You Are Not A Liberal

This video by Bill Whittle needs to go viral.

Watch, Listen, pay attention!

And share this with as many people as you can.

Somebody has to say it.  I do not know what kind of world other people want to live in, or how much slavery they want to tolerate, but give me my freedom, real freedom, or just go ahead and kill me.

He Said It Well

There is not much I can add to this post regarding the Republican field.

I would only have a few differences of opinion with the author of this fine blog.  I would not give Perry a chance.  I've heard from people in the State of Texas.  Callers to the Mark Levin show have made it clear that he is just George W. Bush redux.  Not a true conservative at all and if given the reins, would govern like a stealth liberal.

Chris Christie would be even worse. He won't run, and rightly so, because there are plenty of people waiting in the wings to expose him for the "moderate" liberal that he really is.  Sure you can seem to be or actually be very conservative on a few issues and yet be fatally liberal on too many other issues.

Herman Cain's resume is stunning for someone seeking high office. It is the antithesis of the typical polititian's credentials.  I was fortunate enough to be in the Atlanta area and listen to Herman when he had his own radio show and sat in as guest host for Neal Boortz on WSB. 

It would be so fitting, so deliciously apropos for this country to elect Herman Cain, especially amidst the idiotic, but so expected charges that voting against Obama is based purely on race.

More importantly, there is a very simple principle for determining who conservatives should vote for.  Just like the overwhelming drumbeat to drive Sarah Palin out of the running, just look and listen to the polemics being directed at Herman Cain now.  The Left is telling us exactly who they are afraid of. 

If I had to come up with a list of who the Democrats and Leftists would love for us to run against Obama they would be; and in this order:

1. Newt Gingrich
2. Michelle Bachmann
3. Rick Santorum
4. Jon Thune
5. Mitt Romney
6. Rick Perry
7. Jon Huntsman

Who have the Left shown us that they are terrified of? 

1. Sarah Palin
2. Herman Cain
3. Ron Paul

Seriously,  go to the link above and scroll down and read Herman Cain's resume.  Ask yourself if you really want another person who's only experience involves running for office, or someone who has succeeded in business.

Worse Than Stupid

Yep.  They think you are worse than stupid.  If you come from flyover country, the parts of the United States that lie between the metropolitan areas of the east and west coasts, the leftist elites think you are some kind of evolutionary throwback.  You are not just ignorant, you don't even have the intellectual capacity to learn to become as sophisticated as they are.

Just go to this site and play the video.  It's barely 3 minutes.

What makes this even worse is that Chris Christie is not really even a conservative.  Christie is actually a liberal who sought a job in power and when he got there, he got mugged by the hard, cold reality that New Jersey is in a financial mess and he had enough intelligence to know that, as he responded to a union goon teacher, the State of New Jersey, unlike the Federal government, can't print money.  Bill Maher and company are the true believers in State control of everything except personally perverse lifestyles.

Knowing Is Hard

Seems like Twyla and I are always saying that it is hard to know the truth when there is so much ignorance out there.  We don't live like elite people, don't want to live that way, or seem that way to others. But, dammit, I get really tired of hearing people parrot the propaganda that they've been fed by the dominant media that is just flat-out false.  I don't want to talk down to people or purposely make them feel stupid.  I feel like I did when I was fueling my truck one day and this young girl pulls up to the pump next to me and with a lit cigarette in her hand, proceeds to swipe her card, pull the nozzle, open her tank cap and shove the nozzle in.  She was at first shocked when I started shouting at her, and then giggled when she realized why I was shouting.

And I'm really sick and tired of people not being willing to take the time to actually find out the truth about issues that really effect their lives.  I pause here to interject a quote that I got from Belmont Club:

Part of the problem with politics is the problem of datasets. Soap opera issues — like sex and petty abuse of power — are popular with the viewers and newspaper readers because they are the only issues that everybody down to the least educated can understand. They are discussions at the lowest common denominator of human nature. Death and sex are what the King and the King’s chambermaid have in common. Editors know that if “it bleeds, it leads” because everybody bleeds.
Readers who are unable to grasp complexities of the deficit, the War Powers act, or the intricacies of quantitative easing are still able to comprehend that it isn’t kosher for a California governor to cuckold the maid’s husband, for a powerful banker to chase a chambermaid around a hotel room, for a President to hit on an intern or for a Presidential candidate to maintain a mistress with campaign funds while his wife is dying of cancer. They understand that because they can understand that. It is an available dataset to them. Creepy behavior is something they can grasp without a college degree. The same thing is true for gut issues like gas prices and inflation at the supermarket. People who don’t know how the fiscal system or the financial markets work still sense when their wallet is empty. Having an empty wallet not be the most theoretically important economic issue around but it is the dataset available to the average Joe.

