Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Sent to me by a friend and it was too good to not post. It fits in exactly with my take on things ....
An economics professor at Texas Tech said he had never failed a single student before but had, once, failed an entire class.
That class had insisted that socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer. The professor then said, "Okay, we will have an experiment in this class on socialism."
All grades would be averaged and everyone would receive the same grade so no one would fail and no one would receive an A. After the first test the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy.
But, as the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too; so they studied little.. The second test average was a D! No one was happy.
When the third test rolled around the average was an F.The scores never increased as bickering, blame, name calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else. All failed, to their great surprise, and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great; but when government takes all the reward away; no one will try or want to succeed.Could not be any simpler than that...
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
- Plane flies low over New York City
Also in photo op were some military "jets"
Talking Heads all have panties in wad
Citizens Afraid and now Angry
Government Says 'Oops. It was a photo -op for Air Force One."
My take - The best way to prepare is to prepare in conditions as close to real as can be managed/staged, and this was very likely not a photo op for a publicity campaign. Come on, my peeps! Regardless of how clueless you think of the Obama administration, it is hard to think that they are this clueless.
My answer is that perhaps they are not clueless at all and that instead, this "photo-op" could very well have been an exercise to evaluate the condition of our military and civilian threat response, and an assessment of the reaction of citizens in an urban setting.
In this vein, it is of limited use to notify everybody and his brother that there is going to be a test of the military's ability to intercept a large low-flying airliner, or to tell them the time and place of the "party". If such advance notification is done, then all the intercept crews would be standing at the ready, and the citizens would behave differently than if the exercise happens out of the blue with only those at the highest level in the know.
Thus, if I were the dude in charge (aka El Presidente), I would want to know some of the following:
- How long would it take for FAA or the military nets to alert on an aircraft flying off course? Would they alert at 400 miles out, 100 miles out, or would they be staring at their navels even as the plane was penetrating the New York City limits?
- How long would it take for the military jets to be scrambled and to intercept? Would the commanders take decisive action, or would they be paralyzed in fear and take no action because they were waiting for somebody else to tell them to act. (This is especially important in light of the interference of the Office of the President in the Somali pirate incident. )
- How alert are the civilians? For example, if we fly this big-ass jet over a cornfield in Iowa as it proceeds on its way to NYC, how many civilians, if any would report the incident? If we got 5,000 calls to 911, that would mean one thing, if we got none, then that would mean another.
- If people in NYC see a big plane flying around "low", would they start to evacuate buildings or would they just go about their business? If they got panicky, how did their panic play out? Was it orderly, or was it disorganized? Did they clog the streets, etc. such that emergency crews would be gridlocked?
Also, if I was the dude in charge, I would know that people would get their panties in a wad and excoriate me as being a dunce, but I would also know that the answers to these national preparedness questions outweighs the venom that would be directed my way, and would I know that I would never be able to tell the people what was really going on.
Now, of course, if it was just a photo-shoot then they are indeed clueless, not only because doing such a thing without universal notice is bone-headed, but also because of the very fact that it was just a photo shoot instead of a military preparedness exercise.
Monday, April 27, 2009
At the link above, you will find the epitome of the liberal/collectivist failure and a harbinger of the future.
I have news for this poor sister -- she cannot keep up, and neither can Obama. This is what awaits the entire country: complete exhaustion, the destruction of the goose that lays the golden eggs. Why? Because the government simply cannot, nor should it, take care of anyone or everyone, meet all their needs, ensure that the house is not foreclosed, the gas bill gets paid, the job saved, that everybody uses energy wasting environment-destroying fluorescent bulbs, etc..
Liberals want utopia secured by the government, but want what can never be, and in trying to achieve their utopia, they destroy the very thing that created the wealth of the world.
About 1/3 down the article says:
Now she sometimes wonders aloud to her husband, Charles: "When does it stop?"
Councilwoman, let me break it down for you. It stops when you and your kind move your eyes to the right hand side of this blog, read the "About Me" section, and start to understand that it is exactly the views and morality espoused there that built the country, and that government policies having their basis in your views, are leading to its very destruction.
It stops when you wake up and realize that that lazy brother of yours will suck you dry, exactly BECAUSE you are giving him a handout.
It stops when you realize that there is ALWAYS going to be a "lazy-brother" and that your handouts of MY money, do nothing but increase his number.
It stops when you realize that you could take all the wealth of all those evil rich people, distribute it to all those you deem "in-need", and raise the standing of "the people" by perhaps as much as only .00001% . (aka shared misery)
It stops when you tell that "friend" of yours that they need to pay their own "... $168 .. water bill".
