Sunday, December 27, 2009

Naked Passengers Prevent Bombings

Airports worldwide tightened security a day after the passenger tried to detonate a device that contained a high explosive on a flight into Detroit. After that attack, passengers have had to contend with extra pat-downs before boarding, staying in their seats without blankets or pillows for the last hour of the flight and more bomb-sniffing dogs.
~Fox News

What a bunch of malarkey -- why stop with the last hour of flight? Heck, why not just strip passengers naked and shackle them to their seats? Look, dudes, every stop-gap measure you implement is going to be circumvented by a terrorist ...
To which Seneca adds:
Yes, that is the eventual way to make us all "safe from everything" - just line us all up against the wall and shoot us becasue that's the the most "sustainable" thing for the earth.

Oh, and one last thing .. This incident too, is all George Bush's fault.

Tuesday, December 22, 2009

Anti-Reality Is Everywhere

There are dreamers who are making dreams come true

Taking time to teach the children there’s nothing they can’t do.

Giving shelter to the homeless giving hope to those without.

Isn’t that what this land’s all about.

Randy Travis Point Of Light lyrics

Humm.... I wonder what Ayn Rand would say about this. Maybe she would write up a book and title it "Atlas Shrugged". But wait ....... She already has done exactly that.

Not to put to fine a point on things, Randy, is it exactly teach[ing] the children there’s nothing they can’t do, that is ruining not only the children of the nation, but is ruining the nation itself.

Want to know why the American youth think themselves entitled? How can they NOT think this, when they have been infected with such anti-reality treacle such as this.

When I was young I was never exposed to his kind of pap, and therefore I know that there are a host of things that I can never do. For example, play ball like Michael Jordan. Indeed, Mr Jordan  - as a kindness to me - told me so himself when he told me my ass was too fat and legs to short and my character defective in atheletic drive.

So then, what the children really need to be taught is that "NO, you cannot be all you can be",  and that contrary to the high sounding bromides of the minstrel, there ARE things that they cannot do.

"Life is Tough -Get A Helmet" is what they need to be told. They should also be told that not everybody has the same capabilities, skills, or aptitudes, or luck, and THAT is the reality of things.

As for the last line about "Giving shelter to the homeless giving hope to those without", I demur for now, but those that have followed the line of thought in these many articles may already know what anti-societal impact that giving based on need can lead to, and indeed in their minds thay may hear the faint echoes of another anti-reality author when he said;
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need

God help us. And those that know and understand what God really may be, know that God will indeed help us.

Economic Sleight of Hand

Economy grows 2.2 percent in third quarter (Reuters) 12/22/09
Yeah, Like Duh - and the money supply only grew by 68%. This means that the economy did not grow in real terms and instead that it declined.

Monday, December 21, 2009

Socialism in Early America

The Great Thanksgiving Hoax by Richard J. Marbury

Each year at this time school children all over America are taught the official Thanksgiving story, and newspapers, radio, TV, and magazines devote vast amounts of time and space to it. It is all very colorful and fascinating. It is also very deceiving.

This official story is nothing like what really happened.. It is a fairy tale, a whitewashed and sanitized collection of half-truths, which divert attention away from Thanksgiving's real meaning.

The official story has the pilgrims boarding the Mayflower, coming to America and establishing the Plymouth colony in the winter of 1620-21. This first winter is hard, and half the colonists die. But the survivors are hard-working and tenacious, and they learn new farming techniques from the Indians. The harvest of 1621 is bountiful. The Pilgrims hold a celebration, and give thanks to God. They are grateful for the wonderful new abundant land He has given them. The official story then has the Pilgrims living more or less happily ever after, each year repeating the first Thanksgiving. Other early colonies also have hard times at first, but they soon prosper and adopt the annual tradition of giving thanks for this prosperous new land called America .

The problem with this official story is that the harvest of 1621 was not bountiful, nor were the colonists hard-working or tenacious. 1621 was a famine year and many of the colonists were lazy thieves. In his History of Plymouth Plantation, the governor of the colony, William Bradford, reported that the colonists went hungry for years, because they refused to work in the fields. They preferred instead to steal food. He says the colony was riddled with "corruption," and with "confusion and discontent." The crops were small because "much was stolen both by night and day, before it became scarce eatable." In the harvest feasts of 1621 and 1622, "all had their hungry bellies filled," but only briefly. The prevailing condition during those years was not the abundance the official story claims; it was famine and death.

The first "Thanksgiving" was not so much a celebration as it was the last meal of condemned men. But in subsequent years something changes. The harvest of 1623 was different. Suddenly, "instead of famine now God gave them plenty," Bradford wrote, "and the face of things was changed, to the rejoicing of the hearts of many, for which they blessed God." Thereafter, he wrote, "any general want or famine hath not been amongst them since to this day." In fact, in 1624, so much food was produced that the colonists were able to begin exporting corn.

What happened?

After the poor harvest of 1622, writes Bradford, "they began to think how they might raise as much corn as they could, and obtain a better crop." They began to question their form of economic organization. This had required that "all profits & benefits that are got by trade, working, fishing, or any other means" were to be placed in the common stock of the colony, and that, "all such persons as are of this colony, are to have their meat, drink, apparel, and all provisions out of the common stock." A person was to put into the common stock all he could, and take out only what he needed. This "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need" was an early form of socialism, and it is why the Pilgrims were starving. Bradford writes that "young men that are most able and fit for labor and service" complained about being forced to "spend their time and strength to work for other men's wives and children."

Also, "the strong, or man of parts, had no more in division of victuals and clothes, than he that was weak." So the young and strong refused to work, and the total amount of food produced was never adequate. To rectify this situation, in 1623 Bradford abolished socialism. He gave each household a parcel of land and told them they could keep what they produced, or trade it away as they saw fit. In other words, he replaced socialism with a free market, and that was the end of famines.

Many early groups of colonists set up socialist states, all with the same terrible results. At Jamestown , established in 1607, out of every shipload of settlers that arrived, less than half would survive their first 12 months in America . Most of the work was being done by only one-fifth of the men, the other four-fifths choosing to be parasites. In the winter of 1609-10, called "The Starving Time," the population fell from 500 to 60.

Then the Jamestown colony was converted to a free market, and the results were every bit as dramatic as those at Plymouth. In 1614, Colony Secretary Ralph Hamor wrote that after the switch there was "plenty of food, which every man by his own industry may easily and doth procure." He said that when the socialist system had prevailed, "we reaped not so much corn from the labors of thirty men as three men have done for themselves now."

Before these free markets were established, the colonists had nothing for which to be thankful. They were in the same situation as Ethiopians are today, and for the same reasons. But after free markets were established, the resulting abundance was so dramatic that the annual Thanksgiving celebrations became common throughout the colonies, and in 1863, Thanksgiving became a national holiday.

Thus the real reason for Thanksgiving, deleted from the official story, is: Socialism does not work; the one and only source of abundance is free markets, and we thank God we live in a country where we can have them.

Sunday, December 20, 2009

On Hyphenated Americans

History, again dictates that when certain moralities are LEGISLATED, and the culture is hyphenated [P.C. again] ... the adverse and resulting divisiveness leads to bitter resentments.
~ R. Griffin USN Retired, Lexington USA

Uhhh .. Ya Want Fries With That?

Wednesday, December 9, 2009

So You Want World Government??

Want to see a taste of what will happen when you get your wish of a World Government?

More government means less freedom, more control, more potential for abuse. It’s all about freedom!! Maybe the underclass will wake up and see that handouts lead to slavery.

Always remember, the master that feeds you gets to chain you.


Tuesday, December 8, 2009

Man Asks "Why is it that Homosexuals are So Queer"


The activists' goal is to show that California's marriage amendment, known as Proposition 8 and passed by 52 percent of voters in November 2008, was designed to create "discriminatory animus" toward homosexuals, according to the Los Angeles Times.