I was talking to a friend the other day at a garage sale.  He and his wife don't have a computer and get all their news from the idiot box.  On most accounts, he sees through the leftist crap and seems like a conservative on most issues. But then he says, with total derision and disgust snarling from his mouth, "And what about that, . . . that . . what's his name . . . Paul guy?"
"You mean Ron Paul?"
"No, no, ah . . . "  Fingers snapping.
"Rand Paul?"
"No, no, uh,  Paul something. . . "
"Paul Ryan?"
"Yeah, geeze, what an asshole!"
"What?  Why would you say that?"
"He want's to get rid of medicare."
"Really?  What do you know about his plan?"
"Something about vouchers."

I won't go on with the conversation mode, but I'll admit to being obviously pissed off in front of my friend and then asking him if he actually read anything about Paul Ryan's plan.  No, he hadn't.  All he knew was what the TV told him as if Jon Stewart had written the script.  And when I explained to him the brief, true, and salient points about Ryan's plan, he agreed that he'd been totally misled and that Ryan's plan made perfect sense.

If you think it's more important to pay attention to who is dancing with who, who's getting kicked off the island, who's going to win a contest, how your sports team is doing, and you just can't be bothered to study some issues because it's boring and not any fun, then you deserve what you get when your quality of life goes into the toilet.  The problem is, such people drag the rest of society down into the septic tank with them.

When it all goes to hell and there are people who either sit around wondering what happened, it's going to be hard to feel any pity for them.  And God forbid I should encounter anyone who will say that it's the fault of Wall Street, or Big Oil, or Big corporations or Wal-Mart or any such nonsense because it will take much restraint to keep from beating the hell out of them.  The people who make the law and hold the badges and the guns are the ones who made Wall Street, Big Oil and all the rest do all the things they did.

And no, it's not all Obama's fault.  In fact, only a small fraction is Obama's fault.  Those of us who have been conservatives for decades have known this all along.  We are the ones who have been railing against the crap that led us to this point ever since Tip O'Niel for crying out loud.  The problem is the voters who buy into the crap about "fairness" and "tolerance" and "social justice" and the amorphous, undefinable "Hopey, Changey" pathway to social and economic collapse.  We real conservatives are pissed off that you didn't want to listen to reason and see through the lies when Bill Clinton slicked his way into the White House.  Now we are even more doubly pissed off that you didn't listen or pay attention when BO told you the unvarnished truth about what he wanted to do as president and you voted for him anyway.

Okay, post is long enough and I have a lot of stuff to do today.

Shalom Y'all

No Reverence For Men

Leftists continue to amaze me with their penchant for projection and utter lack of self awareness.  This is most evident when it comes to glorifying men. It is really disgusting when it comes to them glorifying themselves as individuals.  Robert C. Byrd being a great example of this. That man makes me embarrassed to admit that my parents came from the State of West Virginia. When it comes to praising the people that they consider heroes, the sky is the limit.  The reverse side of that coin is that they accuse conservatives of putting our heroes on pedestals beyond reproach.  Are there people within our ranks who do that sort of thing?  Of course, but they are a small minority.

I was prompted to write about this today because of the flap over the reading of the Constitution on the House floor.  From Ezra Klein to Joy Behar, the left has no shortage of folks that love to shower scorn and derision on those of us who see the Constitution as one of the finest documents ever written.  Of course we see it as an ironclad contract designed to protect the people by putting chains on government.

The left sees the Constitution as an archaic bit of history written by patriarchal slaveholders who couldn't possibly have anything to benefit society today were they alive now, and so that stupid old document is nothing more than a hinderance to the progressive ideas of "Hope and Change."

Because they don't actually read the Constitution, leftists like Bill Press make idiotic statements about what the document says about the right to privacy while on the Joy Behar show.  I think he found it next to the part about the right to abortion.  I forgot which article it appears in, so you will have to go look it up yourself.  And because they don't read the document or the Federalist Papers or the Congressional records of the time, they don't comprehend the idea that we conservatives hold the ideals and principles of the document in high esteem, while understanding that the men who contributed to it all had serious flaws.

