Why Obama’s use of the term ISIL instead of ISIS is actually really important – Glenn Beck:
One has to laugh ... our former president was ahead of his time ... "Depends on what your definition of Is Is!"
Glenn covers what I've covered here before ... the Levant encompases Israel, BO DOES want "peace in the Middle East" ... have a Caliphate that runs from Egypt through Turkey and there will be peace!
'via Blog this'
Monday, September 15, 2014
Fat Drunk and Stupid
We Have Always Been at War With ISIL! | Power Line:
The video at the link is from CNN, and it would make one roll on the floor and laugh if it was not so sad. BO has been very clear that "The War on Terror" is over. But now, we are doing "something" that Lurch (The French looking former Senator that served in Vietnam) characterizes as "A Very Significant Counter Terrorism Operation" (VSCTO) ... kind of reminds me of MUTO from Godzilla ... Massive Unidentified Terrestrial Organism".
The sycophants at CNN are having a hard time figuring out what the rulers that they are sworn to support and never question even WANT them to say. Is it a "war"?, is it a VSCTO? Is it with ISIL, ISIS, or as NPR calls it "The self-named Islamic State" ... no longer feeling good calling it ISIS after his Linksmanship BO said it was "Not Islamic and not a State", and continues to add credence to it's largest territorial claims as "The Levant" which is the whole Eastern Mediterranean including Gaza, Israel, Jordan, Syria, Cyprus, Iraq and Southern Turkey.
We are right back to the late 70s ... a nation so confused and out of touch with reality that we are ripe for any sort of major attack. We have no leadership and are in the situation of being the biggest guy in the bar dead drunk, stumbling around being stupid with our pants around our knees and just waiting for someone to kick us in the balls and get a cheer from the rest of the patrons.
'via Blog this'
The video at the link is from CNN, and it would make one roll on the floor and laugh if it was not so sad. BO has been very clear that "The War on Terror" is over. But now, we are doing "something" that Lurch (The French looking former Senator that served in Vietnam) characterizes as "A Very Significant Counter Terrorism Operation" (VSCTO) ... kind of reminds me of MUTO from Godzilla ... Massive Unidentified Terrestrial Organism".
The sycophants at CNN are having a hard time figuring out what the rulers that they are sworn to support and never question even WANT them to say. Is it a "war"?, is it a VSCTO? Is it with ISIL, ISIS, or as NPR calls it "The self-named Islamic State" ... no longer feeling good calling it ISIS after his Linksmanship BO said it was "Not Islamic and not a State", and continues to add credence to it's largest territorial claims as "The Levant" which is the whole Eastern Mediterranean including Gaza, Israel, Jordan, Syria, Cyprus, Iraq and Southern Turkey.
We are right back to the late 70s ... a nation so confused and out of touch with reality that we are ripe for any sort of major attack. We have no leadership and are in the situation of being the biggest guy in the bar dead drunk, stumbling around being stupid with our pants around our knees and just waiting for someone to kick us in the balls and get a cheer from the rest of the patrons.
'via Blog this'
A Nice Simple Diagram of Liberal Inconsistency
The Law of Supply and Demand In One Venn Diagram | Power Line:
Replace "Krugman" with "liberals" and it just about covers it. It is much worse than this picture -- liberals are consistently inconsistent because they believe that they can take all sorts of actions in the real world and somehow pick and choose the results -- often claiming they will achieve the exact opposite result of what their actions are guaranteed to achieve in the real world. Or, they know what they are doing and simply want to create a dependent voter population that will keep them in power.
Thus, on one hand they claim that the ONLY effect of raising the minimum wage will be to help minimum wage workers by giving them more per hour. However, when the price of something is raised (labor), the demand for it WILL go down -- the only question is how much, which economists attempt to answer by "elasticity". Demand for cigarettes was often used as an example when I was taking economics, however there isn't anything that is perfectly inelastic -- it would have to have no substitutes and all consumers would have to have infinite wealth relative to the price of the commodity -- ie. be ABLE to pay whatever the price rose to.
But I digress. The fast food market is quite elastic and there are lots of substitutes -- technology being the obvious one, less people eating more expensive fast food, etc. Raising the minimum wage always reduces the number of people working -- a win-win for Democrats, since both the minimum wage workers and the unemployed tend to vote Democrat. BUT, the fiction given to the public is that raising the minimum wage will not cause more unemployment, when it is a given that it will.