Duh! Of course it is. That's what politics is all about, creating discriminatory animus toward your opponents, and liberal and gay activists do it better than anyone. Do you think that the activists who disrupted a Catholic Mass were motivated by non-discriminatory good-will?
The dirty little secret object of politics is to discriminate those ideas and parties you disagree with from those you agree with, and to stir up dislike, even animus, toward the other. At least that is the politics of liberals generally, and they overdo it much to their discredit, but then again sadly, much to the advancement of their queer and destructive causes.

Saturday, December 5, 2009

Big Company Crap

And you all thought that government run health care was gonna be a snap. Here is an example of how bad it gets when something is run by a PRIVATE company with a profit incentive. Just think what it will be like when you take the profit incentive away.

Post found on an message board:

PointyClawedRaptorDecember 4, 2009

So many other companies can install software easily off the net. You guys choose some install system that is unintuitive and that simply doesn't work - fails without error.  For **** sake, just give us an exe file to download !

fedupandcrazy3876December 5, 2009

Did not find this helpful - GD I agree with linus VP. Just let me download it. Your freaking product is not so special that I have to use some special computer busting manager. How about a link to let me just get the box software cause your online process is so freaking lame.  And Duh... how about checking my computer for the download manager compatibility BEFORE you process my credit card and take my money??


Thursday, December 3, 2009

Just the Numbers

Climategate Czar Beheaded

Czar Update

John Holdren – Science Czar
Chapter 26

Late last month, the email system from the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit, one of the worlds leading climate research facilities, was breeched, exposing what may be the largest scientific fraud in history. The emails detail a concerted effort to hide, conceal, alter and destroy the scientific evidence contradicting their global warming fundamentalism. Al Gore must now be kicking himself for “inventing” the Internet.

A key player in this email scandal is Obama's radical Science Czar John Holdren. As detailed in Chapter 26 of SHADOW GOVERNMENT, John Holdren is a left wing radical with a decades long history of peddling the catastrophe du jour to advance his big government, anti-capitalist agenda.

On November 24, 2009, The Canada Free Press reported that Holdren was prominently featured in the thousands of the hacked emails. Congressional Republicans, led by Congressman Darryl Issa (R-CA) have started investigating these climate scientists whose emails suggest they tried to stifle global warming dissent.

~ From National Republican Trust - Author of Shadow Government, which details the connections and backgrounds of Obama's Czars.

Wednesday, December 2, 2009

The Dangers of Anesthesia

ni⋅hil⋅ism  /ˈnaɪəˌlɪzəm, ˈni-/


1. total rejection of established laws and institutions.

2. anarchy, terrorism, or other revolutionary activity.

3. total and absolute destructiveness, esp. toward the world at large and including oneself: the power-mad nihilism that marked Hitler's last years.

4. Philosophy.

a. an extreme form of skepticism: the denial of all real existence or the possibility of an objective basis for truth.

b. nothingness or nonexistence.

5. (sometimes initial capital letter) the principles of a Russian revolutionary group, active in the latter half of the 19th century, holding that existing social and political institutions must be destroyed in order to clear the way for a new state of society and employing extreme measures, including terrorism and assassination.

6. a. annihilation of the self, or the individual consciousness, esp. as an aspect of mystical experience.

b. nothingness or nonexistence.

In 1972, when I was a high school student, I could not understand why my english teacher was having us read works of this genre.

Deny the existence of reality????  What a load of crap.  Unfortunately, what I now realize is that I was being shown one of the drugs that would be used to anesthetize the American youth. What a stupid concept, I thought. Little did I realize that an entire culture would later embrace the mantras of "nothingness" , and  "I am nothing"  and "I do not exist"  and "There is no truth".

As if that is not sad enough on its own, the ugly little truth is that this is exactly the thinking that allows a society to take the position that they will not take any position at all, and thus is it that it allows foreign elements to quickly infect it and bring about its death. Not to put too fine a point on things, a society that will not stand FOR anything, will not stand AGAINST anything, and will be exterminated by those that do.

Make no mistake, my friends, those of Islam do not subscribe to the drivel of nihilism. Whether you like it or not, they do stand FOR something -  your destruction.

Recession Slide Show

Click here  for show

It is About Time - Swiss Take Steps to Stop Miranets

From a National Review Blogger Nov 30, 2009 ( A Line in the Air)

"The Swiss have just taken the significant step of banning the building of minarets. Right across the continent of Europe this ban is sure to have important repercussions.

Some will say that here is evidence of racism and xenophobia, while others will hold that the Swiss are people who believe in their historic identity, and Muslims who wish to live in Switzerland will have to respect it.

The ban follows quite a bit of contention which started when the king of Saudi Arabia bought a house on the shore of Lake Geneva. Launching a building program without first obtaining the requisite permits, he was obliged to stop and pull down extensions. Geneva already had a mosque, and when the Saudis wanted to build another one, the city fathers replied that permission would be granted only when the Saudis reciprocated by allowing the building of a church in Saudi Arabia. ...."
More at the link above, but this is a step in the right direction. When one reads the article one will find that, contrary to the PC crowd, the citizens voted for this restriction. It is about time that nation states understand that the thing that makes them unique nations states is their internal culture, and that to the extent one keeps the internal culture so too is kept the State.

Tuesday, December 1, 2009

Worth a Listen

Some Food For Thought

I got this in the other day - folks can check out as they see fit. Here is the Snopes link.

Subject: Professor Wichman E-mail

Claim: A Michigan professor sent an e-mail telling Muslim students to leave the country.


The story begins at Michigan State University with a mechanical engineering professor  named Indrek Wichman.  Wichman sent an e-mail to the Muslim Student's Association. The e-mail was in response to the students' protest of the Danish cartoons that portrayed the Prophet Muhammad as a terrorist. The group had complained the cartoons were 'hate speech'.

Enter Professor Wichman. In his e-mail, he said the following:

Dear Moslem Association,

As a professor of Mechanical Engineering here at MSU I intend to protest your protest.

I am offended not by cartoons, but by more mundane things like beheadings of civilians,cowardly attacks on public buildings, suicide murders, murders of Catholic priests(the latest in Turkey), burnings of Christian churches, the continued persecution of Coptic Christians in Egypt, the imposition of Sharia law on non-Muslims, the rapes of Scandinavian girls and women (called 'whores' in your culture), the murder of film directors in Holland, and the rioting and looting in Paris, France.

This is what offends me, a soft-spoken person and academic, and many, many of my colleagues. I counsel you dissatisfied, aggressive, brutal, and uncivilized slave-trading Moslems to be very aware of this as you proceed with your infantile 'protests.'If you do not like the values of the West - see the 1st Amendment - you are free to leave. I hope for God's sake that most of you choose that option.

Please return to your ancestral homelands and build them up yourselves instead of troubling Americans.

I. S. Wichman
Professor of Mechanical Engineering


As you can imagine, the Muslim group at the university didn't like this too well. They're demanding that Wichman be reprimanded and the university impose mandatory diversity training for faculty and mandate a seminar on hate and discrimination for all freshmen.

Now the local chapter of CAIR has jumped into the fray. CAIR, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, apparently doesn't believe that the good professor had the right to express his opinion.

For its part, the university is standing its ground in support of Professor Wichman,  saying the e-mail was private, and they don't intend to publicly condemn his remarks.

This political correctness crap is getting old and killing us.

Monday, November 30, 2009

Hitler and the Tea Partys

Kind of puts things in perspective.

The Racists Among Us

Use this handy flow chart to determine your racisticity.

Follow the Money

Do we really think that the government even if they do "take over the health care insurance business" is going  to operate the health care insurance system themselves?

Hardly. Do not be surprised if the government side of the insurance business will be run by the insurance industry itself, or at least one or two of the major players.

As was explained to me many years ago by a friend, contrary to the idea that businesses want no regulation or less regulation, the ugly fact is that businesses WANT regulation because that levels the playing field and they know exactly what the competition can and cannot do. This knowledge then reduces their risk of operating their business and that is why contrary to their protests, they actually want it.