Benjamin Franklin was a brilliant man and a darn good scientist, but his hedonistic lifestyle would have made me blush.  Thomas Jefferson's ownership of slaves is nothing to be proud of, but more than that I am ashamed of Jefferson championing the French Revolution as if it was on the same moral level as our own.  Nothing could be farther from the truth.  Thank goodness Jefferson fought valiantly against Hamilton when it came to the idea of a central bank.  John Adams had much to commend about him.  He held honesty and truth in high regard to the point of defending British troops on a charge of murder even though it was incredibly unpopular to do so, and he also was in favor of self rule by the colonies. But Adams was also very outspoken and not much for tact.  He also fought hard for the idea that the titles of the President smack of Royalty.  That hardly made any sense.  George Washington's own handling of the Whiskey Rebellion tells me that he was no saint.

Were they great men?  Yes.  Were they perfect? No.  It is in their demonstrable failings that they proved the necessity of a Constitution that denied the ability of any one man, or even a group of men from wielding too much power.  We are supposed to be a nation governed by a contract of law, not by people who feel some sort of anointing to tell us how to live for our own good.

We have traveled so far from the original intent of the Constitution that it is no wonder this country is so messed up and that so few citizens really know anything about the Constitution.

Here is a list of myths that a lot of Americans believe which are directly contrary to what the Constitution says or allows:

1. If the economy suffers or improves, it is because of the policies of the president.
2. The Senate is one half of the Congress that represents the people.
3. The Supreme Court's job is to interpret the Constitution.
4. The Constitution determines what rights the people and the States have.
5. Every citizen in the United States has a right to vote in presidential elections.
6. If there are enough votes in both houses of Congress to override a presidential veto, a bill should become law.
7. Prior to the war between the States, the Constitution considered negroes or slaves to only be three-fifths of a person.
8. The fourteenth amendment to the Constitution automatically makes anyone born in the United States a citizen with all the rights and privileges thereof.
9. Anyone arrested on U.S. soil, regardless of national origin is subject to all rights guaranteed to a citizen by the Constitution.
10. The United States of America was founded as one country to free us from the British.

Anyone want to answer why the above statements are provably false?

Your Straw Man Is Way Too Big

I like stopping by Jaded Haven almost every day, because usually the posts are good, thought provoking stuff.  Even if I don't agree with something, it's usually no big deal.  But when I read something that makes no sense factually and actually defames others unjustly, I just have to say something.

Before I get on with it, let me be the first to say that I have lots and lots of vitriol to hurl at leftists who know what they are doing, as well as the leftist drones. I can engage in take-no-prisoners scolding of the crap that so-called progressives preach and want to impose on us.  But what I will not do is accuse my opponents of saying things they didn't say, or even worse, believing things they don't believe. So, when I encounter a writer whom I like, engaging in such behavior, it hurts.

Here I will quote Daphne directly and deal with it point by point.

Chalk it up to personal anxiety caused by ingrained societal pressure to create a day of materially prolific Christmas bliss or my increasing reluctance to walk any partisan line, but I would sincerely like to know how Evangelicals can justify the ongoing genocide and displacement of Iraqi Christians in the wake of Operation Freedom.

My question:  Is there some news source that I don't know about that has published a new survey that supports this charge?  And because she is talking about recent events, it made me curious, so I went searching the internet to see  if there was some evidence of this, since Daphne cites not a single article or even somebody else's educated or experienced opinion.  It begs the question: What has Daphne read or heard that  has her panties in a bunch over evangelicals?

I googled the question of evangelicals support war, and could only find these:
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/1010-02.htm
Please note that this is from 2002, and just as importantly note the stats:
"Some 69 percent of conservative Christians favor military action against Baghdad; 10 percentage points more than the U.S. adult population as a whole."  So, 59% of the general population felt that way back in 2002, and so because evangelicals were a bit more in that direction, evangelicals were are a big problem.   


Then there is:  http://www.religionnewsblog.com/7331/iraq-war-weakens-bond-between-bush-evangelicals
Dated May 18, 2004.  Please note what the article says about evangelicals: 
"Some academics estimate evangelical Christians represent 25 to 30 percent of the 105 million people who voted in the last presidential election."    The article, from Reuters - no big cheerleading squad for Christians - makes the point that evangelical support for Bush had eroded and by a significant margin.  Evangelicals by this time had started waking up to the fact that Bush was not really a conservative, but was still the lesser of two evils when compared to John Kerry.  The important point found in the survey is that even back then, no case could be made that evangelicals supported bush specifically on the war more than non-evangelicals.