Which as the chart points out, might mean that people that don't understand economics are fooled -- but the flip side means that can't be true. Cap and trade argues that "supply and demand works!" -- that by raising the price of using carbon, the demand for carbon will fall.
So if liberals were reality based, they would say that they are fine with the economy being vastly slowed by taxes and fees on carbon, because they care about warming in 100 years more than they do about jobs, income, etc today.
On the raising the minimum wage they would admit they are fine with a LOT less people having jobs as long as a few can have higher wages.. Or they would admit that they are absolutely fine with the lowering of productivity and national wealth via high taxes on corporate and personal income, because having everyone's standard of living being generally lowered by redistributing income so they are more government dependent is perfectly in line with their strategy to be a one party socialist state!
The left is well on it's way to achieving it's goals -- inconsistency and force are the two cornerstones of leftward thought.
'via Blog this'
Replace "Krugman" with "liberals" and it just about covers it. It is much worse than this picture -- liberals are consistently inconsistent because they believe that they can take all sorts of actions in the real world and somehow pick and choose the results -- often claiming they will achieve the exact opposite result of what their actions are guaranteed to achieve in the real world. Or, they know what they are doing and simply want to create a dependent voter population that will keep them in power.
Thus, on one hand they claim that the ONLY effect of raising the minimum wage will be to help minimum wage workers by giving them more per hour. However, when the price of something is raised (labor), the demand for it WILL go down -- the only question is how much, which economists attempt to answer by "elasticity". Demand for cigarettes was often used as an example when I was taking economics, however there isn't anything that is perfectly inelastic -- it would have to have no substitutes and all consumers would have to have infinite wealth relative to the price of the commodity -- ie. be ABLE to pay whatever the price rose to.
But I digress. The fast food market is quite elastic and there are lots of substitutes -- technology being the obvious one, less people eating more expensive fast food, etc. Raising the minimum wage always reduces the number of people working -- a win-win for Democrats, since both the minimum wage workers and the unemployed tend to vote Democrat. BUT, the fiction given to the public is that raising the minimum wage will not cause more unemployment, when it is a given that it will.
Which as the chart points out, might mean that people that don't understand economics are fooled -- but the flip side means that can't be true. Cap and trade argues that "supply and demand works!" -- that by raising the price of using carbon, the demand for carbon will fall.
So if liberals were reality based, they would say that they are fine with the economy being vastly slowed by taxes and fees on carbon, because they care about warming in 100 years more than they do about jobs, income, etc today.
On the raising the minimum wage they would admit they are fine with a LOT less people having jobs as long as a few can have higher wages.. Or they would admit that they are absolutely fine with the lowering of productivity and national wealth via high taxes on corporate and personal income, because having everyone's standard of living being generally lowered by redistributing income so they are more government dependent is perfectly in line with their strategy to be a one party socialist state!
The left is well on it's way to achieving it's goals -- inconsistency and force are the two cornerstones of leftward thought.
'via Blog this'
Friday, September 12, 2014
The Healing Power of Beheading in Islam
Beheading infidels: How Allah ‘heals the hearts of believers’ | Human Events:
Since we have now been schooled by BO that ISIS is NOT Islamic, this article is probably beside the point. If they WERE Islamic though, this article would really be helpful to our understanding since it uses the Koran, Sura and Hadith to explain how violence and beheading is pleasing to Muhammad and should be used by his followers to "heal their hearts".
We however know that ISIS is NOT Islamic, because BO has explained that to us -- so why THEY act as they do is still a mystery. Bad day on the links?
BO 666:666 "Thou shalt worship BO and his holy words. Lo, though he driveth through the rough, he will fear not, his weed and his blow (but no heroin) they comfort him, and he will make a table and hang with his personal gay chef for 4 or 5 hours if he needs to chill".
I'm glad we are not up against an Islamic enemy.
'via Blog this'
Since we have now been schooled by BO that ISIS is NOT Islamic, this article is probably beside the point. If they WERE Islamic though, this article would really be helpful to our understanding since it uses the Koran, Sura and Hadith to explain how violence and beheading is pleasing to Muhammad and should be used by his followers to "heal their hearts".
