollute it while protesting in Cancun (Mexico).

We need a better car, a better life, and a better god -- goddamit!

Jump in the parade, NOW! Do as I say, and think as I am, and follow my logic and buy the scam.

We've got a meat grinder specially made for you and your thoughts...and your rights.

Follow the leader and bow down before every lie they tell ya...because they care! -- in five colors and sometimes alternate choices.

There's a sunbeam in their heart and rabid secret in their soul, and in the end they want to push the same buttons you do while pretending to feed old cripples and crowds of rejects.

Follow their smiles and and learn to shed tears for every phony lie they throw at ya.....

I don't know about you, but I'm really into separting my trash...

Burkas for Euroland

(no time for blogging so here's a repost from long ago that still remains relevant today)

Nowhere today is the concept of "be nice to your enemy" more bizarrely displayed than in the limp and pampered realm of Euro-Socialist Land. Not all Europeans of course have bought into this self-destructive P.C. nonsense but the one's that have, as in America, pull a lot of strings in media and education.

Amir Taheri has an excellent overview of "pre-emptive obedience" at FrontPageMag.com.


"...In most European countries, an official black of list of books has emerged, containing works deemed to be "hurtful to Muslim sentiments". The list includes the names not only of such major European authors as Voltaire and Thomas Carlyle but also of Muslim writers whose work has been translated into European languages. For example, the novel Haji Agha by Sadeq Hedayat, translated into French and published in the 1940s, is no longer available. The novel Four Pains by Cyrus Farzaneh has also disappeared from French bookshops and libraries along with The Master by Darvish...."

Taheri's essay reminded me that; if one word were to overwhelmingly encompass the positive attributes of the American people, the word would be, "disobedience."

Europe's obedience of late is going to land it into one giant Burka if they don't soon come to their senses and realize they are under siege -- again -- from a totalitarianism within.

“What's the deal with all the dumb asses?”

(note: This is intended to be light, whimsical, and perhaps crude...not for the uptight and fussy).

Scholars have debated the “dumb-ass” equation for millenia. I believe it was Marcus Aurelius in the 4th Century, who first confronted this vexing issue with the grand statement, “...what a dumb ass...is everyone a dumb ass or something? ...what's the deal with all of these dumb asses?”

Later in the 17th century, Descartes was known to ponder the dumb-ass issue with the now seminal philosophical statement, “I think, therefore most others don't think, therefore they are probably dumb asses.” Dumb asses have indeed been a pivotal part of each and every society, contributing their lack of purpose to humanity with that sense of overwhelming meaninglessness we have all come to appreciate as light entertainment or occasional horror (as in the idea of people voting for someone based on a hypnotic mantra, “Yes we can”).

Dumb-asses are a particularly relevant segment of the populations at K-mart and government offices. Many achieve high office and contribute to a sort of noble malaise so prevalent in the perennial dumb- ass paradigm.

Attempts have been made to confront the dumb-ass societal affliction with such statements as “don't be such a dumb-ass”.

Dumb-asses seem to manifest eternally. They in fact often serve a great purpose to society's well being by allowing us non dumb-asses to feign sympathy for their unique form of victim-hood. The huge sums of money spent by governments to lift people out of dumb-ass inspired inertia is the finest example of how dumb-asses can help on another. Remember, dumb asses are just like you and me...except they're dumb asses.

The Reasonable Man and Radical Nothing

It appears that a new phenomena has emerged in the webs of discourse amongst citizens of free nations. I attribute it to years of bogus schooling, charlatan journalism and a flaccid life philosophy dispensed through shoddy entertainment venues.

In pre-baby-boomer times it seemed that most people held convictions; sometimes strong ones, sometimes less fervent. Often issues and events called for a passionate stance but issues that were neither life or death would often elicit the reasonable response – a noncommittal, dispassionate “take no sides” adaptability. It was reasonable to be reasonable.

The role of the reasonable person today has devolved into something neither reasonable or marked by great conviction, a sort of radical nothing. Ironically, this muddy soup of non-conviction is spouted -- fervently -- as something held with...great conviction.

Daily one can find conversation, sound bites, and proclamations that reveal allegiance to no one or nothing, but stated with self-righteous certainty and passion. A pride in one's empathy for dictators and derision of all that has been done to the ends of family, nation and liberty is felt by some to be a sort of middle of the road non alliance. Within all this dogma there is an implied but subtle shield that proclaims the espouser is somehow taking no side.

When I hear one state with passion their lack of allegiance to anything of substance or moral value I typically sense that they feel they've reached some pinnacle of awareness. In short, nothing actually drives their feigned adaptability more than simple arrogance; the desire to be seen as having risen above petty concern for things like moral clarity or choosing good over evil. Of course such dichotomies are viewed to no longer exist anyway (at least since Nietzsche).

Perhaps its a genuinely new thing (at least to our era) to plant one's values so deeply in mere mist, but there's nothing new about stupidity or arrogance. Being “reasonable” and “seeing the other side” of an issue can be just and objective. But the contemporary prevalence of less sincere stances are certainly no way to support a family, nation or sober world view.

What more could authoritarian regimes and ideologies hope for from a civilization in decline and an expanding population of those who now believe so strongly...in nothing.

Random Observations

Regarding attempts to “facilitate” voting (i.e. “postcard registration”):
An individual who is informed and conscientious will typically vote. The type of people who choose not to vote are the types of people who shouldn't be voting anyway (unless the end goals of your society are decay before the passions of a mob or some hollow catch phrase like, “yes we can”).

***********************

America's greatest sins are:
Acting in its own self-interest, and success. The first, hardly unique in the world of nations, the second, hardly sinful.