When you can't get the kind of answers you want from a large base of survey participants, the best thing you can do is narrow the field and hope for the best.  Which leads to this survey:
http://www.christianpost.com/article/20080212/most-evangelical-leaders-still-support-iraq-war/
Where what we find is that the press only interviewed 100 members of a group that the vast majority of evangelical churches don't belong to.  The reason I can say that is because the tens of thousands of churches that consider themselves evangelical are independent and don't belong to such an organization.  Just as telling is the fact that the survey revealed that only a bare majority of the members were on the support side.  Hardly some kind of mandate.

A most glaring absence of data would be a list of the top ten issues that caused evangelicals to vote for Bush. Just a wild guess here, but I think it's safe to say that abortion and a few other things were big factors as well.

Daphne again:

Don’t get me wrong, I was a fierce supporter of the invasion. Just another citizen completely convinced that Sadaam was about to unleash a maelstrom of fiery hell on America in the wake of 9/11′s devastation. I sincerely believed our government was telling us the truth. My justifiable fear trumped my mind’s skeptical rationale. It’s been a few years since I blindly subscribed to the Bush Doctrine,  in light of hindsight’s neglected facts, it was a tenuous position to maintain with any long-term seriousness over the passing years.

Here Daphne admits that she "blindly" supported the "Bush Doctrine" even though I can't seem to find any such doctrine as defined by the former president, but only some vague references attributed to pundits.  That's kind of like citing Roman Catholic doctrine and then assigning it to the Bible. But for me to make sense of what Daphne is saying, she needs to define what exactly is the Bush Doctrine. Secondly, what are the "neglected facts?"  If it is a question of WMD, the facts are that Hussein had WMD because he used it on people in his own territory and Iran.  British Intelligence still stands behind the information on yellowcake uranium and the fact that John Kerry, Hillary Clinton and various other democrat senators stood in the well of the Senate and cajoled their colleagues into voting for Bush's actions of war. (Even back then, I said there was something strange about that.)  Add to this the defecting Iraqi general who publicly spoke to anyone who would listen that the Russians came and moved the nuclear weapons north into Syria. No big surprise there.  What would you expect to find if the DEA spent three months weeks days warning a drug dealing gang that if they didn't provide proof that they had stopped dealing drugs you were coming in for a full sweep?    Then all of the ACLU types in the burbs start screaming that the raid is totally unjustified because -- "Wow, we searched in all of the obvious places, but we didn't find any drugs, Lieutenant."  I could say more on that, but . . .

But some people are still buying the mongrel spiel, most notably Evangelicals. No derision intended, I’d honestly like to know how they square the overthrow of a secular, American owned [then why the hell didn't we just sell them to the Chinese?] dictatorship in favor of an expensive war that established a Muslim hotbed of “democracy” who are directly responsible for the wholesale eradication and diaspora of minority Christians. How is eliminating Iraq’s people of the book in our nation’s best interests? I’d sincerely like to hear the Evangelical response to the continuing collateral damage resulting from a flawed foreign policy they still passionately embrace.

Again, I'd sure like to know what constitutes "most notably," but I think I already covered that up above.  While I can't speak for all evangelicals, this subject has come up in conversation with both people I consider evangelicals, which are few and far between, since my standards for that label are considerably higher than the secular world, and among those who carry some other mainstream Christian label.  Except among those I would call left-leaning, the general consensus was that we were making a colossal mistake and could lose the war because Bush and other RINOs insisted on the delusion that you could impose "democracy" [hochhhh - spit] on a culture whose religion absolutely loathes such a concept.  I knew we were in some deep cow paddies the moment I heard Bush referring to Islam as a religion of peace.  [Islam means "submission," look it up.]

Explain this horrific mess.

Christmas was almost cancelled in Baghdad this year. The October 31st slaughter of 58 people in a Baghdad church by Al Queda had already terrified the Christian communities, more bombings and murders followed, and last Tuesday Al Queda threatened to kill anyone celebrating Christmas.  

Thank you, I think I will explain this mess.


True conservatives overall, and evangelicals as the smaller subset were warning before the election of Obama, because of his own rhetoric, that this would create a disaster in Iraq for the innocent civilian population.  That telegraphing to the radical jihadists that it was just a matter of time before we would be pulling out, would simply allow them to breathe easy, re-group, re-arm, re-strategize while they wait for us to pull out.  The flip side of that coin is that those who were on the side of creating a peaceful, moderate society, were now faced with a choice: try to stand on our own against terrible odds when the Americans leave, or start trying to get back in the good graces of the Taliban before that fateful time comes.