From all of us that grew up on the farm and know that if you put out free cream for one cat that the next day there will be 3 more freeloaders, none of which will catch mice anymore, we tell you that you are playing with matches in the closet.
Burn Baby Burn
Saturday, April 25, 2009
~ from the Securities and Exchange Commission Site.....
....Ponzi schemes are a type of illegal pyramid scheme named for Charles Ponzi, who duped thousands of New England residents into investing in a postage stamp speculation scheme back in the 1920s. Ponzi thought he could take advantage of differences between U.S. and foreign currencies used to buy and sell international mail coupons. Ponzi told investors that he could provide a 40% return in just 90 days compared with 5% for bank savings accounts. Ponzi was deluged with funds from investors, taking in $1 million during one three-hour period—and this was 1921! Though a few early investors were paid off to make the scheme look legitimate, an investigation found that Ponzi had only purchased about $30 worth of the international mail coupons. Decades later, the Ponzi scheme continues to work on the "rob-Peter-to-pay-Paul" [emphasis added] principle, as money from new investors is used to pay off earlier investors until the whole scheme collapses.
Regarding that last part, "Robbing Peter to Pay Paul". Perhaps it would be a good use of time to go back and read the above while considering the recent "bail-outs," and the schemes of social security, universal health care, children's health insurance, welfare, free education, food stamps, set-asides, immigration "reform", global warming, carbon taxation, save the hungry, feed the whales, aid to Africa, aid to China, be kind to trees movements, and a host of other programs/causes.
Great schemes - all designed to "reach across the aisle" so as to get money out of your pocket and into somebody elses - and also to wrest control from YOU and install it elsewhere. But then, that is OK as long as, in the end, I am able to get more of "mine" at your expense, than you are able to get of "yours" at mine.
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Marriage ~ Noun
- the social institution under which a man and woman establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc.
- the formal declaration or contract by which act a man and a woman join in wedlock.
I just saw Neil Cavuto's interview of Carrie Prejean (Miss USA 2009 Contestant) and was amazed that in this politically correct world someone ( Carrie Prejean ), in national spotlight and national forum, had the spine to tell things like they are, tell things like they should be, and not allow someone with an agenda use a particular forum cause her to waver in her conviction.
For those of you that have not heard of the incident, the politically loaded and leading question that was directed her way at the Miss USA Pageant was about homosexual marriage (a.k.a. the euphemism "gay" marriage). Her answer was that she believes that marriage is between a man and a woman.
"I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman," she said on the live broadcast.
Of course, the responses are predictable .. For example ..
"I am personally ... hurt that Miss California believes marriage rights belong only to a man and a woman," said Lewis in a statement." Keith Lewis, co-director the Miss California competition
And then, of course, came the YouTube diatribe made by the deviant that asked her the question and was apparently humiliated when he got the unexpected answer [that did not support his cause] on live TV.
Says Prejean during her Cavuto interview, "It did cost me my crown ..... It is a very touchy subject and [Hilton] is a homosexual, and I see where he was coming from and I see the audience would've wanted me to be more politically correct. But I was raised in a way that you can never compromise your beliefs and your opinions for anything." .... "I feel like I won," she said. "I feel like I'm the winner. I really do."
I laud this young woman for standing firm. Speaking of standing, words stand for things and the word marriage is a character based (xyz are characters) symbolic representation for a relational and legal condition pertaining to a man and a woman. Not a man and a man, or a man and an animal, or a woman and another woman.
Just because somebody wants to say that 2 = 5, does not make it so, and the incessant histrionics and yammering of homosexuals over this term "marriage" is puerile, and indeed, is indica of thinking that is unstructured and imprecise, and evidence of thinking that knows no control or boundaries or limitations. Just as homosexuals are deviants by the very definition of the word (Hint - look it up in a book on statistics) and no amount of Orwellian speak can change that, they still persist in trying to shame and intimidate those straight thinkers among us through devices such as attempted national embarrassment as was done by that homosexual with an agenda (Hilton) to Miss Prejean. Well, Mr. Hilton, your attempts to humiliate someone into saying something favorable to your views backfired.
Get it through your grey matter that words mean things. Indeed, the fact that you can read this means that words mean things, for if they did not then you would not understand this writing.
So then, in keeping with the resolve of Miss Prejean - here are MY declarations:
- I refuse to allow YOU to dictate the meaning of words - words mean what they mean.