***********************

The weak-willed mud of post modern neo-marxist sophistry has so permeated media and education that a renewed confrontation between America and Hitler himself would find much of the world cheering for swastika flags. Feigned intellectual sophistication has never been so misguided, careless or corrupt.

***********************

“What if everyone thought like that?” is a stupid statement regardless of what the “thought” is directed toward because the fact of the matter is, everyone doesn't “think like that...”

***********************

Liberty vs. the lemmings of state adoration:
The choices are basic and clear; maximum individual liberty or increasing degrees of government “intervention.” The problem is that individual liberty (with obvious constraints against aggression or fraud against others) can only be “maxed-out” so far. Any degree of state “intervention” by its very nature always calls for more authority and control. A lover of government can always come up with reasons why “we need” more government (usually to “fix” problems created by government in the first place).

State authority means coercion. Those who choose freedom simply wish to be free – to be left alone. Those who favor the intrusion of the state into personal life and transactions are ultimately choosing to dictate the lives and actions of others.

***********************

The odd obsession:
Does anyone not find it odd that, with all the instance of violence, war, oppression, and cruelty in the world, the left is so fervently obsessed with the tiny democratic state (amongst a sea of authoritarian regimes) of Israel?

California and Reality

This Reason TV mini-documentary, although about California specifically, explains some basic realities about economics and government.

"Angry Racist" Belief in Limited Constitutional Government

I had recently seen an editorial cartoon in a Japanese / English newspaper which depicted a crazed Republican screaming, "They're coming! More and more people getting health care!". Alongside him, an equally absurd caricature of an anguished "Tea Party" person saying , "Minorities! Women! Children! It's the end of the world!"

Uhh,...yeah, right...

Hasn't much of mainstream journalism overplayed this card a bit? Unlike many among the general public, the usual allies of bigger and more centralized state authority appear to genuinely believe that conservative or libertarian values are somehow invalid and unworthy of engagement in legitimate debate.

Rising protests against growing state authority seems to have struck a nerve with many on the left, and their only response seems to be some variation on the repeated mantra that; the right is "full of hate." So just what is it that progressives are so “full of" when addressing conservative or libertarian ideals? I don't remember them being exactly full of tolerance, compromise, or “understanding” during the previous administration (group hug for Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld anyone?).

The coddling of the Obama administration by many media sources has become laughable. Likewise for a common assertion by some talking heads that anyone who opposes an unread 1000 page piece of "health care" legislation could only be taking issue with it because of they are racists or, in the above noted cartoon, fear women and children receiving health care. Meanwhile, “anti-war” and anti-capitalism protests are still often depicted as mere cross sections of society when they are often organized by genuinely violent extremist groups, several which advocate a complete overthrow of our constitutional system so as to replace it with their much loved Marxist gulag state. When was the last time we heard of a Tea Party protest where rocks or Molotov cocktails were thrown at private businesses and police (or anyone for that matter)?

As for the phony attempts to label opposition to Obama's state-enhancing agenda as a product of "racism,” do some people really believe that if a white male tried to ram through a thousand pages of unread bureau-growth legislation that conservatives and libertarians would somehow then find it palatable? Nonsense.

Belief in limited government and sound economic policy as espoused by most in the Tea Parties has no relation to "hate," racism, conjured threats and dangers, or general "mean-spiritedness." That so many pseudo intellectuals try to concoct such a fantasy is more a reflection of their own inability to tolerate popular viewpoints different from their own than any genuine danger from citizens questioning a president and party's grasp for expanded authority.

It's often said that if you repeat a lie often enough it will be believed . But that's not completely true. If you tell a lie too often people wonder why you feel the need to keep repeating something that you claim is obvious and apparent.

Some Republicans and many Tea Party advocates will be laughing all the way to the polls this fall... and perhaps in 2012 as well.

Evil, Fascist, Racist, War-mongers

...ah, that would be the left's typical descriptive terms for conservatives.

I recently read an article that noted the stated values of a small Tea Party like conservative group called "The Lincoln Club," and was struck with the simplicity of their purpose:

..."to promote, educate and advance conservative principles of fiscal responsibility, small limited government, free enterprise, the rule of law, private property rights, and the preservation and protection of individual liberty."

I think it pretty accurately describes the core of conservative belief. But, I'm missing the part about fascism, racism, and war-mongering. Indeed, these are the values so feared and abhorred by the clowns of leftland whose worship of wall-to-wall state coercion is threatened by those who favor limits on government authority.

Clowns on parade...

Get a Clue Folks...

The left in general really loves to see the state move in on anything private. After all, us little people are too stupid to actually make our own choices and run our own lives. I dare say that some "progressives" may be a bit weak in forsight themselves on some occasions. For example, give lots of authority to the government and than look puzzeled or angry when someone else is running the show (this has happend on both sides of the aisle -- solution, don't give government enhanced authority in the first place). It always backfires. I don't think any sane person would want to see the internet fall under the control of the state but, stranger thoughts and goals have occured by some.

Socialism vs. Capitalism...as usual

For a variety of reasons -- all of debatable merit -- a leftist will always choose subsistence or deprivation over abundance and growth. (though not necessarily for themselves).

The Values of Annoyance

First the Tea Parties and now this. The clowns of leftland aren't going to be happy if this trailer is any indication of what this movie is about. Someone is always interfering with the "path to revolution" with emotional expressions that value freedom. It's rare to see something like this on a screen. The only truly effective anti-communist movie in decades (that wasn't it's intention, it was just conveying a true story) was "The Killing Fields."

It's not that all leftists are devout fans of Mao or communist dictators...it's just that it's fairly typical that they cut such authoritarian regimes plenty of slack. When criticism is made of the pathetic track record of Marx's many clones, the left goes into their default position and turns the conversation around into how terrible America and capitalism are.

Idiots..."useful" (to the socialist cause) or otherwise.