This, then, is the true significance of Koran 9:14-15: “Fight them, Allah will torment them with your hands [mortally wounding and eventually decapitating ‘Amr], humiliate them [pulling his beard], empower you over them [standing atop him], and heal the hearts of the believers, removing the rage from their hearts [at the sight of his decapitated head].”Islam teaches that all the behaviors practiced by ISIS are pleasing -- in fact the Angel Gabriel finds running a rope through a severed head to be quite humorous -- but that is from an ISLAMIC viewpoint.
We however know that ISIS is NOT Islamic, because BO has explained that to us -- so why THEY act as they do is still a mystery. Bad day on the links?
BO 666:666 "Thou shalt worship BO and his holy words. Lo, though he driveth through the rough, he will fear not, his weed and his blow (but no heroin) they comfort him, and he will make a table and hang with his personal gay chef for 4 or 5 hours if he needs to chill".
I'm glad we are not up against an Islamic enemy.
'via Blog this'
The Most Important Historical Fact
Christianity grounded in the historical fact of the resurrection | Human Events:
The whole article is good, but if you have time to just read one paragraph, this is it:
'via Blog this'
The whole article is good, but if you have time to just read one paragraph, this is it:
It’s one thing to suggest that someone would die for an ideology he believes in even without physical evidence; it’s altogether another to contemplate that men would die for something they absolutely knew to be false. For if Jesus Christ had remained in the tomb and had not appeared to them, they likely would have believed their earlier hope had been for naught, but in any case, they wouldn’t have manufactured a mythical story that they had seen him alive when they hadn’t just so they could have the pleasure of dying for nothing. Dwell on that for a moment — seriously.This is the one historical fact of eternal significance. Without it, all of history, past, present and future is a meaningless joke ... a tale, Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, Signifying nothing.
'via Blog this'
Devout Christian Tea Party Mass Killer Arrested
Jihadist Serial Killer? Ho Hum! | Power Line:
Oh, ooops Devout MUSLIM ... non story, nothing to see here, move along.
'via Blog this'
Oh, ooops Devout MUSLIM ... non story, nothing to see here, move along.
'via Blog this'
Not-War, Not-Coalition, Not-Islamic, Not-State
Obama assembles non-coalition to fight not-war against ISIS | Human Events:
Good article. I'm reminded of my "B ZERO" designation for Obama -- The NOT President really showed his stripes this week!
'via Blog this'
Good article. I'm reminded of my "B ZERO" designation for Obama -- The NOT President really showed his stripes this week!
'via Blog this'
Straw War, Slow Surrender
http://www.theonion.com/articles/obama-to-assure-nation-that-isis-campaign-will-be,36898/
We hired a community organizer to be a president and that has been heavily on display the last couple of weeks. The best article I've seen covering the speech is the linked from the Onion: "ISIS Campaign Will Be Drawn-Out Ordeal We’re Used To" One of the rules of the organizer is to "define your opponent" -- so he tries to build the straw man that ISIL is neither Islamic or a State.
As an aside, BO tends to use "ISIL" -- Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant" bs "ISIS" - Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. The general term is ISIS, he persists in using ISIL. Two likely explanations are 1). The "Levant" is much bigger -- Israel, Lebanon, Jordan, Cyprus, Southern Turkey, so maybe he wants to draw attention away from Iraq and Syria, two areas his foreign policy failures are especially glaring 2). As having been a strong supporter of Islamic conquest (eg. Muslim Brotherhood), I suspect he sees "The Levant" as all legitimate Muslim territory, including Israel, so it is natural for him to use that term
In community organizing or politics, especially with a helpful media, defining your opponent is a great thing -- thus we have Tea Party Racists, Republicans against ALL taxes, women, working families, Hispanics, the environment, etc and a host of other solid TP / media arm definitions -- they are false, but when you control the media, the majority can be largely confused. ISIS however, exists outside of our media fishbowl and trying to define them as just another BO straw man only highlights the glaring naivete of this JV president.
Telling your adversary what you WON'T do is foolish -- even if you can't be trusted. BO is already sending in "military advisors", no doubt there are special forces on the ground for at least target designation, so of course the "no troops" statement is a lie from the git go -- which both we and they know by now since his lips were moving. We and they also know that his weasel words will limit his ability to "do what is required" in the unpredictable future -- at least some, besides, he is always a tentative weasel.
Taking things off the table aids nothing but the enemy in the battle -- but it may assuage your political base, and both we and ISIS know that is what BO really cares about . It would better for ISIS to at least worry that we might lob a tactical nuke into Tkrit in the right situation -- a Predator fired nuke would be a good thing to show them, if for no reason but to give them something to think about at bedtime. NOTHING should be "off the table"!