So then, if this national health care thing comes to pass, be ready to see the stock price of some of the players  move higher.

Would not be at all surprised to find that behind those closed mahogany doors such conversations along these lines has already been had and the template agreed upon.

Friday, November 27, 2009

Overheard at the Grocery Store

"Keep working and stay out of debt. People like me want you young people to be in debt because then we can get you and an army of people like you to work for us for the rest of your lives for practically nothing."

~ Wisdom imparted to a young man by a grey-haired senior citizen, who had earlier remarked to the younger man that he, too, in his younger day, had sacked groceries, and that was one of the reasons that he did not have to sack groceries anymore, and was thereafter asked by that youngster bagging the groceries if there was anything he could do in the current economy to protect himself.

Wednesday, November 25, 2009


Consumers spent more on costly "durable" manufactured goods — such as cars and appliances. Such spending rose 2.1 percent. [Emphasis added] They also boosted spending last month on "nondurables," including food and clothes, and on services...
~ Reuters
It  is specious to talk about how much more $ people are spending and using that as reason to try and say  that people are actually purchasing more actual goods.

Do you not know that there has been a decline in the amount of goods that a dollar will purchase, i.e., inflation. For example, take a look at the price of that candy bar that you are eating right now. If you paid 80 cents a year ago, but you paid 82 cents today, based on the above kind of pseudo-analysis by this newspaper writer who is toeing the company line, they would say that YOUR consumer spending has risen 2.1% and use that to support the Obama bandwagon fantasy that you have bought 2.1% more candy bars than you did last year.

What falsehood and finger-painting there is going on nowadays. And they want us all to celebrate???

Monday, November 23, 2009


"If you consider that there has been an average of 160,000 troops in the Iraq theater of operations during the past 22 months, and a total of 2112 deaths, that gives a firearm death rate of 60 per 100,000 soldiers.

The firearm death rate in Washington , DC is 80.6 per 100,000 for the same period. That means you are about 25 percent more likely to be shot and killed in the US capital, which has some of the strictest gun control laws in the US , than you are in Iraq .

Conclusion: "The US should pull out of Washington"
~ contributed by Monte as mentioned in the Australian Shooter Magazine

Friday, November 20, 2009

Losing Touch (With America)

On a cold and blustery day, Art Koenig goes to his mailbox and retrieves the latest propaganda flyer sent to him by his Representative, Texas Congressman Lamar Smith. In a staunchly Republican state, these flyers have come sporadically in the past, but in the last several months as the republican machine struggles to regain and assert its own brand of government intrusion and control, Mr. Koenig notes that both his physical and his e-mailbox are getting more than their fair share of such political messages from the likes of Smith and Senator Cornyn.

All of the flyers and email blasts excoriate the Democrats for their big government plans and take them to task for trying to take over the country. To Mr. Koenig, however, these fulminations against those evil Democrats and Liberals are disingenuous and he thinks under his breath that it takes not too bright a spark in the shed to see that there is something "off" about the messages that he and others like him are getting from the "Republican Machine".

He wonders if other people see it too, and as he trudges back into his house, he cries for his county and laments privately as he realizes that he grew up at a time when America was at its greatest and that it is now being destroyed from within by the collectivists, and the feel-gooders and that it is all happening exactly as Kruchev said it would happen - without there being a shot fired.

As he walks back inside, Mr. Koenig takes a closer look at the flyer from Smith and sees that it proudly displays on its cover the Constitution of the United States of America upon which has been overprinted the standard publisher's teaser headlines indicating the content. Three of those teasers "Defending the Constitution"; "Fighting for Limited Government", and "Speaking Out"  immediately draw his eye.

As Koenig sits down to his dinner table to read, he shakes his head as he recalls that ALL of his Texas Republican delegation, comprising Congressman Smith and Senators Hutchison and Cornyn, voted to sell out their constituents and that all three of them an a host of other Republicans helped pull the trigger on the first cannon salvo of TARP that has now become a shot heard around the world, and has which set the stage for all the other heavy artillery that has been unleashed against the American People.

As Mr. Koenig opens the flyer he sees that Mr Smith's propaganda machine tells us that Smith opposed the Stimulus Bill because it would waste taxpayers dollars and increase inflation (with no mention of his support for the thing that started it all - the TARP).The flyer also tells up that Smith is a vocal advocate of limited government. Then, elsewhere in the flyer Koenig sees that Mr .Smith also believes that: health care in America is too expensive, that too many families do not have health care insurance, that he wants to have legislation that allows families to keep their health insurance regardless of a change of loss of a job, and that he wants to improve Medicare and Medicaid.

Here now comes the rub, because as mentioned above Smith voted FOR the TARP (which will waste taxpayer money and increase inflation) and cannot now be said to be a proponent of limited government. In addition, all of these things that Smith supports are collectivist ideas and are brought to you courtesy of .... Big Government.

Do Smith and the others that inhabit the oxygen deficient atmosphere of Washington, not realize that NONE of these things that they are "for" are functions of the Federal Government to provide.

Where, for example does it say that the Federal Government is allowed to make sure that people have enough food, or health care, or movie tickets? Not to put too fine a point on things, no matter how much a Congressman, or a citizen, thinks that these things would be "good" and that the Federal Government should provide them, the Constitution of the United States of America, for a very good reason, does not grant the Congress the right to legislate or regulate concerning these things.

Thus it is that the Congress and the governments in general (Federal, State, AND Local) have ALL lost touch with the American People - and have lost touch with the Constitution, the document that specifies how the national government is to be constituted and what it can and cannot do.

As Koenig closes the flyer and adds it to his library section chronicling the fall of America, he feels alone. Indeed, as he writes items for his electronic newsletter he often wonders if anybody cares - after all, is there really any reason to worry when they can still get their triple grande super latte or as long as they can get "theirs" from the government?

On his way to work though he sees his neighbor Mary, and on stopping to talk they fall into a discussion wherein she tells him that she often wonders what happened to the Republican Party and that she and her husband feel that the Republicans have deserted her.

Hearing that, he  knows that he is not alone and wonders if the Republican Machine will ever catch on to the fact that there are millions like him and Mary, who given a change to vote Democrat or Democrat-Lite, will either go full Democrat so as to "get ours", or will simply sit out and wait for the diseased beast of the Republican Party to fall and die, whereupon we will be able to erect a new animal that is in touch with us the American People.

Thursday, November 19, 2009

The Ant and the Grasshopper


The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long,  building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.

The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and  dances and plays the summer away..

Come winter, the ant is warm and well fed.

The grasshopper has no food or shelter, so he dies out in the cold.

MORAL OF THE STORY: Be responsible for yourself!


The ant works hard in the withering heat and the rain all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.

The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away.

Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the ant should be allowed to be warm and well fed while he is cold and starving.

CBS, NBC , PBS, CNN, and ABC show up to provide pictures of the shivering grasshopper next to a video of the ant in his comfortable home with a table filled with food.

America is stunned by the sharp contrast. How can this be, that in a country of such wealth, this poor grasshopper is allowed to suffer so?

Kermit the Frog appears on Oprah with the grasshopper and everybody cries when they sing, 'It's Not Easy Being Green.

ACORN stages a demonstration in front of the ant's house where the news stations film the group singing, "We shall overcome.

 Then Rev. Jeremiah Wright has the group kneel down to pray to God for the grasshopper's sake.

President Obama condemns the ant and blames President Bush,President Reagan, Christopher Columbus, and the Pope for the grasshopper's plight.

Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid exclaim in an interview with Larry King that the ant has gotten rich off the back of the grasshopper, and both call for an immediate tax hike on the ant to make him pay his fair share.

Finally, the EEOC drafts the Economic Equity & Anti-Grasshopper Act retroactive to the beginning of the summer.