A Timely Issue

I probably post this cartoon about once every year and still feel it gets right to the matter of those issues and personal values that this blog is so opposed to:

 

"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule."

-- H.L. Mencken

Contradictions in Leftism

It stands out as an enduring paradox among leftists that they are both highly critical of (the U.S.'s) government yet proclaim the need to expand it's scope and authority significantly.

"The state is bad. The state is wrong. ...The state is, too small and has too little authority [?]."

"Smart" Doesn't Equal Right

The worst thing about dealing with someone who is clearly intelligent and even well-informed is that some of them tend to think that their knowledge automatically makes their judgement superior -- "[They're] smart, so [they're] right."

With a largely left wing intelligencia that regularly shows sympathy to authoritarianism in all its guises and scorn upon the free-wheeling individualism of America it's a hard case to prove that knowledge and wit necessarily means an honest or insightful view of things.

If We Could Only Have a Bigger and More Intrusive State -- That Would Save Us

"We need_____." "The government needs to_____." "Why isn't the government doing more about_____?"

Or, framed in another more revealing way, "The government isn't big enough. We need more powerful politicians, bureaucrats, and government...the state is just too darn small!"

Liberal Fascism

In my last post I made a reference -- link -- to a speech by Jonah Goldberg regarding the issues he analyzed in his book, "Liberal Fascism."

I read "Liberal Fascism" and it's quite good. (Here's an amazon.com review that I had written after reading to it).

The link to the speech in the previous post warrents repeating -- it's very informative. I'm reposted it here.

'An excellent overview of what "Fascism" and "Socialism" really are and how they've manifested in history.

"Knuckle Dragging Neanderthals...full of hate"

The clowns of leftland have been rather successful in painting a portrait of conservatism as a philosophy of ignorance, greed, and "mean-spiritedness" for quite some time now. They've done this (and continue to) through virtually all organs of communication from journalism, education, and entertainment. In the conjured view of philosopher-king wannabes, those who favour the centralized authority of the state and micromanagement of individuals' lives are enlightened, loving, and caring. Their only motive is that of "making a better world" -- laughable!

One minor tactic used for some time by the left is to have painted left wing talking heads as somehow simply nice folks with professional insight who wish to inform us of the events of our times. This is the fantasy land ideology that successfully morphed John McCain -- previously known as a Republican "maverick" for his moderate to liberal views on a variety of issues -- into a blood-thirsty war-monger. Leftland's propaganda organs also, as many know by now, morphed a pseudo-Marxist community organizer with no real-world job experience into a god-man.

So, who are the pundits and thinkers "on the right" who speak for conservative and libertarian values? Common appraisals would tell us that they are Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, and Glenn Beck. They may even toss in Bill O'Reilly even though his style is a bit more restrained (or less sarcastic).

I can't say that I don't often agree with the above personalities. I'm well aware that their styles tend to the dramatic and their delivery often clouds the valid positions they often express. Most people have no idea that Ann Coulter's books are full of little-known facts and and Glenn Beck actually unveils some serious issues we should be thinking about backed by some rather insightful historical knowledge. But....the delivery and showmanship often trips up the message and loses the independents and uncommitted center -- Oh well.

What media leftland doesn't want people to know is that there are many genuinely scholarly pundits on the right with a level voice and head. They're the regular reading stock of many conservatives who share the view that the government that governs least governs best and that the U.S. -- warts and all -- is essentially a good country that has often been threatened by horrid ideologies and authoritarian institutions.

Getting to the point; below is a list of some very sober minds on "the right." Common folks who take little interest in daily political debate probably never heard of many of these people. It's in the interest of the left that citizens not be aware of these writer's ideas and that people think that the only spokespersons for conservatism those who rant on talk radio.

If you don't know the work of the following people, you should. You'd gain some insight that isn't readily available in pop/mainstream venues:

Victor Davis Hanson

Charles Krauthammer

Thomas Sowell

Mark Steyn

Johah Goldberg (An excellent informative speech regarding "Liberal Fascism")

Walter Williams

Larry Elder

Cliff May

Theodore Darymple


These are but a few. But those independents and centrists who have been led to believe that Tea Party activists are racists/fascists or who think that a controversial statement made by a loud talk radio personality and taken out of its actual context are the "conservative viewpoint" may find some interesting ideas among the writings, speeches, or interviews from/with the above mentioned conservative/libertarian personalities.

Redistribute Common Sense...

"Full Of Hate" For Thee But Not For Me

If one hates Obama, big centralized government, bureaucrats, lawyers, and assorted busy bodies and control freaks (if one wishes to be left alone), one is "full of hate." (Don't forget the hateful concept of favoring low taxes and maximizing individual freedom).

If one hates George Bush, businesses, entrepreneurs, and individualists, one is full of ...what exactly? --(besides shit).

The Greece-y Hands of Wealth Envy

Regarding Greece and the greed of the non-wealthy.

...The whole scenario is a preview of what's to come for most "developed" nations who have been lured to the scam that the state "should"/must provide for all issues that confront one in the real world. Just pay for it by stealing it from productive creators of wealth.

Get people fired up about how "unfair" it is that others have more wealth. After said wealth is bled dry, whine and continue to demand the fruits of further theft from victims of theft who have barely been allowed to exist.

It's no coincidence that Greece has such a large communist party membership.

There isn't anything "free" and the products of theft only lasts a limited time. Socialism always leads to an economic graveyard -- idiots.

The Law of Unintended Consequences - Garbage Disposal in the Mountains of Japan

 

Japan is Dying

…That's not to say that other countries, for similar reasons, are not also on the critical list. Demographics and the absurd demands of statist control freaks have made it almost impossible for advanced states to maintain their unique standings as places where the middle class can emerge and flourish in relative comfort and independence.