- I refuse to allow YOU to dictate the choices of words used in my speech. That homosexuals call themselves "gay" does not mean that they are not homosexuals, and that they are homosexual is why society, in the remote past, created a unique word to describe that relation which is different than an opposite-sex relation. Sheeesh, the reason we have the word dog is because a dog is a different thing than a cat. Don't tell me that because you want to yamer that you call what we call a dog by the name "jambjubwe" that I now have to call it a jamjubwee! No, it is you that need to call a dog a dog, instead of engaging in all the infantile finger-painting.
-As to the the word marriage, that is a word that was created long ago to describe the man-woman relation, and just because you now want it to mean something else is untenable. What then would you want to do, cause the man-woman relation to not have a word to describe it, or to have society have to create a new word for the man-woman relation because you have stolen the word marriage? No, methinks that the man-woman relation and the word to describe it, has staked "first claim" and it is YOU that need to find yourself new territory with a word other than the word "marriage", instead of trying to steal for yourself something that already belongs to another relation.
- I refuse to allow YOU to co-opt the words of the language so as to allow you to convert terms having one connotation into warm fuzzies so as to assist you in propagating your message. Not to put too fine a point on things- you are not gay, you are homosexual, and your attempts to co-opt this word "gay" is a transparent attempt to make things seem more palatable to non-homosexuals and is a sign of a misguided, but I do admit, clever, mind.
- Like Miss Prejean, I do not hate you.
- I believe that life is to short not to love somebody and have somebody love you. Yes, you read the implication properly. So, if you are a man and love either a man or a woman, that does not offend me. Knock your socks off. Again - Life is too short to not have somebody to love and have somebody love you.
- I believe that homosexuals should be allowed to join in a civil and legal state of relation and that it is even appropriate for us as a society to decide on a neologism to be the character based symbol set to convey that relation - perhaps "gayirage" or "garriage"; and "garried", to convey the idea of civil, spiritual, and other union. BUT, you cannot take an existing word and redefine it.
- Please drop the agitation to redefine the word marriage, for in persisting in this way, you shoot yourself in the foot. I suspect that half of the population that you think is "against" you, or against homosexuality is actually not against YOU or your preferred state of relation, but instead is against the corruption of the language that sends their minds reeling because if words do not mean anything and can be redefined at will, then they do not mean anything. Again, let's choose a specially created new word to refer to the special same-sex relation that you want to enjoy and that you want legal protections for.
Update - 4/21/09 - Now we learn that the Somali pirate that was not killed has been taken into US custody by the FBI [and has been brought to the US].
Just freaking great! Mark my word, this will set the stage for pirates now being treated as common criminals instead of as entities that thru their acts of attempted piracy are making war on the United States.
This then, in conjunction with the American Gitmo experience/precedent, will, within 50 years, result in all POW's being reclassified as "criminals" and their entry in to the civil justice system of the United States with all its protections.
This then, in turn, will result in a release of those that made war on the United States because they were not Mirandized on the battlefield or because we cannot prove our case that they were shooting at our people, etc.
There is a reason why the earlier nation-states took the stance they did on piracy. (That stance being that pirates are fair game to be killed on sight.) That reason was to eliminate these sorts of collateral "problems" if such a stance of "kill on sight" was not taken.
All of this new world order brought to you courtesy of those "touchy-feely" kumbaya folks that delude themselves into thinking that chicken comes from the grocery store, and in their minds can't, or won't, go to the place where chicken really comes from.
For those of you who care to think about things, there is another reason pirates are fair game. Hint: It has something to do with property.
Monday, April 20, 2009
Smith Congratulates TEA Party Organizers and Participants
Congressman Lamar Smith today, on Tax Day, sent the following letter of support to TEA Party organizers and participants throughout TX-21, which will be read at several TEA Parties in the district.
"Americans in Texas and across the country today are exercising their Constitutional rights to protest the massive expansion in the size and scope of government currently underway. ......"
More Blah Blah Blah and blowing of smoke from elected politicans .......
In the 2010 election, remember, this is the guy voted FOR the $700 thousand million TARP bailout.
That vote was over the objections of constituents, who got, in response to their impassioned pleas, not only his YES vote to sell them down the river, but also got a letter of reply talking drivel about "stampedes" and " .... getting in front of the herd".
Folks, stuff like this political blah blah letter to the tea party people, is EXACTLY why, at many tea parties, political incumbents were not allowed to speak. It was a time for THEM to listen to US as opposed to us having to listen to them.