The ant is fined for failing to hire a proportionate number of green bugs and, having nothing left to pay his retroactive taxes, his home is confiscated by the Government Green Czar and given to the grasshopper.

The story ends as we see the grasshopper and his free-loading friends finishing up the last bits of the ant's food while the government house he is in, which, as you recall, just happens to be the ant's old house, crumbles around them because the grasshopper doesn't maintain it.

The ant has disappeared in the snow, never to be seen again.

The grasshopper is found dead in a drug related incident,and the house, now abandoned, is taken over by a gang of spiders who terrorize the ramshackle, once prosperous and once peaceful, neighborhood.

The entire Nation collapses taking the rest of the free world with it.

MORAL OF THE STORY: Be careful how you vote in 2010.

~ from tom

Friday, November 13, 2009

Just Doesn't Make Sense

Let me see if I understand all this...

If you cross the North Korean border illegally you get 12 years hard labor.

If you cross the Iranian border illegally, you are detained indefinitely.

If you cross the Afghan border illegally, you get shot.

If you cross the Saudi Arabian border illegally, you will be jailed.

If you cross the Chinese border illegally, you may never be heard from again.

If you cross the Venezuelan border illegally, you will be branded a spy and your fate will be sealed.

If you cross the Cuban border illegally, you will be thrown into political prison to rot.

If you cross the U.S. border illegally, you get:

A job
A drivers license
A social security card
Food stamps
Credit cards
Subsidized rent or a loan to buy a house
Free education
Free health care
A lobbyist in Washington
And in many instances you can vote.

Monday, November 9, 2009

Man on the Street

Overheard on the street -

Hey, do you know what's wrong with letting the government be your Daddy?

........... Daddy gets to spank you.

Thursday, November 5, 2009

How THEY Get You to Pay Twice

Developer named for $1.5B Riverwalk project near St. Louis

The St. Charles, Mo., City Council has selected Riverwalk Development to develop a $1.5 billion, 300-acre project along the Missouri River. The project will include hotels, shops, a marina, condos and a pedestrian walkway. Riverwalk Development will request public subsidies to help fund the project's bridges and pathways. The project will also require dredging sand in a canal.

~ From American City Business Journals/St. Louis

This is how they hit you twice. Every dollar spent by the government has to first be taken from somebody else and thus it is not the government that is funding any project -  but the citizens, and this audacious move to now ask for public "subsidies" for even more money is appalling. The public has already given at the office.

Monday, October 26, 2009

The Modern Boxcar

Some have told me that in the old days (think 1939; Nazi Germany; Dachau), these guys at Google would have been boxcar builders.

Sunday, October 25, 2009

White House to Train Future Terrorists

"The White House today highlighted a new multi-million-dollar technology fund for Muslim nations, following a pledge made by President Barack Obama in his landmark speech to the Islamic world.

The White House said the US Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) had issued a call for proposals for the fund, which will provide financing of between 25 and 150 million dollars for selected projects and funds.

Great. Let’s just bring the Muslim world up to speed on technology, so they can train more jihadists to hack into defense department and infrastructure computers, go to engineering school where they can be taught how to make nuclear weapons, and learn the latest technology for remote detonation of explosive charges.

The first rule of investment is that you eliminate as much as you can the risks and mitigate adverse consequences. But as soon as the US doles out this money, it will disappear into a black hole in countries over which we have no control, but which contain hundreds of madrasas indoctrinating future terrorists, where hundreds of thousands cheered on 9/11. Does Obama really think this money will mollify the Islamic world, and bring them closer to us?

I do - but not like you think.


Wednesday, October 21, 2009

Climate Despotism

Update 10/23/09

After seeing this video, I downloaded the text of the "Treaty" that he is talking about and I read the whole thing  - even though by  page 8 I had to go vomit because it is but another Communist Manifesto gilded in the sedulous prose of the green movement.

Essentially, the thrust of the document is that those evil Western Nations -  you know, those nations that with only 15% of the worlds population, have figured out how to create a social system that produces 78% of the world's wealth and progress, need to give up a whole bunch of that wealth and progress to the other 85% of non-producers who, after 5,000 years, have not figured out how to create a sustainable social system so as to create wealth and progress for themselves, and instead prefer to "get theirs" by plundering the fruits of another's industry.

Given that we have had 50 years or more of indoctrination of the school children in the mantra that another's need constitutes an obligation on others, and the mantra that selfishness is a sin, it is little wonder that we now have a society poised on the brink of self destruction, themselves holding the very knife and striking at their own throats  - all while chanting the goodness of  "Service to Others".

Friends, even those of you that have bought into the Kool-Aid of "Service to Others",  the best way of serving others is to SERVE YOURSELF!  The butcher butchers, not because he wants to serve the baker - but because he wants to "serve himself" to some of that baker's bread. Likewise, the baker does not bake bread to be "of service" to the butcher. He bakes bread because he wants to be of service to himself - to serve himself up with some steaks for dinner.

Not to put too fine a point on things, the fruits of the earth are brought forth, not by plunder of the haves by the envious and multitudinous have-nots,  but by trading value for value, and if you "have-not", then go out and get yourself a job and quit demanding that I enable you to continue in your shiftlessness.

Sunday, October 18, 2009

Signs Of the Times

When ordinary people take time to make up signs like this and get off the couch, and "community organize", then you know that a nerve has been touched. Let us all hope that the both the Republican and the Democrat parties take notice. People are plain fed up with government intrusion (from both parties).

~sign sent in by Chester

Friday, October 9, 2009

Dem Flies

A cowboy from Texas attends a social function where Barack Obama is trying to gather more support for his Health Plan. Once he discovers the cowboy is from President Bush's home area, he starts to belittle him by talking in a southern drawl and single syllable words.

As he was doing that, he kept swatting at some flies that were buzzing around his head. The cowboy says, "Y'all havin' some problem with them circle flies?"

Obama stopped talking and said, "Well, yes, if that's what they're called, but I've never heard of circle flies."

"Well Sir," the cowboy replies, "circle flies hang around ranches. They're called circle flies because they're almost always found circling around the back end of a horse."

"Oh," Obama replies as he goes back to rambling. But, a moment later he stops and bluntly asks, "Wait a minute, are you calling me a horse's ass?"

"No, Sir," the cowboy replies, "I have too much respect for the citizens of this country to call their President a horse's ass."

"That's a good thing," Obama responds and begins rambling on once more.

After a long pause, the cowboy, in his best Texas drawl says, "Hard to fool them flies, though."

~ from Monte

Thursday, October 8, 2009

The Difference

If a conservative doesn't like guns, they don't buy one. If a liberal doesn't like guns, then no one should have one.

If a conservative is a vegetarian, they don't eat meat. If a liberal is vegetarian, they want to ban all meat products for everyone.

If a conservative sees a foreign threat, he thinks about how to defeat his enemy. A liberal wonders how to surrender gracefully and still look good.

If a conservative is homosexual, they quietly enjoy their life. If a liberal is homosexual, they loudly demand legislated respect.

If a black man or Hispanic is conservative, they see themselves as independently successful. Their liberal counterparts see themselves as victims in need of government protection.

If a conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation. A liberal wonders who is going to take care of him.

If a conservative doesn't like a talk show host, he switches channels. Liberals demand that those they don't like be shut down.

If a conservative is a non-believer, he doesn't go to church. A liberal wants all churches to be silenced and God removed from public view.

If a conservative decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it. A liberal demands that his neighbors pay for his.
~ sent to me by Monte

Editors Note:
Each of these is a colorful way of saying that the Conservative's view of the world is:
  • What's Mine is Mine - Not Yours

and that the Collectivists view of the world is:
  • What's Mine is Mine - What's Yours is Mine, Too.

Sunday, October 4, 2009

The Sky is Falling - So Says Chicken Little at an ASFE Meeting

"The sky is falling, the sky is falling" screamed the non-scientist Chicken Little as he ran all about the stage proclaiming how the world was coming to an end, and how we were all going to burn to soulless cinders in the coming conflagration caused by those evil humans who are just nothing but a plague upon on the earth.