Like so many other countries (the United States included), Japan is slowly -- has been -- killing itself. One can drive along many roads in a country with limited space and find row upon row of rusted and abandoned factories, stores, and warehouses, carcasses that show witness to the effects of top-heavy state strangulation. Taxes are only a minor issue in the equation. There is virtually nothing one can do to maintain or augment one's livelihood without time and money consuming bureau-encounters. The drones of state stoically push papers, fees, and decrees in your face and at the end of the year they receive the popular windfall "bonus" that rewards mere compliance with dust. If one questions these persistent breaks on dynamism and economic health, the answer (excuse) usually relates to some phony pre-packaged statement that "Japanese culture"…is different from American (or any other) culture. But, what does the typical socialist bureau decree have to do with the tea ceremony, flower arranging, or leaving one's slippers at a home's entryway?

My criticisms of the Japanese bureau state certainly don't mean to imply that the U.S. or other countries are somehow free of the plague of statism. In many ways though, Japan offers a model upon which all dynamic and free societies will find themselves as politicians and the people who love them load political guns and point them at their country's hearts.

Many people are under the impression that Japan is simply an American clone and, looking at it superficially, one could be prodded to think just that but Japan, in many ways, retains the obedient collectivist nature that it had before its war with and defeat by America.

The citizens of Japan are amazingly tolerant of the bureau-oppressiveness around them. Even tiny issues like garbage collection are muddled by a thousand rules and fussy standards. In most towns, such edicts are arranged in complex charts specifying exactly what is to be thrown out and when and in what ceremony-styled manner (i.e. in the town I live in, aerosol cans must be punctured and placed in a separate bag with a large note saying "spray" on it). Of course in any country where classic socialist sentiments dictate that human nature must not be diverse and imperfect, people find it difficult to meet the high standards of their masters – almost no one gets the details of garbage disposal done "correctly." The anti-statist view of "simpler is better" is proven a thousand times over in such mundane ordained chaos. Throwing appliances away becomes incredibly annoying and tedious (one must purchase special stickers, pay special fees, call special departments, or return the product to where it was purchased -- they don't account for used products or ones purchased from a place that no longer exists). This results in what any free-market libertarian would expect. If one travels in the countryside or mountains of Japan they will eventually find a graveyard of dumped appliances no doubt put there by people who simply wanted to throw something away and found it nearly impossible or too annoying to do so. This is not to say that those who do such things are okay for tarnishing the natural landscape but, common sense would tell anyone that such things are bound to occur when the system is so clearly not organized to "serve the customer" in any way. Like any socialist template, the citizens of Japan are encouraged (forced) to "serve society" (i.e. bureaucrats and the government offices they dwell in).

I once tried to dispose of a Toshiba laptop here that I had purchased in America. The screen was toasted and getting rid of it my prefered "option." I had read in the lengthily trash disposal guidelines (perhaps I should have gotten a lawyer?) that one is supposed to take their laptop to a local electronic appliance store and pay some fee, give it to them and be done with it. No, I had purchased it in America and even though it was a Japanese made model they couldn't deal with it. I was told to send it back to the manufacturer. I instead simply dismantled it piece by piece over a couple months time and put the barely recognizable pieces into "non-burnable" weekly trash (a special purchased bag, of course). I'm sure I'm not the only one that has taken the time to accomplish my mundane goal with stealth and wasting of personal time. At least I wasn't littering the sides of mountain roads.


It's amazing to see so many huge SUV's in Japan -- they're everywhere and certainly defy the conjured myth that America is somehow the only place where big enviro-unfriendly toys are indulged in. In America, one occasionally has to have one's car checked for safety and pollution standards. The cost depends on the state one resides in but none even come close to the insane amounts Japanese citizens are forced to pay (even a small "earth-saving" car is typically tagged for a grand every couple of years and this fee doesn't even include annual taxes one must pay on a car as well – this doesn't include the state's take in gasoline taxes, nearly half what the "greedy" oil companies get to make with their average 13% profit margin – they at least give us the oil we want while the state just keeps robbing Yuko to pay Kenji...and some politician's construction buddies).

The clowns of state can't stop human nature (though they keep trying). Some people want a big car…and they act on their desire by – duh – buying a big car. I wonder though how many people don't send their kids to college or send them to a lessor college than they would like because every two years they have to dish out a grand or two to the political class. This car fee is only one example of many fees, taxes, and government roadblocks that channel Japan's wealth into the coffers of the political class instead of feeding a vibrant economy and allowing citizens the personal freedom to spend the fruits of their labor in the diverse ways that free people choose. Allowing for the unfettered creation, sale, and purchase of products and services increases a nation's wealth and overall living standard. Allowing the state a thousand and one ways to seize a nation's productive capacity creates stagnation, apathy, and decline (although it's beyond the scope of this rant, I'd venture to guess that such state imposed decline results in everything from reduced birth rates to increases in crime).

The state in Japan gives -- GIVES! -- me and everyone else with a young child about a hundred bucks a month. I take it of course, knowing that the reasoning behind it is blatantly stupid. No, that doesn't make me a hypocrite. I'll take all the ridiculous nonsense a socialist government throws my way knowing full well that the concepts that drive them are absolute nonsense. And, forfeiting it would certainly gain nothing for anyone either. The new socialist prime minister is going to hike that giveaway to about a hundred and thirty dollars (I know, it's yen). Supposedly, these huge outlays will encourage Japanese citizens to have more children (more accurately, to have children at all). Surprise, the birth rate keeps declining. Instead of handing other people's money to people like myself who may or may not be able to afford the monthly expenses of rearing a child, how about getting rid of the fees, taxes, and roadblocks to economic prosperity that are the default position of leftist governments? No, we have to keep that wealth envy going until a nation litterally eats itself (as has been the case in Greece for quite some time).