"The pirates attacked the MV Front Ardenne late on Saturday but fled after crew alerted warships in the area. The pirates fled in their small skiff and were pursued by ship and helicopter for hours but only stopped after repeated warning shots were fired."
Sheeesh - "Warning Shots" instead of Deadly Force?????
So, the first neural network "training" that the pirates got over the last several years was that they could take people hostage and get a ransom for them with no retaliation from the victims - or from the nations to which they belong.
Result - Continued Hostage Taking & More Piracy
The 2d "training" was the weakness shown by the US as for days they "negotiated" instead of implementing the time honored "British Solution".
Result - Pirates getting positive propagation of the idea that the civilized world was weak and spineless.
The 3d training to the pirate neural network happened when some US Military "attitude adjustment" bullets reconfigured some some neurons.
Result - Fear of Additional Attitude Adjustment
The 4th training now comes when the nation-state, instead of dispatching the pirates forthwith (the British Solution), and reinforcing the idea that the world navy nations (the US in particular) are not going to take crap from a bunch of pirates, instead revert to weakness and "pursue and fire warning shots", and thereafter turn the pirates over to "the authorities"!!
Predicted Result - Continued piracy with little abatement, and reinforcement in the pirates' neural net that the United States and the modern nation-states are weak and afraid of asserting themselves.
Update - 4/21/09 - Now we learn that the Somali pirate that was not killed has been taken into US custody by the FBI [and has been brought to the US]. Just freaking great! Mark my word, this will set the stage for pirates now being treated as common criminals instead of as entities thru their acts of attempted piracy are making war on the United States. This then, in conjunction with Gitmo, will result in 50 years in all POW's being reclassified as "criminals" and their entry in to the civil justice system of the United States with all its protections and a release of those that made war on the United States because they were not Mirandized on the battlefield and because we cannot prove our case that they were shooting at our people.
There is a reason why the earlier nation-states took the stance they did on piracy. So as to eliminate these sorts of "problems".
All of this brought to you courtesy of those "touchy-feely folks that think that chicken comes from the grocery store, and can't go to the place where chicken really comes from .. because they can't take the truth.
Friday, April 17, 2009
April 17, 2009
Starbucks - Bulverde Texas
I saw a fellow reading "The 5,000 Year Leap" and since we had just come off the TeaRally, I stuck up a conversation by asking if he liked the book. He said the he did and told me that it was amazing how far off the tracks the country has moved from the ideals that made the country in the first place.
Now, here is where it becomes distressing, for these preliminaries lead to a discussion of Statism and Big Government, and in that vein, I mentioned how the "Big-Government Problem" is not confined to the Democrats, but that the Republicans are helping hand-in-hand to expand the power of the Federal Government over our lives. Essentially, it being that the Democrats come from one direction while the Republicans come from the other - with the pocket book of the citizen in the middle.
To try and drive the point home that "our" party is power hungry just as are the Democrats, I mentioned that the thing that was the straw that broke my back was when our Republican Senators Hutchison & Cornyn, and my District 21 Representative Lamar Smith, ALL voted for the first TARP bailout - over the objections of their constituents.
Now, think of it. I had just told him that the Republicans were ½ the problem. Was there any light that went off in his head? Was there any nod of agreement? ABSOLUTELY NOT. Even though that I was telling him that his Republican Senators and his Republican Congressman sold him out, he was going to avoid that ugly fact and continue to think that it is all Obama and those evil Democrats.
I am so saddened that even the people that go to the tea parties, when led by a celebrity to "boo" the Republicans and the Democrats, do so with gusto; yet in their heart of hearts, when you get them "one-on-one" to look inside, you can see that they feel that it is all the Democrat's fault, and think that if the Republicans can boot them out then things will be all good and fine. They completely ignore that it was BUSH that came to Congress and wanted a $700 billion appropriation in 3 days.
Wake up people. It will not be all good and fine if the Republicans with their current brand of Corporatism and Statism come to power, because a boot is a boot and feels the same on my neck whether it is worn by a Democrat or a Republican.
In sum, I think that it is appropriate to remember - It's Not Left vs Right - It's the STATE vs YOU.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
April 16, 2009
When I heard Santelli's rant and his idea of a tea party in Chicago, I remarked to my wife that I would go to something like that, as it was about time that people spoke out about the craziness that has infected BOTH the Republican and Democrats.
