Open Season on Non-Blacks

Open season on black boys after a verdict like this | Gary Younge | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk:

Since it was Zimmerman who stalked Martin, the question remains: what ground is a young black man entitled to and on what grounds may he defend himself? What version of events is there for that night in which Martin gets away with his life? Or is it open season on black boys after dark?

"stalked"? When someone is in your neighborhood, you have to "keep your distance"?  Really??

The versions of events where Trayvon "gets away" are: 

1. He doesn't attack Zimmerman when he talks to him ... if he ever actually did talk to him.
   
   Even if Zimmerman wanted to "detain him", so what? I had an old couple in the Walmart lot ask me to hang around when they claimed that my car had rolled into theirs ... so the cop came and there was no damage and they looked like fools. What the hell? Assuming that the Trayvon story is what we are told, the same would have happened there. 
2. Zimmerman is not armed and Martin seriously injures or kills him when he attacks him

I've went out and talked to people parked or walking in my neighborhood multiple times over the years. Mostly, they are lost, just stopped here to rest because it seemed secluded. Generally they have been very polite to me, probably because I'm a sensitive looking guy.

Once, years ago, when druggies were walking across my back yard at another house to a known dealer and I had little kids, I confronted a couple of them.  On one occasion, when the response from one of them didn't meet my standards, I mentioned that the next time his motorcycle was parked where it was it would be picked up and thrown in the ditch and he could call the police if he liked and explain why he was using my back yard for a sidewalk. He almost said something else, but then I think realized that doing that with his 200lbish  cycle was actually easily within the realm of potential, so thought the better of further comment due to prospects for harm to his 160ish carcass.

Such is the kind of thing that happens in modern America ... and it is worse now than it was then. When you are in a different neighborhood, even when you are there for absolutely legitimate purposes, being polite and courteous if someone is interested in what you are up to is just reasonable ... or at least used to be.

But we don't need to see many of these sorts of articles or statements to know that we are going to have plenty of "getting even" from blacks against anyone that is not black ... hispanics, orientals and whites. Because blacks are "aggrieved" ... and there are PLENTY of folks out there to make that case even though the current US president happens to be black.

If you are a white person in a black neighborhood, you are considered "crazy" ... and if it is dark, lots of folks think "you deserve what happens to you".

Obviously the writer of this article would see your demise as "just desserts".

Why is it again that we just can't all get along?

'via Blog this'

Rule of Media

Here is CNN this AM. What now?? Federal charges? Civil trial? Just kill Zimmerman on the street??

At one time there was Rule of Law, and it was honored!! The defendant was ASSUMED INNOCENT got as fair a trial as society could muster. If the verdict was that they were STILL innocent, then they were FREE!! Done.

No double jeopardy. No threat at least from major media people that someone else may deal out a different kind of "justice" for you.

Those days are clearly gone.

What if Zimmerman had not had a carry gun or not been able to get it pulled and Martin succeeded in killing him?? It is absolutely certain that we would never have known the name George Zimmerman.

A Law Based Zimmerman Discussion

The Zimmerman Case Is About Race? Why? | Power Line:

I'm mostly posting this for my own recollection. I think it does a great job of showing the media activist myth .... "Innocent black child gunned down in the street by violent white vigilante", vs the evidence presented in court;  "young adult black male MMA trainee on top of and beating 30ish hispanic guy gets shot and killed by carry gun".

Why is it again that there is a lot of disagreement in America?

'via Blog this'

Jabba the Hut Government

Daniel Henninger: Big Government Implodes - WSJ.com:

The BOcare delay is no surprise to anyone that has ever worked with any organization larger than a small local church, gun club or neighborhood organization. To be honest, it isn't really a surprise to anyone that has been married or even  tried to plan a weekend with friends.

My guess is that a lot of it "could" be implemented in the standard stupid large organization fashion, but BO and company just didn't want the open pain to have a potential impact on 2014. They win the house in 2014 and then it really is over except for bloodshed ... with no voter ID, Undocumented Democrats streaming in over the borders and a completely blank check to destroy the last of the private economy and force 80% of the country into government dependence than the current "mere" 47-50%, it's already over, the issue is just how.