There comes a point in a "mixed economy" (as Ayn Rand refers to the socialist / capitalist hybrids we now live in -- always edging closer to the socialist end of the spectrum) when even private institutions begin to act as functionally fixed and sclerotic as their government models. I guess people become so used to the pervasive lack of service in the state sector that the private one simply feels it's an acceptable standard. In a small town coffee shop my wife was once told she couldn't order a simple piece of chocolate cake. It was advertised as a "set" with coffee. It was beyond the owner's rigid clerical thought process that he could simply sell my wife the cake she wanted without the coffee. No, he'd rather make less money and let the cake go to waste – idiot.

Capitalists being the "greedy bastards" that they are want to make money. Idiots haven't a clue about such things. Not because they're less greedy or because they're brimming with altruism, but because the entire system now teaches people to be mere functionaries that obtain a bare minimum result. Excellence or something so philistine as "giving the customer what he or she wants" is beyond even most "capitalist" enterprises. They're all just extensions of the hand of state. Cradle to grave lassitude.

Somewhere along the road to socialist hell citizens have been weaned from the concept of striving for a better life. A high standard of living is of no concern. Of course it will be too late when they find out that a high standard of living and a thriving economy are good things and that nations nosediving into deliberate decline have nothing to look forward to. Japan and America may not become North Korea but we may become Greece. (Anyone who's aware of economics and current events should be aware that being Greece at this time in history is not a good thing).

In America, the threshold has almost been reached where a majority of the population is either directly employed by the state or receives considerable benefits from the state and the spoils from the productive classes. When that threshold is breached a society permanently bounded by passions of wealth envy, dependency, and a blind march to economic suicide becomes firmly established. From there it's all downhill.

Japan's citizens were easy picking for the arrogant politicians of the modern bureau-state. They tend to accept most nonsense that's imposed on them and certainly wouldn't rebel against the hand that they think should feed them. A "tea party" would never happen in Japan (and in America, a media dominated by allegiance to socialist values won't allow such a rebellion to get the traction it needs to roll back an encroaching dystopia either).

Japan is a good country with good people but adopting the tired values so meticulously developed in Europe to guide (subdue) it's citizens is going to destroy it for good. America's fate will likely be little different. Huge tax burdens, unaffordable social schemes that will no longer pay, substandard healthcare, and rationed everything. The fruits of socialist "compassion" and the vegetables of blind followers into history's dust heap.

Too bad…really.

More Good Stuff From Nealz Nuze

...which he got from Reason.com

Earth Day Predictions, 1970

"We have about five more years at the outside to do something."
• Kenneth Watt, ecologist

"Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind."
• George Wald, Harvard Biologist

"We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation."
• Barry Commoner, Washington University biologist

"Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from intolerable deterioration and possible extinction."
• New York Times editorial, the day after the first Earth Day

"Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make. The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years."
• Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University biologist

"By...[1975] some experts feel that food shortages will have escalated the present level of world hunger and starvation into famines of unbelievable proportions. Other experts, more optimistic, think the ultimate food-population collision will not occur until the decade of the 1980s."
• Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University biologist

"It is already too late to avoid mass starvation."
• Denis Hayes, chief organizer for Earth Day

"Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions....By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine."
• Peter Gunter, professor, North Texas State University

"Scientists have solid experimental and theoretical evidence to support...the following predictions: In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution...by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half...."
• Life Magazine, January 1970

"At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it's only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable."
• Kenneth Watt, Ecologist

"Air pollution...is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone."
• Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University biologist

"We are prospecting for the very last of our resources and using up the nonrenewable things many times faster than we are finding new ones."
• Martin Litton, Sierra Club director

"By the year 2000, if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil at such a rate...that there won't be any more crude oil. You'll drive up to the pump and say, `Fill 'er up, buddy,' and he'll say, `I am very sorry, there isn't any.'"
• Kenneth Watt, Ecologist

"Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, secretary of the Smithsonian Institute, believes that in 25 years, somewhere between 75 and 80 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct."
• Sen. Gaylord Nelson

"The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age."
• Kenneth Watt, Ecologist


There you have it..."the experts"

Neal Boortz Sayin It The Way It Is

["...]since when was it written into law that your earnings must "contribute to society as a whole"? Can you imagine what would happen to our economic system if every financial transaction was judged - or perhaps regulated - on whether or not it contributed to society as a whole? You do realize that this "society as a whole" noise is collectivist nonsense, don't you? I engage in an economic tranction - or "function" as Obama calls it, to get something that I want, not to contribute to society. The person on the other side of the transaction is getting something he wants as well. It's a trade ... a trade negotiated and transacted between two free individuals. Society plays no role here. Society isn't putting up any of the money, society isn't taking any of the risk. So long as I'm not harming someone else ... just leave me the hell alone. When I want to contribute to society as a whole I'll send some money to the Red Cross.[...]

Remember, "society" is no one in particular and everyone but you -- something only a leftist could rally around.

On Anti-Americanism

In school, the loud, lucky, spirited, and optimistic kid is typically hated by the stern, bitter, pessimistic kid.

Dictatorships can always be counted on to despise America. Those who sympathize with dictatorships and authoritarian views will always despise America...and stern, bitter, pessimistic people will typcially despise America.

Hardly a loss for America.

More from the Control Freak-in-Chief

More new stuff from the Operant Conditioner-in-chief.

A very important read if you know history and have seen this all before (or if you like science fiction and distopian fiction...and have seen this all before).

Sorry. Another hiatus. I'll be back eventually but right now I'm too overwhelmed with trivial real life stuff.

Have fun and, always enjoy the nonsense. Remember, socialism and it's values primarily exist for our entertainment!

It's Happening Again...