The evangelical position, the conservative position, as has been publicized all over the internet, is that we don't like war.  But war gets foisted upon us by evil people.  So once the war starts, the goal should be to bring it to a complete and unambiguous end as quickly as possible.  Try to protect innocent life wherever possible, but don't let that keep you from the primary goal; win it, and win it fast and decisively. Only those who play by the rules of the Geneva Convention get to benefit from its rules.  All else are summarily executed.  No exceptions. People who have anything to do with flying plane loads of civilians into non-military targets, beheading journalists for show, turning mentally retarded women of their own families into burka-clad remote control bombs can be water-boarded ad infinitum and worse if it means helping to stop any more terrorist acts.  Again, I can't speak for most evangelicals, and there are probably many conservatives who wouldn't agree with me, but I don't find the Jesus in the New Testament to be a touchy-feely liberal.  His instructions about loving one's neighbor were strictly about one-on-one relations not political or national.  The guy who claimed to be "one with the Father" was obviously in on all the campaigns of the Old Testament. You know, like wiping out the entire Egyptian army?  I wouldn't have brought religious doctrine into this, but Daphne left me no choice.

More from the story Daphne quoted:

The following day, a council representing the various Christian denominations advised followers to call off Christmas celebrations. Services were cancelled, decorations taken down. Mass was held in various cities on Christmas Eve, but under tight security, then the faithful were told to go home and pray in private for those who had been killed in 2010.

There’s no reason to think the ongoing pogrom against Christians will slacken in 2011. This means the ongoing exodus will continue. After the Oct 31st mass killing over 10,000 people fled the capital for the relative safety of the Kurdish areas in the north. They added to the almost 300,000 Christians who have left the Arab areas of Iraq since 2003. Most left the country entirely. About 500,000 remain.

Daphne: I can’t imagine anyone of sound mind or honest integrity supporting this collateral damage in the name of nebulous homeland security or Muslim sovereignty.

You don't really have to, Daphne.  But let's be clear about something.  Bush's policy was that he could not, and would not guarantee a timetable for a withdrawal from Iraq because he knew that any such talk would be a signal to the radical Muslims that they were winning the propaganda war and that it would only be a matter of time before they could regain control and carry out pogroms against any infidels.  What is happening in Iraq now is the result of Al Queda simply responding to the policies of THIS administration, and the last time I checked, I couldn't find a single evangelical that supported a single policy, domestic or foreign, of the Obama Administration.

I'd like to see one of two things happen. a) Either the United States puts enough volunteer forces back in Iraq to flush out and eliminate ALL remaining Taliban/Al Queda/etc. members or drive them into obscurity and stay until it is reasonably certain that the Iraqis can defend against their resurgence, or b) we give notice and reasonable amount of time for all Christians or freedom loving Iraqis to be relocated to other parts of the globe where they are welcome and then we pull completely out of Iraq.  But then we put them and the world on notice that if we determine that they are involved in even the slightest way with any terrorist activity, a few GBU-43/Bs will be delivered to Baghdad in short order.  And while we will pray for your innocent lives lost, we will not be deluded into believing it was our fault and not yours that they died.

In a nutshell, to make sure that I'm not misunderstood; don't present the problems created by the Obama administration and expect someone to defend those problems as if they were created by Bush.

What's even sadder is to blame a minority segment of the electorate for crap they didn't believe in to begin with.

Proving They Don't Care

. . . about whether or not you matter, or that you care enough to call your Representative, or Senator.

While they have less than a month left, they are going to steal every dime they can get their hands on.

Because, after all, what are YOU gonna do about it?  Nothing.  Especially if you voted for any Democrats.

Must be pretty cool to just be a couple living in America and just because you happen to know a certain Congressman, you can fill out a few government forms and collect $48 BILLION.  Why risk your money on the lottery.  Just go for the sure thing.

Don't risk prison by stealing or embezzling it.  Just have a Representative transfer the money from millions of taxpayers directly to you.

Quote of the Day: Nicki

Americans' assessment of Congress has hit a new low, with 13% saying they approve of the way Congress is handling its job. The 83% disapproval rating is also the worst Gallup has measured in more than 30 years of tracking congressional job performance.

What I'd really like to know is: who are the cave-dwelling, ignorant, drooling, imbecilic, cretinous Neanderthal moonbats who constitute the 13 percent?

You have to be living under a rock and completely oblivious to the events of the past two years to still believe that Congress is doing a good job.