W bore the burden of "going it alone" -- our TP controlled MSM constantly reminded us of this. America was "alone and misled". The ruse required not recognizing Britain a country, but when TP needs to make a false case, reality must suffer. Actual W coalition? 37 nations, 25K troops http://www.history.army.mil/html/books/059/59-3-1/CMH_59-3-1.pdf Want to place any bets on the numbers in the BO Straw Coalition?
It isn't a "war" ... BO ends those. So what is it? Slow Surrender?
'via Blog this'
We hired a community organizer to be a president and that has been heavily on display the last couple of weeks. The best article I've seen covering the speech is the linked from the Onion: "ISIS Campaign Will Be Drawn-Out Ordeal We’re Used To" One of the rules of the organizer is to "define your opponent" -- so he tries to build the straw man that ISIL is neither Islamic or a State.
As an aside, BO tends to use "ISIL" -- Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant" bs "ISIS" - Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. The general term is ISIS, he persists in using ISIL. Two likely explanations are 1). The "Levant" is much bigger -- Israel, Lebanon, Jordan, Cyprus, Southern Turkey, so maybe he wants to draw attention away from Iraq and Syria, two areas his foreign policy failures are especially glaring 2). As having been a strong supporter of Islamic conquest (eg. Muslim Brotherhood), I suspect he sees "The Levant" as all legitimate Muslim territory, including Israel, so it is natural for him to use that term
In community organizing or politics, especially with a helpful media, defining your opponent is a great thing -- thus we have Tea Party Racists, Republicans against ALL taxes, women, working families, Hispanics, the environment, etc and a host of other solid TP / media arm definitions -- they are false, but when you control the media, the majority can be largely confused. ISIS however, exists outside of our media fishbowl and trying to define them as just another BO straw man only highlights the glaring naivete of this JV president.
Telling your adversary what you WON'T do is foolish -- even if you can't be trusted. BO is already sending in "military advisors", no doubt there are special forces on the ground for at least target designation, so of course the "no troops" statement is a lie from the git go -- which both we and they know by now since his lips were moving. We and they also know that his weasel words will limit his ability to "do what is required" in the unpredictable future -- at least some, besides, he is always a tentative weasel.
Taking things off the table aids nothing but the enemy in the battle -- but it may assuage your political base, and both we and ISIS know that is what BO really cares about . It would better for ISIS to at least worry that we might lob a tactical nuke into Tkrit in the right situation -- a Predator fired nuke would be a good thing to show them, if for no reason but to give them something to think about at bedtime. NOTHING should be "off the table"!
W bore the burden of "going it alone" -- our TP controlled MSM constantly reminded us of this. America was "alone and misled". The ruse required not recognizing Britain a country, but when TP needs to make a false case, reality must suffer. Actual W coalition? 37 nations, 25K troops http://www.history.army.mil/html/books/059/59-3-1/CMH_59-3-1.pdf Want to place any bets on the numbers in the BO Straw Coalition?
It isn't a "war" ... BO ends those. So what is it? Slow Surrender?
'via Blog this'
Rapid City, Earliest Snow Record
Summer Snow: Record-Early Snowfall Hits Rapid City, South Dakota; Boulder, Colorado; North Platte, Nebraska - weather.com:
Just a little reporting balance -- if we ever see any record warmth again, I know the media will cover that extremely well !
'via Blog this'
Just a little reporting balance -- if we ever see any record warmth again, I know the media will cover that extremely well !
'via Blog this'
Thursday, September 11, 2014
The Republican Brain
Amazon.com: The Republican Brain: The Science of Why They Deny Science- and Reality (9781118094518): Chris Mooney: Books:
I just ran into this, I suppose I'll have to wait for the price to drop before I decide to read a little humor.
It doesn't take too much to know what this claims. Rewritten just a bit, "Republicans reject the ideological reality that we have completely defined for them, it is like they don't understand the basic facts of Lysenkoism!"
Indeed.
'via Blog this'
I just ran into this, I suppose I'll have to wait for the price to drop before I decide to read a little humor.
It doesn't take too much to know what this claims. Rewritten just a bit, "Republicans reject the ideological reality that we have completely defined for them, it is like they don't understand the basic facts of Lysenkoism!"
Indeed.