Intellectuals and bureau-planners are having a difficult time imposing their usual schemes and follies (imposing conformity of thought and lifestyle). Free individuals acting in consort with like-minded others are resisting "the revolution" again. The yellow-stream media, academia, education, and "entertainment" are rallying the forces but....

Real revolutionaries don't sit down and shutup.

Compassion carved in stone

The thing about the state is that, it's so difficult to determine which marble building facade' cares about you most.

note: as stated here many times before, once again, I'm not going to be posting for quite some time. Of course, I've said that before and may make an occasional note or post to what I think to be a noteworthy link but, for now...outta here.

Do have a look at some earlier postings. I haven't fully compiled all of my "Big Rants" -- topical essays -- yet (in the side bar), but over the years I've accumulated a lot of my personal complaint with the nonsense that perpetually eminates from intellectuals, journalists, academics, and other assorted scoundrels who think "their shit don't stink" and everyone but themsleves should be relegated to the status of servitude to collectivist visions of obedience. Freedom is not the "right" to enslave another, whether that other be a middle-class shopkeeper or a wealthy doctor. Freedom is the right to be left alone to choose one's own path. When that path is obstructed by idiots, clowns, or control freak demogogues, people who can see the writing on the wall need to act or at least be aware enough to resist perrenial attempts to impose conformity. May the bureaustate and its minions perish.

Just Don't Call Them Communists...

...or communist sympathizers. It needs to be noted as a reminder to the more delusional out there; Communism is a ruthless, violent, one-party, coercive philosophy of government responsible for the enslavement and death of over 100,000,000 people in the last century alone.

Thomas Friedman of the New York Times recently had this to say:

"One-party autocracy certainly has its drawbacks. But when it is led by a reasonably enlightened group of people, as China is today, it can also have great advantages. That one party can just impose the politically difficult but critically important policies needed to move a society forward in the 21st century."

...another rich arrogant elitist and authoritarian sympathizing...asshole.

Does this clown really think that the style of government he praises would have any room for a wealthy "pundit" like himself.

Sooooo pathetic. Seems that film-making and journalism is in close competition as to who can be the most ridiculous.

Important, Insightful, Informative, and Scary...

(I know I stated that I'd be away from computer-land activity for some time but I couldn't resist posting this link)

Mark Steyn is brilliant. I'm quite certain that most leftist/"progressives" must thoroughly hate him (I've noted more than once that there is one thing a leftist hates more than a capitalist, it's an articulate, intelligent spokesperson for the "working class" worldview).

Anyway, this piece by Steyn is very informative and ...scary.

Very Funny

....Yep. Nailed it.

'Away from Computer/Blogging ventures for a month or so (maybe a bit longer)

The world will continue to be facinating...and crazy.

...obey no one but your inner conscience.

President Reagan Was A Great Leader

...Obama just plays one on TV.

"Greed" is:

It was asked on a website recently what an appropriate definition of “greed” is. Typically the word is tossed around to mark anyone who has been successful or wealthy as being somehow evil and morally corrupt (as the word has now come to be associated with mere wealth).

So, I offer the following observation:

Greed is; when one's lust for material gain or power surpasses a point where their intentions, actions, and interactions are peaceful, honest, and responsible.

By this definition, the mere -- normal -- desire to succeed, excel, and acquire is not “greed” no matter how wealthy or accomplished one may be. And, of course, one can be “poor” and exhibit these very traits as well.

Most business people are not “greedy,” but most politicians surely are. In the end, the pathological and morally corrupt attributes defined above as greed are standard behavior amongst those who seek to impose their will through compulsion and thus increase their power and authority over the lives of others.

Repeal the First Amendment...

...God, if this ain't classic! (Scroll to the "petition"Video)

Follow Up

This beginning overview of socialist history -- by Glen Beck -- is EXCELLENT.

(The Real) Che Finally Goes Public...

I haven't the time or desire to go into an extended commentary on Glen Beck. I'll fully acknowledge that he has a style that lacks the professional seriousness one wants to point to when backing a viewpoint. He's overly dramatic and sometimes a bit cliche' no doubt. For those on the left his biggest "crimes" are probably that he's both religious and patriotic (and those are big crimes to "progressives").

I've noted several times on this blog how disgusted I am that the worthless authoritarian idiot, Che Guevara, has become such an idol amongst the clueless. More than a few blogs and essays have gone over the issue well and further informed that relatively small niche of society that cares about such things,but..

Finally, some serious exposure to undercut that mass admiration that Hollywood and others have hoped to stir for Che Guevara. Beck has a massive audience. Even many on the left that so hate him acknowledge actually watching him and, of course, a lot of just simple folks who used to take no interest in political issues watch him too. So, love him or hate him -- or, don't care -- Glen Beck exposes some serious issues widely. And now, the Che that only a few conservative/libertarian types know of is in full view of a public that is increasingly finding that "progressive" icons and ideals are rotten to the core.

'A guy who barely ever bathed, shot a twelve year old in the head for "pilfering food," wanted Russia to initiate a first strike on New York with a nuclear weapon, hated rock and roll (because it was "bourgeoisie and imperialistic"), and who thought black people were lazy and inferior.

That's the Che "progressives" so love.

...'figures.

"When are you all going to wake up..."

Scam, scam, scam..."

While “early to bed” may offer health, wealth, and wisdom, “early to rise” is to be avoided at all costs.

Hollywood vs Reality...

Here's some numbers regarding the numbers of American military personnel being sent to assist in Haiti after the recent terrible Earthquake there.

I wonder if they'll be blowing up and trees and forests as depicted in James Cameron's latest film, "Avatar." Maybe they just want to take straw baskets from old people or pull the wings off of butterflies?

After major disasters, The U.S. -- and it's military -- is among the first on the scene with assistance. U.S. citizens consistently offer significant help both public and private (and I'm not even including the much maligned freeing of whole populations from tyranny).