The delay won't avoid pain, it will just delay it ... at the cost of more uncertainty dragging on the economy.

I'm not nearly as sanguine about his view that "government will implode and liberalism with it" ... I think slow sink to a "Neutron Country" where nothing moves, followed by a possible "Supernova" of upheaval is the most likely "end".

What blasts out of the Supernova wreckage is anyones guess.

'via Blog this'

The Regime Rots On

The case of Aurelia Fedenisn | Power Line:

My guess is that BO hands this fast falling totalitarian state over to Hillbilly in 2016. Her "leadership" at the State Dept shows us the general shape of the levels of corruption that we can expect.

The linked article is well worth the read, and maybe going and looking at the CBS coverage if you have doubts about it being some "right wing nutjob creation".

It's over folks. When the corruption gets to the level where every part of the ruling junta has so many scandals that you can't even track them, but nobody cares one whit, then stick a fork in it. It's done.

'via Blog this'

Black Man Stands Up To Race Pimps

Pastor Ken Hutcherson to Rev. Al Sharpton: ‘Not Again’ | TheBlaze.com:

No more to say. Well said!

'via Blog this'

While America Burns, The Media Pimps the Porn

Roger L. Simon » The Zimmerman Trial as Media Pornography:

I found this paragraph just oh so right on:

As I write this, Egypt teeters on the brink of civil war, Syria is still in civil war, Lebanon is also on the brink, Iran marches forward to nuclear arms, the U.S. economy remains a mess, unemployment is rampant, more people are on food stamps than work in the private sector, the deficit grows exponentially by the second, Social Security is going bankrupt, Medicare is going bankrupt, the IRS has virtually taken over the country and is about to subsume healthcare, Benghazi remains unresolved, the NSA is spying on everything and everybody between here and Alpha Centauri and we’re (I) worrying George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin?!

'via Blog this'

Zimmerman, Law, Aristocracy

In Zimmerman's trial, it's a jury of millions - CNN.com:

Edmund Burke and many of our founding fathers fully understood how to prevent the kind of mess that we see in things like the OJ trial and now the Zimmerman trial.

We were to be a nation ruled by LAW, not by MOB!!

One only needs to read through the sad linked article to see that we have left that path by so far that we no longer even recall what law means.

ALL people feel, ALL the time ... only a FEW people can reason well at any time, and even then, they can only reason for a limited time about limited things. It is terribly difficult for any of us to make reason win out over emotion!!

Which is why we once had religion, civilization and "aristocracy".

 I use the last word in quotes, since it is such a problematic word today. It does NOT mean "wealth", although many in the "aristocratic class" will be wealthy ... it means virtuous, intelligent, well bred, well spoken, well educated, reasonable, mature, wise, moral, etc ... the "best of humanity". It means that although we have equal OPPORTUNITY and we are EQUAL UNDER THE LAW, and EQUAL IN THE SIGHT OF GOD, not all of us play basketball as well as Michael Jordan ... or even LeBron James.

Even harder for modern man to swallow, far from all of us are "of equal ability and use to mankind" as Plato, Cicero, Da Vinci, Newton, Washington, Lincoln, Churchill ... well you get the picture. I know such thinking is difficult for modern man, but trust me, in the words of Josie Wales "A man's got to know his limitations" ... and he is always better for knowing.

Is this REALLY that hard to understand?? Have we been so indoctrinated with the idea that "everyone has their own view, and they all have their points", and that "we are all special",  that we don't understand the basic fact that there are real events that happen, and they MUST be decided by Rule of Law vs Rule of Mob, or the very quick result will be a bloodbath and subsequent dictatorship. Is it REALLY that long since Pol Pot, Mao, Hitler, Stalin and the French Revolution??? Are humans really not trainable and doomed to another thousand years or so of "Dark Age"??

Law, Judgement and Judges require that we have respected people and respected institutions that step outside of the emotional attachments that all of us have and RULE ON THE BASIS OF LAW!