'via Blog this'
BO Ended War In Iraq, or He Didn't, His Own Words
Watch to the end. There is nothing new here for readers of this blog, it is a minute and the end convinces any sentient person that this man is not to be trusted AT ALL!
Sorry, Wrong Number
Letter: Holder Aide Accidentally Calls Issa Staff for Help Spinning IRS Scandal:
Human error is a constant in the universe, and even the supposedly brilliant left wing seems to not be immune. In this case it illuminates something we all know to be going on, but have been admonished to not speak of what happens behind the curtain of government.
This is one of those stories that the MSM just doesn't carry because even though it is completely obvious that The Party (TP) now works seamlessly between it's currently elected arm and it's vast unionized resources in the permanent government bureaucracy, the fictional propaganda narrative is that DoJ, IRS, NSA, etc are "non-partisan". Yes, and making money is the farthest thing from the mind of any used car salesman -- he is just there to get you the best car at the lowest price!
So a DoJ staffer erroneously calls up the Republican staff rather than his buddies on the Democrat Elijah Cummings staff to do a little partisan posturing, media spin control ... OOOPS, 3 min hold then "oh, just calling to chat"!
Note that this is NOT the "your side does the same thing" kind of story. The government agencies are 99% populated by union Democrats with a few "enemy Republican appointees" sprinkled in when there is an R in the WH. The minority party simply doesn't get to play ball this way -- not that they might not WANT to if they had the chance, they ARE politicians after all, but when the other team controls all the day to day levers of government, you just don't have the potential to do this.
'via Blog this'
Human error is a constant in the universe, and even the supposedly brilliant left wing seems to not be immune. In this case it illuminates something we all know to be going on, but have been admonished to not speak of what happens behind the curtain of government.
This is one of those stories that the MSM just doesn't carry because even though it is completely obvious that The Party (TP) now works seamlessly between it's currently elected arm and it's vast unionized resources in the permanent government bureaucracy, the fictional propaganda narrative is that DoJ, IRS, NSA, etc are "non-partisan". Yes, and making money is the farthest thing from the mind of any used car salesman -- he is just there to get you the best car at the lowest price!
So a DoJ staffer erroneously calls up the Republican staff rather than his buddies on the Democrat Elijah Cummings staff to do a little partisan posturing, media spin control ... OOOPS, 3 min hold then "oh, just calling to chat"!
Note that this is NOT the "your side does the same thing" kind of story. The government agencies are 99% populated by union Democrats with a few "enemy Republican appointees" sprinkled in when there is an R in the WH. The minority party simply doesn't get to play ball this way -- not that they might not WANT to if they had the chance, they ARE politicians after all, but when the other team controls all the day to day levers of government, you just don't have the potential to do this.
'via Blog this'
Wednesday, September 10, 2014
Bad Magic: Human Freedom vs Abject Dependence on Government
The Magical President doesn’t exist: What the left must really do to defeat the wingnuts - Salon.com:
BO was popular in '08, but I don't think even "the one" broached the kind of 80%+ certainty that the American people had about going to war in Iraq. Oh sure, it was "a lie", but a "lie" also supported by nearly the entire Democrat leadership -- with the exception of BO and Wellstone reporting in from Uranus (or their anus). Of course BO needed a lot of time to even figure out that he is really opposed to ISIS. Yes, Cheney is the only one that has ever been "certain" when viewed from the far left edge of the universe with your head suffering a cranial rectal inversion.
But now? Well now:
Note that "It" won't happen in eight years or even 80! It's an "eternal battle" -- the battle for government to squeeze the last bit of individual motivation and thought out of the last of the masses. Oh, they will tell you it is "the wealthy" that want to prevent "human dignity" ... you know, education, family life, childhood itself", but are we really that foolish? "The Wealthy" ARE The Party! How many Kerry's, Edwards, Dayton's, Kennedys, etc, etc do we need to see before the man in the street understands it?
Who is it that wants to decree what families may and may not do with their children? Who is it that increasingly demands 12-16 years and more of PUBLIC "education" that is much more about state indoctrination than it is about "teaching" anything, especially how to be a free person in a free society? "Childhood itself"? Now there is somewhat of a mystery -- in one way, the left seeks to extend childhood for the entire life -- never leaving the state teat, being regulated and monitored in every movement and action. OTOH, it is THEIR version of "childhood" -- from state mandated and controlled "head start" to state sponsored and controlled daycare, after school programs, summer programs and Youth Corps. Their stated (and directly advertised) battle is to create a nation of "Julia's" or "Pajama Boys" ... perpetual adolescent dependence as the model for a nation.