A bright spot it seemed, for him at least ,was that it could ALL be averted if those evil capitalists in the United States would just start doing their farming using drip irrigation as is done in Cuba, and if we would just all run around turning off light bulbs, and driving electric cars.

Well, at least that was the message that came across to many of us attending a recent meeting of the ASFE ( a professional association of geoscience professionals).

I guess some would aver that we, the attendees,  were the scientists .. at least much more so than this sociology professor emeritus who, in his very own words, says that :

  • " ..... "sociological practice" should include deliberate intervention. I did not consider research "applied," regardless of how novel, difficult, or esoteric the endeavor, unless and until it resulted in an intervention. I wondered if sociology had room for my activist orientation, and if I could find and study with kindred proactive types."

and when referring to his being vetted by a faculty sociology professor as a condition of being accepted into the Princeton Graduate program, that he was

  • " .... delighted to find his open, though empty office over-flowing with untidy piles of various liberal and democratic left magazines and books dear to my heart."

and further tells us that he was a counselor at a youth summer camp where,

  • "Unknown to the parents of campers and counselors alike, the camp's administration had been taken over by Soviet- admiring young American communists. Bright, energetic, and "liberated," they saw and took a golden opportunity to expose us to ideologies, practices, and values many of us found very appealing ... and out from under the shadow of which I shall probably never entirely escape. "

As I sat there with my mind, and the minds of my colleagues, being assaulted by the PowerPoint presentation, with its endless parroting of talking points taken out of the politically-correct socialist agenda that has been at play since 1910, I start to feel like one of the little kids we see on YouTube, who woke up and went to  school figuring that they were going to be learning to read and do arithmetic, but instead were ambushed by their "Leadership" into standing in line and singing anthems to the Messiah on High, and spouting the wonder of "Hope", Change",  "Mother Earth",  and the beauty of  "The Collective".

At any rate,  within 3 minutes, I have taken my pen, and on the notepad sitting before me, I scrawl in big 4-inch letters the characters


which I then furtively, as would a prisoner clandestinely passing information to others in the gulag, turn over and hold up to show to a colleague sitting across the aisle at another of the indoctrination tables. On seeing it, my colleague, his shoulders slumping, shakes his head and rolls his eyes in agreement.

Now, mind you that few of us, including me, had any idea that this crap was coming ..... well, I take that back - I suspected that it was on the way as I had the night before, looked over the presentation notes/slides that had been included in the meeting agenda booklet - and on looking at them I thought I knew exactly what the agenda was going to be for this block of re-education camp instruction.

Little did I know, however, how much my expectations were going to be exceeded, for the speaker reeked of exactly what it was that he admired - to wit, untidy piles of various liberal and democratic left magazines and books dear to his heart, political activism, social indoctrination, ridicule of reason, and oh, so noble, support for the under privileged people of the world - you know, the under privileged people of the world that in 5000 years have not figured out how to build a water well themselves, nor how to built the societal infrastructure required to sustain it, and who have to have some do-gooder engineers come across their border to built it for them.

Over the next 50 minutes he proceeded to cackle the disconnected and logically incoherent pap as most of the climate normalcy deniers do. Within the first 3 minutes, he cited as proof of "Climate Change" (alias for global warming)

  • an article in the Austin paper written by another non-scientist Paul Krugman, conveniently leaving out the fact that immediately underneath was an article by George Will pointing out the folly of the hysteria.

  • his uneducated taxi driver's comment that the winters in Texas are warmer than remembered as a kid growing up, and as further proof that we are all going to die,

  • that it has been 100 years since South Texas has had temperatures as hot as this summer of 2009, and that the lakes near Austin have not been this low for 50 years, and

  • that scientists believe that climate change is going to wreak havoc on the planet, using a report Sustainable Critical Infrastructure Systems: A Framework for Meeting 21st Century Imperatives (2009) to cloak his views with a mantle of respectability, and conveniently leaving out the fact that the report was written and issued by a group having members that can easily be said to have a vested interest in the economic benefits that they or their professional society membership could achieve by jumping on the hysterically screaming and out of control circus wagon of global doom and gloom, conveniently leaving out the fact that others have been saying that there are over 31,000 scientists, over 9,000 of which have PhD degrees , who say that:

  • "There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth."
All this in the first 3 minutes -

Now mind you that it was colder that day in Austin than it was the previous day, and that, using this climate normalcy denier's own logic, that such a fact supports global cooling. Also, consider that the hottest temperature in Texas was not yesterday, but was in 1936, and that again using the same illogic of this presenter, a sociologist, not a scientist, and a sociologist that it is safe to say, believes that sociology without an agenda is not sociology, that this fact of the hottest temp in Texas occurring in 1936 then proves that we are experiencing global cooling!

And let us not leave out the fact that there were more tornadoes in Texas in 1967 than anytime since and that this must be because of all the greenhouse gas moderating and making less severe the weather patterns.

Concerning the lakes of Texas, this babbler perhaps should have checked his facts and seen that in the flood of 2002, that Canyon Lake which was built in 1964 and had NEVER used its spillway, had to take advantage of it in that 2002 flood, and that again, using his illogic, must mean that this global warming/climate change sure must be acting pretty darned fast to dry up all the water in Texas over just 7 years. Of course, I am glad that he did not have this factoid as it too, as a nose of wax, could be twisted to use as "proof" that man is dooming the planet because his actions are causing either too much or too little rainfall, and never not just enough. ( How convenient for the climate normalcy deniers. No matter which way Mama slices the cake they get a piece.)

As the indoctrination session continued, I wondered at why the hard sell, and I now see that it was all part of what is called the Pygmalion Effect, or the power of expectations to help decisively shape outcomes. Indeed, this person actually believed that the more outlandish his claims, and the stronger his expectation that we actually believe his pap, that a number of us would succumb. When I later learned that in the speaker's own words the Pygmalion Effect is "... an operating principle pivotal ever since in much of my consulting.", I was vindicated in my awareness that it was all just collectivist pap, and when I recall that the speaker believes in activist sociology-with-an-agenda, I knew for sure.

All the preceding by about minute 6, and then at about minute 15, when I saw Slide # 11 where it/he stated that "A Paradigm Shift Would Fundamentally Change Reality" - I nearly went apoplectic, for reality is reality and a paradigm (which is a set of assumptions, concepts, values, and practices that constitutes a way of viewing reality for the community that shares them, especially in an intellectual discipline) cannot change reality, i.e., a way of viewing reality cannot change reality.

At Slide # 12 I was nearly prostrate as he puts up the socialist community- organizer talking points conveniently camouflaged so as to make them seem "engineeringy", using buzz words like: "infrastructure" "critical", "working together", "new", etc., and then, after his anesthesia had begun to set in, he proceeded outright to talk about how to bring about "The Change".

What was the way to bring about "The Change"? Simple, all you gotta do is create:

  • "voters agreeable to adequate outlays of public funds" and

  • " government support for private sector investments" (this Government/Private Partnership is called Fascism folks) ,

Then, the last thing on the list was the REAL socialist agenda , which was stated as:

  • "Advocates [sic] for .. K-16 education helping to bring along young recruits to continue the effort", complete with the cartoon of the little tyke dutifully putting the newspaper into the recycling bin where it will thereafter be taken to be buried in a landfill, or taken to be reprocessed by methods (including its collection) that use more energy and resources than it takes to grow the pulpwood tree and process it into new paper from scratch.
He could have easily added another one:
  • get invited to speak at an ASFE meeting where he could channel Van Jones under the legitimizing mantle of a professional trade association  .. and get paid for it.

It was obvious to me that the speaker was a true believer in the Gray Capitalist vision that the green economy would start off as a small subset and would be used to push it and push it and push it until it [the green movement] becomes the engine for transforming the whole society. [Google it or click the link to find out who said these very words when he was telling his partisans what the "Green Movement" is all about.]