Little did I know that it would become a movement and that we would end up going to the one in San Antonio. On hearing that Glenn Beck was going to come, we made our contribution to the fund raiser and got to see the man up close. He is just as he seems on the show - passionate, lover of his country and lover of a Republican form of Representative Government whose hands are tied by the Constitution and where those that are elected continue to represent the American Way as opposed to the Beltway-Way.
I include pictures.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
In keeping with telling things like they really are then, if you consider yourself and/or call yourself a:
- whatever hyphenated- American
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Thank you for your work (and everybody else's) on the event (Tea Party) and for your speedy reply to my letter about prohibited signage. Welcome to the world of herding cats.
OK here goes -
I understand that some feel that "the cause" should attempt to end run the Catie Couric's of the world, but running away from the liberal's propaganda machine is equivalent to trying to negotiate with them. THEY will not negotiate with us, and until we learn that we should not negotiate with them, we are stalled. We should speak our mind and should stop being afraid of how others in opposition want to paint us.
Fear of confrontation, I think, is the problem with "conservatives" and the reason why they are at a disadvantage whenever they engage the left. The left is NOT afraid of confrontation, nor are they interested in debate or civility. Indeed, confrontation and Orwell Speak is THE tool in their very effective arsenal, and confrontation has ALWAYS been their tool of change. Is Carvill, or Obama thru his minions, afraid of confrontation??? Not hardly.
Concerning "debate", the left's idea of debate is where the other side stays quiet and listens to whatever venom the left wants to spew. Indeed, part of the left's agenda is keeping the other side "pacific" and nice, and your attempts to de-Obamanize the Tea Party event plays nicely into their hands.
So then, regardless of how many "Obamanuism" signs are kept out of the event, it WILL be painted however Couric et. al. has to paint it so as to get an anti-obama "juice" onto the story. I reiterate, an anti-Obama slant of the event WILL be made by the media and in a broad sense of things, until the media gets the message that we, the majority of Americans, indeed have the stones to voice it to the rooftops that We DO Want Obama To Fail, then we are going to have a hard road to walk.
BTW - Obama (the personification of his ideology) IS the problem and to "walk across the aisle" or be non-partisan is fatal. Obama (individually and thru his group of counselors) sets the agenda and is a radical Communist/Socialist/Collectivist. He is the figurehead for the "spend your money so as to reshape society into his image" ideology. He is Wilson and Roosevelt and Bush all rolled into one. He is the one that proposes the budget and he is the one that signs the appropriations bill. It was not Pelosi, Reed, or Congress that told Joe the Plumber that he intended to '.... spread it around". Don't get me wrong, it is not just Obama, as the congress and millions of others are lockstep with the Obamunism ideology, and it is they that constitute the vast left wing base that is pushing all this stuff though, but, back to the signage, that does not mean that Obamunism should be off limits.
In this regard on the signage, I find it odd, if you do not want "negative play", for it to be OK for the logo for the event to be the Alamo wrapped with a snake threatening to strike. Gee - if that image is not filled with emotional overtones of "... let's make sure the government knows that We the People are ready, and will strike in rebellion if they push us too far", I do not know what is. Frankly, I am surprised it made muster, for it is much more threatening to the government eyes that will be at the rally than any "Obama Lied - The Economy Died" signage, and I venture to guess that the group is now, because of the connotations of the event being near the Alamo, and because of this "militia-ish" logo, on some government watch list - and that I am going to be photographed into some database along with you and all the other attendees.
Returning to the spending - You say congress actually spends the money .... Actually, Congress does NOT spend the money. Essentially, all they can do is to appropriate it. Yes, it is appropriated for various broad based initiatives but after that it is spent essentially as the president and his executive branch wishes, mostly because the appropriation is made pretty much according to what the president proposes.
That (the imperial presidency) is one of the things that WE the People are fed up with. THAT - resistance to Obamanomics and Obamunism - is what is embodied in the "prohibited" signage and THAT is what We the People are Resisting - Obamanomics, Obamunism, Statist, Collectivism, etc. We are not hacked off about the spending (spending is just a proxy), we are hacked off about the underlying philosophy that gives rise to the spending (and we are hacked off that this philosophy is found in the Rebublicans and the Democrats.) Making it about "spending" is deflection from the real issue.
I do agree that the Congress Republicans & Democrats are the problem and I go further in saying that many of them need to be changed out. For example, when we have the likes of Lamar Smith, John Cornyn, and KB Hutchison voting for the first $700 billion bailout then we have a problem. That one practically put me in my grave.