I find this column to be highly pessimistic from the "progressive" POV. They are so far down the road on their "battle" already -- they own education, the government bureaucracy, law, medicine (BOcare), nearly all of the media -- and as evidenced by their vote on the 1st Amendment, they seek to completely control all political speech 100%. Losing the Senate in '14 would have no effect on their agenda -- BO will rule by executive order as he does now and we are certainly not talking about a veto override capable majority! This is a rather hollow call to lefty arms.
Yes, the polls don't look good right now for the BO state, and I'm sure that is a concern to the ministry of information / education / propaganda ... Herr Goebbels likes to dot all the i's and cross all the t's, but really, the guys over at Salon shouldn't let a few poor poll numbers from the unwashed masses get them so bent out of shape. There is no prospect at all of the evil forces of conservatism being able to make one iota of progress in getting America moving in the next two years.
The BO magic veto pen will insure that the US crawls on on in the left ditch, with not a hint of even a glance toward the roadway far to the right -- no matter what the results of the election. The "eternal battle" isn't even visible from here -- we would have to have a basic understanding that "human freedom" and "abject dependence on a bankrupt government" are not equivalent terms to even begin such a battle.
'via Blog this'
Let’s be clear: There is neither a Democratic nor a progressive consensus on what is to be done there. All we have is a profound skepticism, and I’ll take that over a cynical Cheneyesque certainty, built on lies to the American people. Disagreement, even deadlock, is preferable.You mean to say that the folks of "Hope and CHANGE!", "We are the ones we have been waiting for!", Faux Grecian columns, "this is when the oceans stopped rising", Russian Reset, winning a Nobel prize for winning an election and a host other highly confident items claim that all they ever had was "profound skepticism" and "gridlock is preferable"? Wow, color me skeptical.
BO was popular in '08, but I don't think even "the one" broached the kind of 80%+ certainty that the American people had about going to war in Iraq. Oh sure, it was "a lie", but a "lie" also supported by nearly the entire Democrat leadership -- with the exception of BO and Wellstone reporting in from Uranus (or their anus). Of course BO needed a lot of time to even figure out that he is really opposed to ISIS. Yes, Cheney is the only one that has ever been "certain" when viewed from the far left edge of the universe with your head suffering a cranial rectal inversion.
This political season opens against a backdrop of profound pessimism, captured in an August Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll that found that 71 percent of Americans believe the country is on the wrong track. The president’s approval rating is at an all-time low, but so is that of congressional Republicans. Even worse, the two big stories dominating the end-of-summer headlines – the unrest in Ferguson, Missouri. and the rise of ISIL – only deepen the political gloom, because they reflect two enormous American problems that are coming to seem almost unsolvable: profound and persistent racial injustice, and the shape-shifting chaos that is Iraq.I'll be damned, how did we POSSIBLY get here? Why in '08 it wasn't just the subscribers to the recently minted "Magical President theory", but the giddy mood of the whole MSM and broad swaths of the electorate that had elected a savior -- Washington, Lincoln or FDR -- it was hard to pick which one to compare BO with, and many thought he was far better than any of them. Maybe than ALL of them rolled together!
But now? Well now:
Democrats have two months to make sure this election doesn’t turn out like 2010 did. It’s not about the president right now, and we shouldn’t wait until 2016 for a new magical president. The kind of thoroughgoing change we need won’t happen in eight years, or even 80. It’s an eternal battle, the constant effort to expand the realm of human freedom to everyone, against the constant crusade by the wealthy to ensure that the trappings of human dignity – education, leisure, family life, childhood itself – are reserved for those who can afford to pay for them. The Kochs and their allies are trying to repeal the 20th century. Progressives can’t just suit up for that battle every four years.Got that? "It's not about the president"! Strange that in '06, there was no shortage of articles on "Bush Referendum".
Note that "It" won't happen in eight years or even 80! It's an "eternal battle" -- the battle for government to squeeze the last bit of individual motivation and thought out of the last of the masses. Oh, they will tell you it is "the wealthy" that want to prevent "human dignity" ... you know, education, family life, childhood itself", but are we really that foolish? "The Wealthy" ARE The Party! How many Kerry's, Edwards, Dayton's, Kennedys, etc, etc do we need to see before the man in the street understands it?