Either Martin knocked Zimmerman to the ground and was wailing on him well enough so Zimmerman had REASONABLE CAUSE to believe that:

• HE WAS IN IMMEDIATE PERIL OF LOSS OF LIFE OR GREAT BODILY HARM
• ESCAPE WAS IMPOSSIBLE
• NO LESSER FORCE WOULD DO

or, it can be PROVEN that the above was NOT the case.

It is ZIMMERMAN who is on trial ... under the system we supposedly believe in and pledge allegiance to, he is PRESUMED INNOCENT!!! The burden is on the state to PROVE that Zimmerman DID NOT have REASONABLE cause ... note. REASONABLE. The jury should simply be asked if a REASONABLE PERSON when on their back with a large young man on top of them wailing away and pounding their head into the pavement saying they were going to kill them could REASONABLY come to the conclusions above!!

If we operated under the Rule of Law, that would mean that this going to trial would never happen. The burden of proof required by the state for 2nd degree MURDER in FL is that Zimmerman acted "with a depraved mind"  to kill this kid!!! Usually that means that Zimmerman knew Martin well, and "something happened" to cause the "depraved mind".

In this case, there was no legitimate way for the state to prosecute Zimmerman, so a charge had to be created due to public outcry. The only path that they really had was to try to "prove" that a mixed Hispanic - Caucasian - Black was motivated by "racism" to stalk and kill a black kid ... who pushed him to the ground and started wailing on him with marital arts blows.

But since we DON'T live under the Rule of Law, it goes to trial and we write long articles trying to make claims that "all sides have a point" and virtually demanding that if "your side" ... "loses", then there really ought to be at least outcry if not violence!!

NO!!!

WE HAVE ALREADY ALL LOST!!!

We have lost the Rule of Law. We no longer respect God, our history, our institutions, our "betters" (or even believe that there are such), and most of all we don't respect ourselves. How could we?? We have abandoned the entire structure of Western Civilization which gave us a framework within which to have such respect.

We have no "right" when we see someone that we don't know walking around our neighborhood to walk and ask them "Can I help you? Are you lost?" ... and if they turn and attack us we have no right to defend ourselves??? Or is it just if they are not of the same race as is normally in our neighborhood that this right is suspended?

or is it ONLY if our neighborhood is predominately caucasian and the person is what? black, hispanic? indian? oriental? Do they all have to be treated differently? Is that what "equality before the law" has come down to??

I strongly suspect that if I am walking around N Minneapolis at night, the "rules" are just a tiny bit different!

We need God, "Betters" ("aristocrats"), and Law. Without these, we are just a bunch of tribes lost in the jungle.

'via Blog this'

I Lust, Therefore I Am

The Future of Religious Liberty - Ricochet.com:

One of the reasons that transcendence, especially religious transcendence, and I would argue superlatively Christianity moves man to a higher plane is because of where the vision is focused. Fail to "aim high", and the genitals or lower are often the target that is hit.

Is sex something we do, or is it who we are?

During the sexual revolution, we crossed a line from sex being something you do to defining who you are. When it enters into that territory, we move beyond the possibility of having a society in which sex acts were tolerated, in the Mrs. Patrick Campbell sense – "I don't care what they do, so long as they don't do it in the street and frighten the horses" – and one where it is insufficient to be anything but a cheerleader for sexual persuasion of all manner and type, because to be any less so is to hate the person themselves. Sex stopped being an aspect of a person, and became their lodestar – in much the same way religion is for others. As Walker Percy wrote, "Pascal told only half the story. He said man was a thinking reed. What man is, is a thinking reed and a walking genital."

People do a lot of things ... art, poetry, prayer, mathematics, macrame ... and yes, we urinate, defecate, and copulate ... or "piss, shit and fuck" in the more earthy modern vernacular.

What defines us as humans? For thousands of years, Western Civilization worked to crawl up from the latrine or the bed of marital or purely lustful carnality to the planes of reason, logic, philosophy, religion, culture, etc.

No longer. Now you are DEFINED by what your genitals desire!!