Much more of all this drivel over the remaining 45 minutes, complete with calls for a global government, electric cars, drip irrigation of crops as they do in Cuba, and the hackneyed "statistic" that the United States comprises 5% of the world population yet creates about 25% of the world's greenhouse gas (no mention of the amount of the greenhouse gas created by the world's population of methane, N02 & CO2 -farting bovines and that the United Nations has identified "farting cows" as a major source of greenhouse gas). [Google it or click the link to see the report.]

As I sat there and listened to all these items which were intended to make me into a "Winston" clone out of Orwell's 1984, I considered how to involve myself in the question-and-answer session that generally follows. As I paced at the back of the room, I considered how an activist or a community organizer would respond and wondered if I should do the same. Should I run up and throw some urine from a cup holding a cross, should I interrupt his talk with some "Obama Lies While Our Troops Die" chanting, or perhaps should I just keep the list of items and sedulous omissions and take about 45 minutes of my own to debunk his attempts at the indoctrination.

I also thought that it may be of benefit express my incredulity that he was not disappointed that Van Jones is a self-professed Communist and sees the green movement as the vehicle to transform America (where have we heard that before?), but instead was disappointed only in that Van Jones opened his mouth and let the cat out of the bag!

No, I just decided to recall his attention to that slide that talked about how good "going green" was and how he mentioned the drip irrigation implemented by Cuba as example of what could be done, and to recall to him his mention of those 5% creating 25% of the greenhouse gas. Thereafter seeing him making the mental linkage back to the slide and his previous comments, I asked:

" So, on that drip irrigation, how's that working out for those Cubans? I mean, how much increase in world gross domestic production (GDP) does Cuba now produce from all that green technology", and I conjoined that rebuke with an observation that while he mentioned the 5/25 split he failed to mention that those 5% of the world's population have a wealth-creation power that end up creating about 24% of the world's wealth and progress, which is more than double the wealth-creation power of the EU. (with its 12% of world population creating only about 30% world's wealth.)

In reply, he babbled on about how the Cubans use the drip irrigation on small communal village plots and that people here could start growing their own vegetables. Yeah, right ... and they could inflate their tires too and thereby save the world.

Editor's Follow-up
And please do not give me pap and try to make light of this unethical behaviour by saying, in defense and justification of a decision to bring this liberal in, using MY dues money, that it was a " ..... thought-provoking presentation" and that if it prompts people to get involved in political issues that it was therefore a "valuable talk".

Yeah, getting robbed or mugged or raped can provoke some thought too ..... perhaps thoughts about crime prevention, or, as we are being raped, about how we really should not have been wearing such revealing clothing, etc., we should all go out to get some of that valuable education?

Or, perhaps we can get some "thought provoking" going on by inviting some folks from ACORN to come in and talk to us about how to smuggle in some 13 year old girls from Nicaragua so they can do some prostitution, and how that can help the environment and take them out of poverty.

Spare me. I, and many others I believe, were ambushed and "mind-raped" by our own association, and I, for one will speak out instead of going quietly into the night.

Ed Note 10/09/2009
Digging a bit deeper, I find that the first item in the Statement of Objectives when the World Future Society, (of which our speaker is a member) was created was: 

  • To contribute to a reasoned awareness of the future  and the importance of its study, without advocating particular ideologies or engaging in political activities. [underlining added]

I'd say that this speaker Shostack must have never read this, or if he did, just decided to ignore it, because the presentation was reeking of advocacy and engagement , and I have come to realize from my swimming a couple laps in the pool of "the movement" is that it is NOT a movement. It is much more. These people are actually engaged in a coordinated effort to shape the future .  ... to change the future ... to fundamentally transform America. - exactly via the vehicle of presentations like that which we were subjected to.

Thus it is that all the pieces are falling into place now, and Obama is not just spouting rhetoric.. when he said " ... fundamentally change America" ..  when he said "... redistributive justice", when he said " ...spread the wealth", when (today 10/09/2009) he said ".... transformative figures  .. and call to action". HE MEANT IT and he knows that there is an army behind him, all busy working, in a coordinated fashion, to bring all that about.

It is not just Obama, and Soros, etc. It goes way deeper and there are a myriad of associations that ALL are working to bring about "The Change".

Thursday, October 1, 2009


$34,000: The amount of federal taxes that Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner (D) failed to pay during his employment at the International Monetary Fund despite receiving extra compensation and explanatory brochures that described his tax liabilities.


$75,000: The amount of money that the head of the powerful tax-writing committee, Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY), was forced to report on his taxes after the discovery that he had not reported income from a Dominican Republic rental property. His excuses for the failure started with blaming his wife, then his accountant and finally the fact that he didn't speak Spanish.


$93,000: The INCREASE in the amount of petty cash each of our Congressional representatives voted to give themselves in January 2009 during the height of an economic meltdown. That's a $40 + million INCREASE! See video here from Fox

$133,900: The amount Fannie Mae "invested" in Chris Dodd (D-CT), head of the powerful Senate Banking Committee, presumably to repel oversight of the GSE prior to its meltdown. Said meltdown helped touch off the current economic crisis. In only a few years time, Fannie also "invested" over $105,000 in then-Senator Barack Obama.


$140,000: The amount of back taxes and interest that Cabinet nominee Tom Daschle (D) was forced to cough up after the vetting process revealed significant, unexplained tax liabilities.

True: Wall Street Journal

$356,000: The approximate amount of income and deductions that Daschle (D) was forced to report on his amended 2005 and 2007 tax returns after being caught cheating on his taxes. This includes $255,256 for the use of a car service, $83,333 in unreported income, and $14,963 in charitable contributions.
True: Wall Street Journal

$800,000: The amount of "sweetheart" mortgages Senate Banking Chairman Chris Dodd (D-CT) received from Countrywide Financial, the details for which he has refused to release details despite months of promises to do so. Countrywide was once the nation's largest mortgage lender and linked to Government-Sponsored Entities like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Their meltdown precipitated the current financial crisis. Just days ago in Pennsylvania , Countrywide was forced to pay $150,000,000 in mortgage assistance following "a state investigation that concluded that Countrywide relaxed its underwriting standards to sell risky loans to consumers who did not understand them and could not afford them."


$1,000,000: The estimated amount of donations by Denise Rich, wife of fugitive Marc Rich, to Democrat interests and the William J. Clinton Foundation in an apparent quid pro quo deal that resulted in a pardon for Mr. Rich. The pardon was reviewed and blessed by Obama Attorney General and then Deputy AG Eric Holder, despite numerous requests by government officials to turn it down.


$12,000,000: The amount of TARP money provided to community bank OneUnited despite the fact that it did not qualify for funds, and was "under attack from its regulators for allegations of poor lending practices and executive-pay abuses." It turns out that Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), a keycontributor to the Fannie Mae meltdown, just happens to be married to one of the bank's former directors.


$23,500,000: The upper range of net worth Rep. Allan Mollohan (D-WV) accumulated in four years time according to The Washington Post through earmarks of "tens of millions of dollars to groups associated with his own business partners."

$2,000,000,000: ($2 billion) the approximate amount of money that House Appropriations Chairman David Obey (D-WI) is earmarking related to his son's lobbying efforts. The son, Craig Obey, is "a top lobbyist for the nonprofit group" that would receive a roughly $2 billion component of the "Stimulus" package.

True: and this as a list of these related stories:

$3,700,000,000: ($3.7 billion) not to be outdone, this is the estimated value of various defense contracts awarded to a company controlled by the husband of Rep. Diane Feinstein (D-CA). Despite an obvious conflict-of-interest as "a member of the Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee, Sen. Feinstein voted for appropriations worth billions to her husband's firms."