My only disagreement with Nicki is that she is being unfair to Neanderthals.  Not that such polls are anything more than something for me to laugh at, but I've often wondered where in the heck one could find one of these 13 percent people.  Do they all live in Nancy Pelosi's district?  Do they wish we were living under Hugo Chavez or Fidel Castro, or were back in Joseph Stalin's USSR?

In case you'd like to browse her site: The Liberty Zone.

Politics Still Boring You?

It was in the mid 1990s.  At that time, I was driving an 18 wheeler from Tampa to Orlando at night. Shuttling freight there and back for a single company between warehouses. It was at the time when the Tampa Bay Buccaneers had been sold, and they were a losing team.  They were actually the most losing team in the NFL.  The new owners were "threatening" to find a new home for the team if they didn't get a new stadium courtesy of the taxpayers.

I had to avoid getting into arguments with the idiots who bought the lies about fiscal impact of having an NFL team.  I say professional sports is no different from museums or performing arts.  Either they produce something people want and can survive or thrive in a free market, or they deserve to dissolve.  Cut and dried.  Want to find the ugliest crap that is supposed to pass for art, but that nobody would allow on their own property let alone pay for?  Go find a government building.

I arrived at the dock in Orlando the night that it was announced by the front office of the Bucs, that Orlando was making overtures about luring the team there.  A warehouse worker approached me like a 12 year old on a playground to ask, "What you gonna do if you lose the Bucs to US?!?"

"Nothing."
"Whaddya mean, nothing?"  From the look on his face, you'd have thought that I had turned down a chance to have sex with the entire Swedish Bikini Team.  Oh, I understood where he was coming from, and it made me angry, but I did my best to stay calm.

"Who is your congressman?" I asked.
"Huh?"  His face was contorted as if he'd just discovered an ice chest of fish that he'd forgotten about from last summer.
"Do you know which congressional district you live in?"
[blank stare, crickets chirping]
"Do you know who your Senators are that represent you in Washington?"
"What the hell does that have to do with football?"
"Nothing.  And that's the point.  The Bucs could disappear off the planet tomorrow and it won't effect my life one iota.  Yet there are people who gain political office, and make decisions every chance they get, which have direct and very negative impacts on my life."

As if I had just spoken in Mandarin Chinese, he picked up the conversation.

"You guys are gonna be so sorry that you lost the Bucs when Orlando gets them."

"I don't think you understood my point. I don't care if the Bucs move to Orlando.  You see, nobody at One Buccaneer Plaza employs me, or signs my paychecks, or is helping me get my college education or pay my mortgage.  Meanwhile, people like you help allow politicians to steal more of my money and liberty, because you don't care enough to pay attention to what they are doing. You have no idea who is making the laws and spending a hefty part of your paycheck, because you are more concerned with knowing the entire starting lineups of the offense, defense, and special teams for at least a half dozen NFL franchises."

"What are you talking about?  I've gotten money back from the IRS almost every year."

"Thank you for helping to prove my point.  How much did they keep?"

"Who?"
"The IRS."
"I said they gave me a refund."
"They gave you back a portion of the money that they overtaxed you."

Getting him to actually look at his paystubs and do the math was interesting.  It was priceless to see him find out that all the FICA was separate and not considered part of the income tax.

Why do I bring up this example?  It may be unlikely that someone who has been coming to my blog is as clueless as that guy, but in case someone is coming here relatively lately, I want you to learn something.

There are some clichés and sayings that are very true and have stood the test of time.  There are some that are true and valid depending on the context, and it is a wise person who can recognize the difference.  For example: "What you don't know, can't hurt you."  That might be true if it describes the fact that your co-workers are jealous of you and hate your guts, but they can't really do anything to sabotage your work.  But when it comes to the populace and politics, it's a big lie.

There is another saying:  People get the government that they deserve.  Supposedly de Toqueville said it about democracy, but nobody is sure.  It is true, nonetheless.  It doesn't matter if you are a soccer mom or a warehouse worker who loves football, or you are a college professor with lots of hobbies.  If you choose to take the attitude that politics is boring, or that you don't see any difference between the parties, or "Why vote, nothing ever changes."  You are just as much a part of the problem as the people who are actively trying to transform our society under the phony, slick, Madison Avenue, "Hope and Change" crap, into a quasi slave state.