After a few months the international left will be back to their usual mantras against the United States and its people; "Imperialist war-mongering greedy capitalists"...who eat McDonald's french fries. For now, "thanks for the help" would be nice (but, don't hold your breath).

Crony Capitalism...

...Oops, wrong cronies ("change we can believe in").

Natural Disasters, No One to Blame...and lots of people to help

Courtesy of Neal Boortz at Nealz Nuze:

The situation in Haiti is so bad it surpasses our ability to comprehend it. We will do what we can today to keep you up to speed on the situation there. Next on the menu will be disease and, I fear, food riots.

I beg you to do what you can. I know we've been through a recession. I know that unemployment is a problem. But please .. can you try to help these people?

BEWARE, though, of pleas you get for help in your email in boxes. The scammers are out there. Use established and recognized relief agencies to show your concerns for the people of Haiti.

Here ... I just did a quick "cut and paste" from the CNN website. I chose a few relief agencies you might want to use. These agencies have a commonality: They're all based in the United States, and when they get out there and do their relief work the recognition will go to the people of the United States who support them. The American people are among the most caring people in the world .. and I'm sick to death of the way our country is disparaged. So .. please help ... but help in the name of the United States, not the UN.

Here you go ... chose one and give something.

American Red Cross

I put this organization at the top of the list. My wife, Donna, is a life member of the Red Cross Tiffany Circle Society of Women Leaders. The American Red Cross' primary focus during the initial response of an emergency is feeding, sheltering and supplying any other basic needs. To donate: Go to RedCross.org, hit donate now button at top and then International Response Fund. You also can text "Haiti" to 90999 to donate $10 to the International Response Fund. The money will go directly to relief efforts in Haiti. Or call 1-800-Red-Cross.

AmeriCares

This nonprofit disaster relief organization delivers medicine, medical supplies and aid to people in crisis around the world. To donate, call 1-800-486-HELP or go to AmeriCares.org. Donations will go toward medicine and medical supplies and for expenses for providing that medical aid.

Care

This humanitarian organization's main focus is to fight global poverty, specifically by empowering marginalized women and girls. To donate to the Haiti relief fund effort, go to Care.org or call 1-800-521-CARE. Money will go toward food, water and sanitation, shelter and emergency health response.

Operation USA

The international relief agency provides funding for reconstruction and development aid to communities that have experienced disasters, disease and poverty. For its Haiti relief efforts, the agency plans to use donations for health care materials, water purification supplies and food supplements. To donate, go to opusa.org or call 1-800-678-7255, or mail a check to Operation USA, 3617 Hayden Ave., Suite A, Culver City, CA 90232.

Algorisms Run Amok

I realize that "algorism" already has a defined meaning related to mathematics (I don't mean the more commonly used, "algorithm") but I think a new meaning could easily be applied to any attempt to conjure a "problem" with the ultimate goal of increasing government income and power. Al Gore and his devout followers have certainly tried their best to use the fluctuations in climate that occur naturally over time to fork in mega-bucks and increase the authority of the state over private activity -- just one example of a common scenario in political con-artistry.

There are currently too many algorisms running amok to keep one free and prosperous.

James Cameron's, Avatar as Childish Political Theater

(This is not intended to be a movie review but a mere appraisal of the political concepts intentionally – obviously – symbolized in a current popular movie. It's written with the assumption that the reader has seen the movie and it is therefore lacking details regarding the plot and characters.

It should also be noted that this was a hastily put together rather random expression of my thoughts on issues related to the movie and is therefore not a very well-polished or organized essay style).

***************************

Before ripping on James Cameron and his splendid sci-fi movie, “Avatar” I first need to note that I think it's a good movie – absolutely beautiful if you like “eye-candy” and sappy romance (which I do). I recommend it. Besides spectacular visual effects, the story itself is lush and moving (though basically simple – really simple). The occasional appraisal of the movie as a cross between “Aliens” and “Dances with Wolves” is definitively accurate and it contains some of the best and worst attributes of both films. If it weren't for such an obvious attempt on the part of the movie's director/screenwriter to proselytize his idealistic left-wing political philosophy, I'd love it 100%.

In today's media environment; news, films, and songs not only continually prod us to an “awareness” that we use too much, but also that we need millionaire directors and musicians to remind us so. Avatar's director (and screenwriter), James Cameron, may be a nice guy (actually, word has it that he's a downright mean and oppressive director to work under) and he makes some fun and even spell-binding entertainment, but he's no insightful philosopher (anyone can have a philosophy). But philosophy is what he is selling and he's got the money, medium, and skill to do so.

The bad guys in this movie are bad. No sane person would take their side in the context of the movie's characters and plot line. In many contemporary films we are often led to believe that America (or a capitalist worldview) is just brimming over with cruelty and would like nothing better than to slaughter innocents and destroy natural beauty, but Hollywood's main purpose has always been to indulge the imagination. Most real people – conservative or liberal – don't relish the idea of laying beauty to waste or harming people who have done no wrong to them. One line in Avatar (among many ridiculous and simple caricatures) says something to the effect that when someone is sitting on something you want they're you're enemy. Uhh, okay, presto!, we fought with North Vietnam over their great coffee beans – or was it oil? With contemporary standards for entertainment vs hard history being what they are, I'm surprised the average person doesn't think the native populations of America were subdued for...oil (!).

Cameron's latest slight of hand, is typical of Hollywood's propaganda / entertainment hybrids today. Evil characters transparently symbolize the West, corporations, the military, and most obviously, America and its materialistic culture. The noble, commune-with-nature, pure at heart, and good guy Aliens are native Americans, Iraqis, ...old ladies in wheelchairs et al. There are enough in-your-face “PC” references to contemporary events to nudge the viewer into realizing that the noble good side (the Na'vi) are kin to today's misunderstood terrorists, environmental idealists, hippies, or just garden variety leftists whose purity is under assault from...people who don't share the director/screenwriter's view of the world.