$4,190,000,000: ($4.19 billion) the amount of money in the so-called "Stimulus" package devoted to fraudulent voter registration ACORN group under the auspices of "Community Stabilization Activities". ACORN is currently the subject of a RICO suit in Ohio .


$1,646,000,000,000 ($1.646 trillion): The approximate amount of annual United States exports endangered by the "Stimulus" package, which provides a "Buy American" stricture. According to international trade experts, a "US-EU trade war looms" which could result in a worldwide economic depression reminiscent of that touched off by the protectionist Smoot-Hawley Act.

True: and Background: Smoot-Hawley Act:

Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Why Johnnie Doesn't Share

In my earlier article  Communist vs. Capitalist Vocabulary, I discussed what I meant when I said that the first word the little communist (Billy) learns in kindergarten is S-H-A-R-E, while the first word learned by the little capitalist (Johnnie) is T-R-A-D-E.

In the article I pointed out the insidious nature of S-H-A-R-E  being a first word learned and also pointed out that Johnnie - even without being taught property rights - has a very definite idea of property, and has an innate resistance to its theft.

After reading the earlier article, one may ask why it is that this little proto-human (Johnnie) has such an innate reasoning about property and an innate resistance to its theft, and it is obvious that the reason for this is that it is an evolutionary survival mechanism.

Consider, if you will, the earliest days of man, and ask yourself what man would it be that would survive if he simply turned over his scarce property (food, clothing, shelter) without which he would starve, to one who, instead of creating such things on his own ,or trading them for other things of value, was just allowed to take them. No, my good friend, the humans that did that did not live long enough to procreate (they starved, or froze, or were eaten by beasts).

Thus it is that what we have in the world today is a species whose very existence sprang from the idea of NOT SHARING. NOT sharing, meant survival and propagation, and NOT having a sense of ones own property meant death and extinguishment of that particular hereditary line.

Thus it is that little Johnnie is exhibiting a trait (What's Mine is MINE, Not Yours) that has kept the human race alive -and the reason HE has it is because he is the end result of a million years of evolution that propagated these traits and extinguished others.

Keep in mind, however, that Billy is also exhibiting a trait - also in the human condition - that it is easier to take than it is to make. Consider too, that he is also exercising a form of survival strategy. However, this is not a long term survival strategy, for if all you do is take, then who is left to make? And, even if there are those that can make, the question is "will they" and "for how long"?

Think of it this way, as long as there are others to take from, and there are others that do not mind starving and dying so that the Billys of the world might live, then Billy may indeed survive . However, the question is for how long? It is easy to see that at some point Billy is going to run into somebody that will kill him, instead of giving up that which they themselves need to survive, and indeed this is exactly how the human evolution has played out to ingrain in even the tiniest babe a sense of property and the intimate and instinctual connection of property to survival.

The reader may now ask what does this have to do with Communism, Socialism, & Collectivism, and I will now proceed to show what it has to do with it. The connection is that the grown-up Billys of the modern world are not stupid, and by executing various survival strategies over the past 2000 years, they have learned that if they can convince a group of sufficient size (but not too great a size) that the need of the "have-nots" stakes a moral claim on those that "have", then they will be able to persist in their strategy of "feeding" without producing much of anything themselves.

Thus it is that the smart collectivist does not mount a frontal assault against the producers, for to do that would polarize the producers and in not to short a time there would be few collectivists. In addition, if a frontal assault succeeded, then in not to short a time (50 years?) the collective would perish as there would be no one left to produce.

No, the smart collectivist, executes a different strategy. He insinuates the ideas of the collective into the population via slogans, symbols, art, literature, religion, and especially into the minds of the children (the kindergarten scenario above) - and, critically important, he does this so that not all are turned into collectivists. This is critical - that not all be turned into collectivists, for even the true collectivist knows that if there were nothing but collectivists, that nobody would eat because, as in Jamestown in early America, where all land was held and worked in common, with rations distributed evenly from a central storehouse, there was no incentive for an individual to work harder and, with such an attitude of "Why should I work if my neighbor is required to make sure I do not starve", everybody indeed starved.

No, the smart collectivist, tries to, in the mass of producers, create and then calve off from the main mass of producers two groups.

The first is a mass of modified Johnnies, who after 15 years of exposure to such pap as "share" because others are in need and you have more - or the pap that selfishness is bad - or the pap that what's his really isn't his, have been body-snatched and re-educated to the collective and thereafter turn into community organizers, marching all around town (with Billy) trying to organize all the other body-snatched Johinnies and Billys of the neighborhood to come together into a shouting mob to take from the producers of the world - all while carrying signs accusing the producers and property owners of the world as being selfish. (Hell yeah, they are selfish - it is THEIR property.)

The second group is different in that they have not yet been completely body-snatched, but have been sufficiently indoctrinated with the kindergarten lessons, to be useful to the collectivist agenda which is to propagate and survive.

The members of this second group are the kind that get up and pronounce that private property rights should be respected - but that all children should be insured; or that complain about the government taking over health care - but in the next breath intone how it is "society" that should come together to pay for care for their aging parent; or that talk about how people should bear the consequences of their acts - but then participate in engineers without border, doctors without borders, carpenters without borders, habitat builders without borders, etc, where they go into a society that in 5000 years has not learned to, for example, drill a water well, and proceed to drill it for them, thus upsetting an entire societal structure with their do-goodedness.

These are the same people/groups who talk loudly at tea parties against government intrusion - but when that government intrusion is going to throw pork their way, are nowhere to be seen, but everywhere to be heard, as they grovel ,grunt, and shove their way to the head of the line. (A perfect example of this being individual members of a national engineering society who while protesting the evils of Obamunism, try to move themselves to the head of the handout line by raising a hue and a cry about how their profession should get government money for work that is not in need of doing, and if it is in need of doing, should be funded at the local level instead of at the national level.

These in-betweens & bystanders are very useful to the true collectivist because they are economically productive, are attached to their station in life, and are attached to the fruits that they have been able to gain and retain by in essence being closet collectivists, or by averting their eyes from what it truly is that they obtain their wealth and possessions. Essentially, they are people that are so wedded to their comforts in life that they will suffer giving up a portion of their property - if they can convince themselves (and indeed they do so convince themselves) that they can just be left alone to enjoy the rest, or if they judge that it is less work to just give up than it is to fight. (BTW - The IRS tax structure is EXACTLY set up with this in mind.)

As a stark lesson in what I mean, consider Nazi Germany and the work of extermination of the Jews. Ask yourself, if they came for your Jewish neighbor, but not for you, would you have stood against the Nazi boots - or would you have "stood-by"? If the answer is that it depends on the cost to you, then you might be an in-between , or a bystander.

Considering the above, is it any wonder then that the signers of the Declaration of Independence pledged their lives, their property, and their sacred honor, instead of pledging 5% of their income, or a couple weekends of their time working in a homeless shelter.

How many of us would do that - Pledge our lives? Pledge our property (all of it) ? Pledge our sacred honor? Not very many of us, I am afraid, and THAT is exactly the strategy of the collectivist. To take as much as can be taken without causing a complete attack from the production tribe, and to even bribe part of that production tribe with promises and selective delivery of economic gain to those that can be body-snatched and induced to continue to stand-by.

It is these in-betweens and bystanders that the collectivist needs, for it is they that set the tone of social acceptability and pressure, it is they that work in the factory or the office, and it is through them that the true collectivist achieves his aim of creating a system where a sufficient number of producers continue to produce, and where he the collectivist, just as a vampire bat, can feed.

Saturday, September 26, 2009

Communist vs Capitalist Vocabulary

Since I made the original post, I have had comments from readers indicating that they were not grasping exactly what it was that I was trying to say, sometimes asking "What's wrong with sharing?". Therefore, I expatiate here in a bit more detail.

Philosopher Ayn Rand tells us that there are 2 kinds of people in the world, the producers and the looters.