'via Blog this'

Still Sparks of Freedom

Reporting From the Land of the Free [UPDATED With Firearms and Fireworks] | Power Line:

I recall my dad fondly remembering his dad LEGALLY setting off a stick of dynamite to initiate the day of celebrating the birthday of what used to be a proudly FREE COUNTRY with all sorts of LEGAL fireworks.

When I was a kid, scrounging up a few ILLEGAL firecrackers, and yes, in those days M-80s and Cherry Bombs was the only illegal activity that my parents condoned, It was the 60s ... we were still a nation that was willing to take great risk, effort and expense to go to the moon, but letting kids legally shoot off fireworks was beyond the pale nationally -- TOO RISKY! The all powerful State had to step in and limit freedom to "protect us from ourselves".

By the time I was a father, SPARKLERS were illegal in MN ... although the "nutcase", Jessie the Bod, did get those and a few fountains legalized. My most major brush with the law came when 3 police cruisers showed up to shut down our fireworks display ... we did go just a bit overboard, purchasing wholesale in WI.

At this point it looks like the America of 1776 is LONG over ... and it looks grim for the future. BUT ... there are still some bastions of freedom like South Dakota covered in the linked PL post.

Sometimes the actual sparks of fireworks ... legal or illegal, mean more than all the lofty works. Go out and shoot and blow things up! That is at least as much what it means to be American than any lofty words!

'via Blog this'

Flat Earth or Flatly Fraudulent?

Global Warming in a Few Slides | Power Line:

Here are some charts of data and some other charts of data vs projections. BO has declared it -- this is a case where you MUST believe in projections, even if those projections have not matched actual data to date!

Believe, or you are a "Flat Earther" ... likely to be watched and audited. The freedom you have remaining is the freedom to "get your mind right" or suffer the consequences!

"The One" has spoken. Why is there any discussion??


'via Blog this'

Liberals are God

Articles: Why Liberals Kill:

I'm a Christian, so I believe this is a question of ETERNAL life vs simply "this life", but make no mistake, World View is very much a huge question of life and death for millions in THIS LIFE!

If you read this blog regularly, you have been exposed to all these points, but the author expresses them very well, if it is a choice, just ignore my words and go read the link. It is EXCELLENT!!

One caveat, he uses the word "liberal" to mean "statist", not it's original "open minded, accepting of diverse thought, favorable  to individual liberty", which can be confusing.

As Orwell warned us, the left LOVES to take words and change the meanings ... thus changing not just current meanings, but the meaning of history and the memories of older people still living,  thereby seeking to invalidate their life experience. The left seeks to invalidate civilization and life itself in the cause of "progress" toward "heaven on earth". This quest invalidates all other morality -- God, Country, Family, Love, Tradition, etc.

Here are a couple teaser quotes, but PLESE, just read it. It does an EXCELLENT job of covering why "liberals think" the way they do, and why thinking people are in grave danger.

This brings us to a truth about the modern left. Generally speaking, like all relativistic people, liberals don't have principles. 

They have feelings. 

And feelings change with the wind. 

Of course, some have learned the hard way - mostly through debating liberals, only to find they're virtually immune to reason - that the left isn't intellect-oriented but emotion-oriented. But the question is, why do liberals deify their own feelings?

"Liberals" are NOT thinkers ... they are feelers!! Which we ALL are, it is just if we let God or an extreme devotion to something outside ourselves we consider transcendent (eg. The Constitution) help us, we can SLIGHTLY modify that!  "Liberal" thinking is ONLY to rationalize what they FEEL as being ultimate morality and truth! This difference explains why conservatives and liberals have a GREAT deal of difficulty communicating!

I've long pointed out that the most basic difference between the people we today call liberals and traditionalists [conservatives] isn't the apparent ideological divide. It is that the latter tend to believe in Moral Truth whereas liberals are almost universally moral relativists.