The movie's most absurd attempt to insert its director's worldview into what could be a decent relatively non-polemic sci-fi flick is when the brutal military commander notes the need to use “terror” against “terrorists.” Up to that point there is nothing even remotely similar to terrorists in the indigenous people the film's villains are fighting, and no reason for the bad guys to see them as such. I guess at that point we're just supposed to imagine that a docile tribe of good people are in some way similar to Al Qaeda – equally innocent and undeserving of our twisted “labels.” I was reminded of a made-for-TV film about Hitler a few years back where he consolidates power by blaming the Reichstag fire on “terrorists” (a word that he and most people of the time never used).

We know the villains of Cameron's movie (again, us..or, U.S.) are fighting to obtain a rare and valuable element, “unobtainium” – like oil perhaps? (the symbolism is beyond obvious) – but we don't know why the element is valuable or what it's used for. For all we know, it's the prime ingredient of a life-saving drug that will preserve humanity. But that's not important, it's basically like oil – we want it, we're greedy and cruel, so we're going to hurt lots of doe-eyed peaceful natives to get it. I'll note here, as I've noted in a few posts back, that America's “take” in oil from Iraq is pretty lame thus far. For all America sacrificed in money and blood, it looks like all we got is what we said we wanted; a (relatively) democratic and friendly Iraq – China got the first oil bid, but that's another story. Oil and the acquisition of other material resources are now seen by most (educated in government schools and entertained by leftist media) as evil. We are led to despise oil companies for their greed but never prodded to contemplate the fact that we willingly give them money in exchange for our own desire to possess not only gasoline but synthetic fabrics to cloth our children, plastic containers to eat our lunches from, and CD's to pacify the cravings of spoiled brats wanting the latest tune that denounces capitalism and wealth. I wonder how much oil was used directly or indirectly to make Cameron's latest film epic (not to mention the cars used by many driving to see it)?

Even though the films “message” is right for the “progressive” crowd, like Cameron's others, it fails to have (leftist) snob appeal. I remember defending Titanic many times against the insults of many an intellectual snob. The only redeeming value they saw in that film was its references to “class” issues; relevant but barely noteworthy to the film's drama but, leftists are never ones for simple romance and adventure. It's always gotta be about oppressor, oppressee and the dry sterile ideologies that address such issues.

If a film like Avatar would be made with complete historical honesty, I would wonder why the Na'vi require “great warriors” in the first place and just how well the different “clans” of their moon/planet got along. Do they have disease? Have any of them tried to “make a better world” and sought to impose this better world upon others (which, in turn, had to defend themselves)? Are there things they treasure and are willing to fight for or conquer to acquire? Of course such questions wouldn't fit into a plot that merely seeks to demonize the western Classical Liberal tradition and idealize an inconsistent... ideal. If the Aztecs had only been able to continue their slave trade and sacrifices to nature, oh what a better world it would be.

We really don't know anything about the Na'vi people of Pandora beyond the fact that they look cool (the women are oddly similar in features to the sex imagery in Japanese manga) and they are “at one with” nature. Considering their state of development, that's easy to do. Nature is always beautiful until it starves you, infects you, or rips your house down. Of course, pretty flowers always trump poisonous reptiles as poster children for “nature”®. Incidentally, why do some people seem to give a pass to the primitive killing technology of bows and arrows (a more “humane” method of killing perhaps)?

It's not reading too much into the movie's plot-line to see that, once again, humans in general (beyond the U.S. specifically) are villains, after all, “they killed their mother [Earth].” But that, like so much of left-land's world view is B.S. Humans are actually OK I think. For every act of aggression, violence, and cruelty there are at least thousands of kindness, affection, and solace, and even more daily behavior that is plain, banal, and neutral in the battle between good an evil. For some, this is neither obvious nor acceptable. For them, humans – especially one's operating freely for their own self-interests – are a “virus” (as Mr. Smith tells us in the “The Matrix”). Humans, as a species, must be seen as evil by some, or at least overwrought with wrong-doing, so that individual moralists (leftist ideologues) can view themselves as somehow above it all. If paradise and altruism can just be enforced with their blueprint then we can all shake off the right-wing capitalist elixir that has so tarnished the non-reeducated.

I'm sure an irony was lost on most viewers of Avatar – as it was plainly by its director – that a movie which so bitterly caricatured the evil of corporations should end its credits with a lengthily list of big...corporations. There was also the firm warning that Avatar is a piece of private intellectual property and one better not dare try to use it without first forking over some more cash to James Cameron's multimillion dollar capitalist enterprise...but, it's all for a good purpose. Film good / energy products and Wall-mart appliances bad.

In a movie full of idealist cliche's, my favorite was subtle. With increasing frequency, Hollywood's greedy movie villains are now often depicted holding a cup of coffee while directing cruel acts against extremely likable victims. How heartless can one be? Killing and drinking coffee?

The most pathetic of Cameron's list of nonsense idealism and disconnects is that he apparently failed to realize that in the world he wants, with no greedy corporations, military, or technical advancement beyond bows and arrows, there would be no movie, “Avatar” and no job for him beyond hunter/gatherer (and perhaps some experience with starvation and submission to the elements – eg. “nature”).

Avatar is a beautiful piece of fiction...and a pathetic exercise in self-indulgence by a typical Hollywood hypocrite. If you want to see a great entertaining film see Avatar, but do have the good sense to realize that within the interesting story and special effects is just another typical leftist's attempt to demonize our existence so that he can perhaps feed his own delusions of innocence and moral superiority.