Who is it that wants to decree what families may and may not do with their children? Who is it that increasingly demands 12-16 years and more of PUBLIC "education" that is much more about state indoctrination than it is about "teaching" anything, especially how to be a free person in a free society? "Childhood itself"? Now there is somewhat of a mystery -- in one way, the left seeks to extend childhood for the entire life -- never leaving the state teat, being regulated and monitored in every movement and action. OTOH, it is THEIR version of "childhood" -- from state mandated and controlled "head start" to state sponsored and controlled daycare, after school programs, summer programs and Youth Corps. Their stated (and directly advertised) battle is to create a nation of "Julia's" or "Pajama Boys" ... perpetual adolescent dependence as the model for a nation.
I find this column to be highly pessimistic from the "progressive" POV. They are so far down the road on their "battle" already -- they own education, the government bureaucracy, law, medicine (BOcare), nearly all of the media -- and as evidenced by their vote on the 1st Amendment, they seek to completely control all political speech 100%. Losing the Senate in '14 would have no effect on their agenda -- BO will rule by executive order as he does now and we are certainly not talking about a veto override capable majority! This is a rather hollow call to lefty arms.
Yes, the polls don't look good right now for the BO state, and I'm sure that is a concern to the ministry of information / education / propaganda ... Herr Goebbels likes to dot all the i's and cross all the t's, but really, the guys over at Salon shouldn't let a few poor poll numbers from the unwashed masses get them so bent out of shape. There is no prospect at all of the evil forces of conservatism being able to make one iota of progress in getting America moving in the next two years.
The BO magic veto pen will insure that the US crawls on on in the left ditch, with not a hint of even a glance toward the roadway far to the right -- no matter what the results of the election. The "eternal battle" isn't even visible from here -- we would have to have a basic understanding that "human freedom" and "abject dependence on a bankrupt government" are not equivalent terms to even begin such a battle.
'via Blog this'
Something We All Agree On
Glenn Beck Shares Never-Before-Told Story of Personal Abuse After Janay Rice Defends Her Husband | Video | TheBlaze.com:
I graduated in '74, so got basically the standard "Little girls are made of sugar and spice and everything nice" childhood where girls were to be treated specially up until sometime in High School when the "not only are they special, they are absolutely equal in every way" gospel was pounded in as ERA and other efforts gathered steam. Note, I didn't even question it in those days -- my conservatism was ALL post Carter Malaise. Besides, they seemed pretty nice to me anyway, and it was easy to believe they were AT LEAST equal, if not superior since it could be hard to carry on witty conversation with them without the occasional unexplained brain freeze.
It seems that Glenn Beck and virtually all liberals and feminists are in absolute agreement on Ray and Janay Rice, and that in itself is enough to give me pause. What seems to be absolute truth is that punching a woman in your company -- even if she is pushing and punching, is very high on the list of moral sins. Certainly badder than pushing a convenience store clerk around to steal cigars, or even breaking the eye socket of a police officer -- which have been adjudicated in the high court of public opinion as "minding your own business" ... at least while black.
Even further, females that are willing to marry "guys like this" (unlike other crimes, violence against women is not a "behavior", it is like being gay, it is "who you are") are mentally damaged -- they have no public standing in their opinion. They are far from "equal" -- they are 2nd class to no class citizens -- and in similar fashion to the abusers, their willingness to be around these guys defines them, it is an existential condition, not a choice.
If Rice was gay and dating a slightly built male, maybe even engaged to same, would the public court arrive at the same verdict? I have a very strong suspicion the answer would be "no", which leads me to believe that violence against a woman in your company is a final remaining bastion of allowed feminine inferiority. Women are to be treated specially in this case.
As an aside, this does at least break a stereotype that I once learned from a black friend, which went something like "You think black dudes are tough? Ha, tell any brother that his woman is looking for him and is going to give him what for and you will see one scared black dude! Black women are scary fighters!" Goes to show that you can't believe everything a black guy tells you -- but then I guess BO already covered that!
My mind wanders a bit in wondering if the store clerk in Ferguson had been female, would that have made a difference? Even more tantalizing is the idea of the officer having been female -- even if white.