Producers sustain themselves (and society) by using their minds and their talents to create objects that they consider that they themselves own, and that they themselves expect to trade for things that others creators have produced - a voluntary value for value exchange if you will. Their creating is not limited to creating things such as a new metal alloy used for railway track, or creating software for manipulation of data, but also includes business systems and organizational structures for efficient production and administration of the products that flow from their creations or the creations of others.

As an example of a value for value exchange, consider two neighbors, Farmer A and Rancher B. Farmer A grows grain, and Rancher B raises and fattens cattle for sale. Farmer A wants beef, but raises none of his own, while Rancher B, wants grain but grows none of his own. It is easy to see that Farmer A and Rancher B will be induced out of self interest  (ooooo scary words for a collectivist), to strike a value for value exchange. Farmer A trading some grain for cattle- Rancher B trading some cattle for grain. Both, with each doing what they do best (Farming or Ranching), end up having their self interested needs satisfied by this voluntary exchange, and this then results in a net increase in value of the Farmer-Rancher system - product trades hands and the immediate surplus (extra value) is that we have 2 satisfied parties.

This is not the only value that is created, for there is an additional increase in value that arises because if such exchange had not happened, the Rancher would have to become a less efficient Rancher/Farmer, and the Farmer would have to become a Farmer/Rancher, and indeed the chances of either one of them being able to create as much product is greatly lessened, for why should the framer raise grain beyond his family's, needs and why would the rancher raise beef beyond his if there is nobody with which to trade. Thus it is then that by voluntary exchange there is the creation of an immediate surplus of value, and the creation of a secondary value (to society as a whole) - [think a place where you can go to trade your lumber for some beef and some bread].

An important point here is that the exchange is NOT a zero-sum game where for one to win, another has to lose. Value trades hands, AND in doing so MORE value is created. THIS is the touchstone of the free market and of voluntary exchange - that someone "winning" does NOT mean that another party has lost and that surplus and societial value is created in the exchange. Again, in the ideal capitalist world there is NO loser; BOTH parties come out winners; and value is added to society.

Keep all this in mind then, next time you hear about how some greedy industrialist is exploiting the poor worker, and consider the true meaning of the word "exploit" which is "to put to productive use", and additionally consider in this sense then, that the capitalist is exploited by his capital - his capital, always searching to be used has used the industrialist as a conduit to create that which did not exist before. Further consider that it can just as easily be said is the poor worker that is exploiting the industrialist. Worker wants money - worker withholds his labor unless in exchange he gets the capital of the industrialist, and indeed, the laborer in a sense takes advantage of that capitalist in even asking to be paid for his days work. In summary then a capitalist thinks in terms of "What's mine is mine, What's yours is yours. Let's trade some of what's mine for some of what's yours."

This then brings us to the looters. Think collectivists. These are the people that do not create on their own, but live as parasites off of the backs of the creators and producers and indeed try to find ways in which they can take the grain of Farmer A without exchanging any of their cattle. (Think "What's mine is mine , What's yours is mine too, and I am justified in taking it because you have more than I do.)

Keep in mind now that parasites end up killing their hosts and in the truest sense of the word looters are indeed pariscites, for their philosophy of feeding off the fruits of the creators will indeed eventually kill the host. Witness what happened in the Soviet Union where the collectivist mentality that consumed that country resulted in a flight of creators from that country and outright "going underground" of those that could create but could not leave. It was just such "social justice" as we saw in the Soviet Union that exactly resulted in people standing in breadlines - and such collectivist mentality that resulted in the extinction of the Jamestown Colony in the Americas.

In summary then, the creed of the creators/producers is individualism, free exchange, and property rights, and they use the means of capital ($) to achieve their ends which are the production of objects of wealth such as TV's automobiles, jets, computers, etc. , and the conversion of their creations into another object which represents the most refined state of value - money - and which represents the work that they have already done.

So, next time you want are tempted to utter "that person is rich and he doesn't do anything for a living", consider that the person of which you complain has already done the "work", and also consider that his money is not buried in the garden, but is placed in institutions where it is used to create the very business that is paying your paycheck. Also, the next time you hear a collectivist say that it was the workers that built the country, respond to him by telling him that it was not workers but money (capital) aggregated by the capitalists, that built the country, and ask him what kind of job those exploited workers would have if capital was not available beforehand.

Looters on the other hand, a.k.a. communists, socialists, social justiceists, community organizerists, collectivists in the Randian sense, do not sustain themselves by creating and adding value, but attempt to sustain themselves thru taking, by force if necessary, goods that have been produced by the creators, either by taking the goods themselves, or by forcing the transfer of some form of the possessor's wealth to themselves, without trading anything of equal value in return.

With all this as background,and returning now to kindergarten, I think we all can see in our mind's eye, the kindergarten playground where little Johnnie is quietly playing with his monster truck in the sandbox. Along comes Billy, who on seeing that monster truck, wants to play with it. Now, keeping in mind that these are two little tykes, whose minds have yet to be molded, and whose minds are in such a state that everything they are exposed to is an original molding experience, it is easy to see that little Billy will, because he has not yet been taught property rights, go over and try to grab that truck from Johnnie's hands and himself start playing with it.

I think it is also easy to see in the mind's eye, and, critically important, being mindful of the fact that Johnnie himself has not been taught property rights, that little Johnnie will protest little Billy trying to take his truck. Indeed, the fact that Johnnie protests is an indication that the natural human understandings of right and wrong have a connection to property, for here we have a 4 year old, having been taught nothing about property, having an innate sense that what is his is HIS and not the other guys - so much so that he resists the forceful taking of his property by another.

Continuing with the playground scene, in now steps a mother who, in soothing tone, tells little Johnnie that he is being "selfish" and should "share" his toys with others - eventually coaxing him to give up his property.

Consider now what lesson(s) is being taught to little Johnnie. What he has just been taught is that another person's "need" lays a moral claim on him to fulfill that need, and that the word "share" means that the way to obtain what one wants is to go grab it from somebody else and when that other person objects, to call it "sharing". He has also learned that he can leverage his chances of getting what he wants at the expense of another by inveighing against that person as being "selfish".

Consider now what Billy, this little proto-communist, has learned. He has learned the first lesson of communism - of the collective - that his need or desire to possess that of another lays a moral claim on others to fulfill it, and like Johnnie, who had the idea right in the first place that your need does not create any requirement for me to give, but was re-educated on the playground, both now have become community organizers who march around proclaiming how all the producers of the world are supposed to give up, for free, the fruits of their production to those that did not produce it, and who march into the halls of Congress to grasp the levers controlling the machinery of government so as to effect their ends of "redistributive change".

Think now if the lessons had been different. That instead of teaching Billy (and body-snatching Johnnie) that "need" of one lays a moral claim on the property of another, and that selfishness on the part of the possessor of property is something bad, and that possessors are supposed to share; that, instead of these teachings, that Billy had been told, Johnnie's truck is Johnnie's property, not yours, and Johnnie does not have to share his toys with you. Suppose further that Billy was taught, then and there on the playground, that is wrong for him to try to take by force the property of another, and that just because he wants that truck does not mean that Johnnie is supposed to give it to him. Suppose further that he had been told that if you want that truck, then you need to find something that Johnnie wants (like that cupcake you have in your hand), and see if you can trade your "stuff" for his "stuff" - and that Johnnie is under no obligation to consummate the transaction if he does not want to.

Do we think that Billy, unless he was a "bad seed", would grow up to be a communist or a collectivist? Do we think that Johnnie, would grow up thinking that another's need becomes his requirement to provide? I think not. No, I think that both would grow up to be producers, capitalists, traders of value for value, writers of conservative blogs- persons who would espouse the view that "What's mine is Mine; What's yours is Yours ...and, most important of all ... What's Mine is Not Yours - regardless of how much better a place/use you think you can find for my money than I can."

Thus it is that the first word that the future communist learns in kindergarten is S-H-A-R-E, while the first word the capitalist learns is T-R-A-D-E.