There are very soon to be people who are going to be crying and gnashing their teeth, scared to death, wondering how they are going to afford their cable and internet service, cell phone service, and groceries.  They are going to be dumbfounded when they need medical care and find out that a third to half of the physicians who could, have already retired or just closed down, or just won't take Medicare or Medicaid unless it is at the point of a gun.  They will get to see,  just like already in England, women will be having babies in the corridors of the hospitals if they are lucky enough to get there in the first place.  We already know that people in several northern states are facing 30% fuel oil increases as winter is just getting started.  This is at the same time there is a moratorium by the administration on pumping, not drilling new wells, mind you, but pumping existing wells off the coast, and we are sitting on vast reserves of oil under the great plains and under Alaska.  We haven't built any new nuclear power plants in over 30 years, while France has raced ahead building perfectly safe, modern design reactors and produces 90% of their electricity this way.

While you were busy watching "Survivor," "Dancing with the Stars," "American Idol," "Monday Night Football," or any number of amusing things, your only considered thought on serious political issues came from the 10 second sound bites you got from the mainstream TV and radio, while the decisions on how to handle those issues were coming to dramatically affect or destroy your way of life.

When California, New York, and Illinois default and admit it, and the riots start here like they are happening in Greece and soon to be in Spain and Italy, and people are sitting here wondering how we got to this point,  I'll be telling my story from the top of this post.  That's how we got here.

You preferred bread and circuses over the tedious business of understanding politics and how it can and WILL effect your life.  You chose to abdicate your responsibility for your own life and put the decision making into the hands of others and as long as what they said sounded good, such as "caring" and "fair" and was "for the children." They could pretty much do what ever the hell they wanted to as long as they didn't preempt your soap operas or your game shows.  A lot of people are going to find out the hard way, that there are deep, far-reaching consequences for the decisions one makes or refuses to make.

I remember going to a Saturday "townhall" meeting in the summer of 1994. It was just before the voters gave the Republicans a chance to reign in some of the out of control crap that Bill and Hillary Clinton and the Democrats were trying to foist on the United States.  Pretty much the same crap that the Democrats have illegally done in the past 24 months.  About a quarter of the 60 or so attendees of this meeting, called by then Congressman Sam Gibbons D - Tampa, were there to petition for reigning in a lot of the unconstitutional garbage, and to see just how much the democrat congressman realized that his job was in danger.  But about a third of the people there were fawning over Sam and asking him how much more bacon he was going to bring to the district, without realizing that the hogs were there in attendance, and we were pissed.

It made me frustrated and angry that those people standing there with their proverbial hands out, couldn't comprehend that government doesn't have anything unless it first takes it away from somebody else.

Politics is like a dangerous predator in the jungle, it would prefer that it be able to stalk you while you are distracted by a host of other things. You ignore that subtle whiff of scent that you know doesn't belong.  You shrug off that shadow you "thought" you saw in the corner of your eye.  Some of us in the herd, the sheepdogs, barked and growled, but the majority of the herd told us to be quiet and not disturb their grazing.  Then before you know it, you are left with nothing but a look of horror on your face and the words, "Awww Sh%$#@% . . . " coming out of your mouth, as you realize too late that you should have taken this stuff more seriously.

Oh well.  Time to go work out my frustrations by making preparations to ride out this winter and think about what food I'll be growing in the spring.

Bring It On

The left likes to say that we conservatives are dangerous.  When you believe in the principles of this country as founded, that's exactly what we should have been for a long time, but we weren't.  Leftists will take what I say and twist it, as they always do, but I'm going to say it anyway.

The reason the country is in such lousy shape is because conservatives didn't maintain the respect that comes from being feared. We conservatives also just assumed that common sense would let people know that the ideas of the left just don't work in the long term, and that history had proved it over and over.  The government at all levels took little steps, and incrementally did things that would take us all down the road to hell, and we conservatives bought into the idea of just being nice, and going along to get along.What should have happened is that, every time those critters who seek out power by getting elected or becoming a bureaucrat started doing stuff that was outside the enumerated powers of the Constitution, they would have quickly heard from a large body of the constituency letting them know that their job was in danger.  Alas, we so wanted not to be hated or to be labeled as sexist, racist, xenophobic, intolerant, homophobic, or whatever, that we kept giving away ground.  Just like the Israelis, trading real estate for the hope of peace.  It was a fool's game.

Have there been extremists among the so-called "right wing?"  Of course.  There are always extremists in every camp.  And now we have an example of one on the left.