This is nothing less than an issue of operating in two completely different universes of reality. When you believe in Truth, morality is something objectively real to you, like matter itself. And most significantly, you view it as what it is: unchanging. This means that your yardstick for morality is the same whether convenient or inconvenient, whether you're out of power - or in power. It is unbending and non-negotiable. Oh, this doesn't mean absolutists can't betray their principles; man is weak and we all falter. But in the aggregate, it serves as a "controlling power upon will and appetite," to quote Edmund Burke, and thus mitigates man's do-what-thou-wilt default.

So liberals are moral relativists, which ends up meaning that each person and how they feel is the ultimate arbiter of morals.

Why should I subordinate my feelings to yours, especially since mine are the only ones truly real to me? This is, mind you, what contributes to the deification of the self. Liberals' feelings do for them what God does for people of faith. They tell them how to behave.

And thus they are god!! If there is no external god, if there is nothing "sacred", then the ultimate authority is **ME**!!!

and thus, "consistency is not an issue" ... ONLY HOW **I** FEEL, that is the only divinity there is!
'via Blog this'

Government Healthcare Works in Sweden!

Obamacare in Sweden | National Review Online:

It is hard to read through something like this and even imagine how a PHD could think such thoughts.

Sweden is 3% the size of the US. Uh, lets see ... the technique I use for mailing 3 invitations will work perfectly for 100 (at least THAT scales linearly!).

I had 3 beers, it will be fine if I have 100. We have been managing our 3 person business using Quicken Home, is there any reason to suspect that we will need to make any changes as our business grows to 100 employees?

I'm hoping that SOME PHD economists might look at things a little differently ... or maybe our educational system is even worse than I think.

But as you read through this, it isn't even plain that Nationalized Healthcare does work, even in Sweden, even removing the obvious but unstated scaling fallacy.

Throw out accidental death, and the US has BETTER life expectancy than Sweden ... even as obese as we are.

The point he DOESN"T make is even worse. Consider how good your fire insurance is. You probably think "good", unless you had a recent price increase, because all you have experience with is paying it. A very very small percentage of us ever test it by having a fire.

So when you ask people in any country that has National Health about "how well they like it", because the vast majority of people are healthy, they will say "fine". Something like 70% of people will have little to no experience with it, and since it's cost is buried in taxes, it SEEMS "cheap". So it is "good".

I'm fairly convinced that for a significant percentage of the population (1/3? 40%?) they would really rather die than for there to be "expensive options" and "tough choices" rather than "standard for everyone, no choices possible" healthcare, no matter what the quality. Their views are similar for the economy ... it is more painful for some to excel than it is for the population to be "leveled" so that they need not have any thoughts about "why do I have less" ... even though, for that group, those thoughts always are at least outwardly answered by "because the system is rigged against the little guy", "because I never had a decent shot", "because life is UNFAIR!".

Which from a human perspective it often is! If you believe that is your personal case, please read this, and then reflect on "unfairness" ...  http://www.lifewithoutlimbs.org/.



'via Blog this'

Wishful Warmnism Admits Defeat

Global Warming Hiatus: Where Did the Heat Go | New Republic:

 "The exception proves that the rule is wrong." That is the principle of science. If there is an exception to any rule, and if it can be proved by observation, that rule is wrong." Richard Feynman

I'm not going to look up any Karl Popper right now, but you can if you want to ... Feynman is of course right, but it is really even WORSE than that!  NONE of our theories are "provabile", but they are ALL falseifiable! Even E=MC**2!! One "Black Swan" and your theory is not "settled". 

Ah, but you say "that has been repeatedly PROVED true!". Indeed, it is like the guy that jumps off a 100 story building with the theory that he will survive. You ask him how his test is going as he passes the 20th floor and he says "pretty good so far". 

**IF** the warmist models had been right on the money for the past 15 years, or even if they had been right for 100 years, that doesn't "prove" anything. Newton's laws were "laws" from 1687 until the early 20th century when Einstein showed they failed at the very small, the very fast and the very high mass. 

As this article explains, the warmist models HAVE NOT been supported by observation. Even the hard core warmists are forced to admit that now ... so what they have is EXCUSES. "Well, it could be this, or that, or something else ... BUT, you had all damned well quit using carbon ANYWAY!!!" 