As to the last part of your reply - the "Please go somewhere else ...". That is not in comportment with the American spirit and reeks of the same problem that we all have with the left - they use every attempt to silence and shutdown and do not want to listen to, or allow, the expression of any divergent view. How do they do that?? - by exclusion and by claiming ownership and thus control of the idea. Not to put too fine a point on things, if it does not get partisan (via signage like what you "prohibit", good vs evil, then the collectivist juggernaut will not be stopped. Our American system is all about partisan and the sooner we start knowing that fact, then the sooner we will be able to stop the infection. Do we really think that the collectivists and statist, when they say bi-partisan, mean it. NO, bi-partisan to them means that you have agreed with them, and your eschewing of expression of views not your own seems a bit in the same vein that is practiced by the leftists.
As to the second of the last part of you reply ".... that we all agree on the spending problem." Agreement on the spending problem covers up that the problem is not a spending problem. The problem is an infective, cancerous ideology.
Focusing on spending also covers up the fact that until we address the real issue we will never be able to change things. For example, if we all agree on the spending problem, will we be OK with the administration running GM as long as they do not do it using too much money??
THIS is what Beck is trying to say - that the overarching problem and cancer is corruption of thought as to what the American system is supposed to be. It is not spending, it is collectivism and Statism. - Beck calls it Fascism - Statism is a better term in my view. Spending is but a symptom of the disease.
Anyway, rest assured, I am not out to rain on the event, I am not an agitator for the other side, and I laud what is being done. It needs to be done. You are making a good difference.
Saturday, April 11, 2009
Hell No - Vote No
I am a businessman in San Antonio and the time is NOW for the chickens to come home to roost from their feeding frenzy in the pasture of 15 years of credit expansion.
I, too, have money in stocks and if they crater, big deal. And, if it is a big deal - big deal. I took the risk, and it was speculation on my part, but my loss is not a reason for me to want, or be allowed to, pass that to you or others. America is supposed to be about earning your own keep and not about expecting others to earn theirs - and yours too.
So then, I urge you to quit listening to the talking heads whether they be on FOX or CNN. It is not about jobs. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say the Federal Government is provide me a job, or a cheap house, or "manage the economy". Only in Statist countries is this part of the government ... it is called Fascism or Socialism, or some other 'ism, ..... but certainly not capitalism.
It is not about saving the economy - the economy is trying to save itself by destroying that which should be destroyed. Get out of the way.
It is not about saving mortgages and mortgage bankers- they took a risk. Get out of the way.
It is not about saving the working man - they too took the risk when they put everything under the sun on their credit card, and bought a $150,000 house when they should have stayed renting. Get out of the way.
It is not about ME - or saving me. Get out of the way.
Summary - Time now to pay. Credit contraction will be a benefit in the long run, for it weeds out the weak, and acts to point out bad decisions that do not comport with the reality of things. Get out of the way.
Want to know how he voted and how my representative voted and how the other Texas Senator voted??? Hummmm.....take a wild guess.
And "they" (the RNC) wonder why McCain did not get elected.
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Hey we gotta have fun as the Fascist State tightens its grip on our throats.
Good thing about parasitical relationships is that eventually the host dies - and eventually so too the parasite. The host in this case is finance capital, and as Ayn says, it will go into hiding or find another place to put itself to work.
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
For those of us old enough to remember ... "Danger, Will Robinson .....Danger".
Our WORST nightmare (and it is coming) is that the UN will get its own "Standing Army". Now, it will not be called this, it will be called something like "coalition forces" or "peacekeeping", etc.
Initially the enforcers will come from the various member Nations and they will all wear their own country's uniform. Next, it will progress to them all wearing something distinctive and unifying - such as a blue helmet. At first, the command and control will be under a commander associated with one of the nation-state partners.
Thereafter, the idea will be floated that it would be more efficient if there was a unified world peace police, under the aegis of the UN - that the UN needs its own independent military.
This will all come to pass, and just as the States ceded their sovereignty and their ability to raise their own Armies, so too will the United States cede its ability. In the end, so as the States are now in relation to the United States, the United States will be in relation to the United Nations.
This has all happened before, in 1786 when the States were usurped at the 2d American Revolution, and in 1789 when the push was made and implemented for a standing army drawing its officer Corps from the individual States into a Federal body where their allegiance would be broken to the (their) State ..... and be transplanted to THE STATE.
~ inspired when I heard a woman lamenting about how she is " ...concerned about the poor " ..... all while she digs into her $400 Prada purse as she orders up her $4 super whompo vanilla latte at the local Sbuks.