What fascinates me is the total lack of reason in the man.  Recent polls coming up to the 2010 election said that only 20% of the country thinks of itself as liberal.  Not leftist, mind you, but just liberal.  And it's been my experience that when you talk to someone who considers themselves liberal, they most often don't know much about anything political or about history, and certainly not anything about weapons.  In fact, most liberals I've ever dealt with in my life reacted to seeing my folding knife or one of my firearms as if they'd seen a scary monster.

With that in mind, I just had to laugh when I read this excerpt of what is a call for violent revolution published by the notorious left wing cartoonist Ted Rall.  He wants to seek out and destroy Tea-Party Patriots.  What more can I say, than, "Good luck with that."

Hat tip to The Anti-Idiotarian Rottwieler.

To Celebrate or Not To Celebrate

I have to make up my mind that I need to be positive today.  I will need to do it tomorrow as well.  Yes, I'm happy that 60 seats were lost to the Socialist Democrats on Tuesday.  I'm not happy that Reid and Boxer and several others who should have been soundly defeated are still going to be in the Swamp of Maryland.

You see, there is no guarantee that those 60 seats in the House are going to translate into a rollback of the socialist agenda that has been tearing our freedom away and crapping on the constitution for so long.  I'd like to think that it will, but I'm old enough to be very familiar with the Republican takeover of the House in 1994 and what happened for the next four years after that.

Put all that aside.  The real thing troubling me is that the Federal Reserve has announced that they are going to start printing enormous amounts of paper notes (some call it cash), in order to monetize the debt.  Now I know that the vast percentage of the populace has never tried to learn about economics, just like they don't want to have to think about politics.  Of course, this is what causes the catastrophic mess that we are heading toward and what causes the disaster in Greece and France, with riots and breakdowns in society.  It's because too much of the populace has buried it's head in the sand when it comes to understanding politics and economics, that we are heading for a major meltdown. It is going to happen, it's just a matter of when.

What does it mean that the Fed is going to print about $600 billion in fiat currency?  Some of you probably understand that when a commodity gets scarcer, the price of that commodity goes up.  You could call that inflation, but that would be wrong, since only that one commodity has an effect on that price.  Inflation is caused when a government creates more currency which then chases after goods.  When there is suddenly a lot more "cash" available to purchase things, prices go up across the board.  What then happens to the cash you already have?  The value of it goes down.  History is full of examples to show that such laws of economics are irrefutable.

If you don't truly understand what money is and how it works, it will eventually bite you.  If you don't understand money and politics and how they work together, it will be your total undoing.

This is why I think the people who have been trading all their stocks, bonds, and other debt instruments for gold are pretty silly, especially in the face of a real economic meltdown. Why?  Because when the proverbial fecal matter strikes the pneumatic impeller, gold won't matter.

Let's say you are John Doe in the suburbs.  The U.S. has reached the point of default and finally has to announce such.  The riots in Greece and France will pretty much look like a Boy Scout Jamboree in comparison to what will be happening in the major metro areas here.  Oh, but you were smart and cashed in your 401k before the lame duck 111th Congress seized it, and you bought gold.

What you gonna buy with it?  Who is going to want it?  Let's say I'm Farmer Brown a few miles out in the country.  I don't have any cash, I don't have any gold.  However, I do have a lot of grain stored up.  I'm sitting on 20 acres of arable land. My wife has been keeping a root cellar stocked up with more than a year's supply of food.  I've got a few cows and goats and chickens and hogs.  There's a creek that runs between me and my neighbor.

If you could even hike from there to here, because all fuel has been commandeered by the military, or martial law is in effect and movement is restricted, why would I want your gold in trade for my food?  What would I do with it?  What could I buy?

In a total breakdown of society, all forms of money become meaningless. In every war that has ever occurred in history, survival is all about basic necessities.  Food and water are the only things that mean anything.

Benjamin Franklin replied to the question, "What government have you given us?"  To which he replied, "A republic, if you can keep it."   Ronald Reagan was right when he said that we are ever only one generation away from slavery.  We were never designed to be a democracy.  The founders had nothing but contempt for such a form of government, and rightly so.  I leave you today, with this quote from Alexander Tyler:

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasure. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most money from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been two hundred years. These nations have progressed through the following sequence: from bondage to spiritual faith, from spiritual faith to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependency, from dependency back to bondage."

Let's Hope So

I second the comment of The Curmudgeon Emeritus.  If the people do what those in Arizona did with John McCain, we are doomed.  But if Nancy is forced to give up the gavel we might have a chance.























Share this link.  Go get it and embed it on your own blog.  I don't need to comment any more than that.