That part is just human wishful thinking, desire for power/control, lack of willingness to admit mistakes. There is NOTHING "new" in the "current political climate". When the rule of law and the rules of science are abandoned, this is the kind of thinking that we ALWAYS get ... see back to Lamark, Lord Kelvin talking about the age of the earth, Lysenko in the USSR, "Cold Fusion" ... and on it goes. 

Newtonian Physics was never "settled science" ... and it is very clear that Quantum Mechanics is DEFINITELY not "settled". 

So, all the things that are built on top of the Quantum Universe ... which is EVERYTHING is NOT "settled". 

When this guy talks about "today's political climate" he is completely showing his human vs his scientific stripes. 

There is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING NEW about folks with "sacred theories" doing a tap-dance about how their theory that doesn't match with OBSERVED RESULTS should be "given a 2nd chance". 2nd chances are for criminals, not scientific theories. 

The warmists, the progressives, the atheists and many more should at least pay heed to what was on Feynman's blackboard when he died: 

"What I cannot create, I do not understand."



'via Blog this'

MSM on IRS etc, Get Your Mind Right!

Shifting IRS polls contradict key deposition - CNN.com:

The right message is that the targeting of conservative groups by the IRS was "accidental due to LACK of political interest".

PLEASE, get with the program! Don't be questioning IRS officials that are testifying! Have we not told you enough (wink, wink) so you KNOW what can happen to you if you get the "wrong message". The government keeps a lot of data on you, and if some of those bored $120K a year union employees would start "making mistakes" with it, well, there is really no predicting what kind of "accident" could happen!

Please, please, get your mind right!

BTW, Pravda, the old USSR "news leader", meant "Truth".

See, back when W was president, the administration did a lot of lying ... it was made fun of as "the age of truthiness" by some comics. See, Bush lied, people died. THAT administration could not be trusted. We needed a Special Prosecutor to investigate someone breaking the cover of a lady that drove to CIA headquarters every day ... I mean that is no reason to suspect she worked at the CIA just because she went there. There are LOTS of government workers that drive to buildings every day and pay a lot of union dues for whole careers, but never really "work there". In Washington, we call driving to work at the CIA every day but having it be a state secret that you "work there" to be Deep Cover!

Did I mention that we have a lot of data on you and mistakes are often made?

"Torture" (the kind we do to every one of our own Special Forces guys) NEVER works ... see, we are just wasting our time doing that to our own guys. Nobody would actually do that, because they know it is ineffective -- oh, and our Special Forces? Just bored government workers that have forgotten to stop putting the screws to their charges as part of training. Government changes slowly.

REMEMBER, the little tiny bit of data collection that we do on you foiled FIFTY (50!)+ nefarious terrorist attacks! These days we blow away suspected "terrorists" (er, well, "suspects") with drones. There is no need to ask them any questions ... asking questions never solves anything and can be confusing. Besides, we are closing Gitmo ... "soon". It was going to be day 1 of BO's first term, but it has somehow been held open by evil Republicans that clouded the minds of the patriotic Party Members when we held control of both houses in '09-'10 including the 60 votes in the Senate.  Heil BO! ... oops, strike that ... don't even think that, we would NEVER demand a loyalty oath.

 The "War on Terror" has come to an end! BO won! Personally, single handedly .... just like he killed Obama ... oh, uh, OSama. You can tell it is over because the Boston Marathon thing was a "bombing" and those poor misguided youth were NOT "terrorists". The most likely explanation for that "accident" is that we provide insufficient welfare support to our foreign guests and it is hard for nice Islamic guys to meet friends!

Ft Hood ... just "Workplace Violence" ... the idea that it had ANYTHING to do with "Terrorism" is foolish. It is like looking at the number of murders in Chicago and thinking that Gun Control doesn't work! Are you remembering the part about the data we have and "accidents"? Good.

BO is a guy you can trust!  When he says he only knows what he reads in the papers or sometimes mouths on the teleprompter. HE MEANS IT!! When he says the "War on Terror" is over, HE MEANS IT!

... and if you know what is good for you, you will remember what he tells you!!

'via Blog this'