The idea of the "scapegoat" is as old as man himself -- take a perfect goat, kick it, whip it, spit on it, swear at it, and let it go out to the desert to die -- taking "the bad" of the community with it. Christ is the ultimate scapegoat -- taking the sins of the world, yet unlike the symbolic sort, being able to bear and forgive them. Some of us used to say that the most important position on any software project at IBM was the scapegoat -- someone was going to have to be blamed for the inevitable bugs, schedule slips, function forced to be cut, etc -- and one might as well name them in advance so there would be no issues with CYA and blame being ducked.
Humanity has to have scapegoats, and tarring and feathering to run out of the NFL (town) on a rail has a rich American history. Violence against women is bad, doing it on cameral is really bad -- otherwise the outcry would have been in February, we knew he knocked her out. I'm fine with that, I guess we have found something that left and right actually agree on.
'via Blog this'
I graduated in '74, so got basically the standard "Little girls are made of sugar and spice and everything nice" childhood where girls were to be treated specially up until sometime in High School when the "not only are they special, they are absolutely equal in every way" gospel was pounded in as ERA and other efforts gathered steam. Note, I didn't even question it in those days -- my conservatism was ALL post Carter Malaise. Besides, they seemed pretty nice to me anyway, and it was easy to believe they were AT LEAST equal, if not superior since it could be hard to carry on witty conversation with them without the occasional unexplained brain freeze.
It seems that Glenn Beck and virtually all liberals and feminists are in absolute agreement on Ray and Janay Rice, and that in itself is enough to give me pause. What seems to be absolute truth is that punching a woman in your company -- even if she is pushing and punching, is very high on the list of moral sins. Certainly badder than pushing a convenience store clerk around to steal cigars, or even breaking the eye socket of a police officer -- which have been adjudicated in the high court of public opinion as "minding your own business" ... at least while black.
Even further, females that are willing to marry "guys like this" (unlike other crimes, violence against women is not a "behavior", it is like being gay, it is "who you are") are mentally damaged -- they have no public standing in their opinion. They are far from "equal" -- they are 2nd class to no class citizens -- and in similar fashion to the abusers, their willingness to be around these guys defines them, it is an existential condition, not a choice.
If Rice was gay and dating a slightly built male, maybe even engaged to same, would the public court arrive at the same verdict? I have a very strong suspicion the answer would be "no", which leads me to believe that violence against a woman in your company is a final remaining bastion of allowed feminine inferiority. Women are to be treated specially in this case.
As an aside, this does at least break a stereotype that I once learned from a black friend, which went something like "You think black dudes are tough? Ha, tell any brother that his woman is looking for him and is going to give him what for and you will see one scared black dude! Black women are scary fighters!" Goes to show that you can't believe everything a black guy tells you -- but then I guess BO already covered that!
My mind wanders a bit in wondering if the store clerk in Ferguson had been female, would that have made a difference? Even more tantalizing is the idea of the officer having been female -- even if white.
The idea of the "scapegoat" is as old as man himself -- take a perfect goat, kick it, whip it, spit on it, swear at it, and let it go out to the desert to die -- taking "the bad" of the community with it. Christ is the ultimate scapegoat -- taking the sins of the world, yet unlike the symbolic sort, being able to bear and forgive them. Some of us used to say that the most important position on any software project at IBM was the scapegoat -- someone was going to have to be blamed for the inevitable bugs, schedule slips, function forced to be cut, etc -- and one might as well name them in advance so there would be no issues with CYA and blame being ducked.
Humanity has to have scapegoats, and tarring and feathering to run out of the NFL (town) on a rail has a rich American history. Violence against women is bad, doing it on cameral is really bad -- otherwise the outcry would have been in February, we knew he knocked her out. I'm fine with that, I guess we have found something that left and right actually agree on.
'via Blog this'
Tuesday, September 09, 2014
Income Inequality, Working Poor, Wealthy, The Party
This is a topic that I run into in my personal life, and one which I see articles on that claim to be causes, but are actually effects. "Jobs moved overseas" is a great example -- companies don't move jobs overseas because they somehow "hate American workers", they move them there because American workers have become non-competitive due to policies of the government or decisions that the workers have made.
I suspect this topic will take more than one blog post, and I'll be looking for articles in support, but I'd like to get a start at the big picture framework -- my order or precedence may well change as I move through the topic (sometimes I change my blog posts after they have been posted).
My top level simple summary is that we have vast income inequality and working poor because runaway consumption fueled by debt and orchestrated by politicians seeking to buy votes from an ever larger dependent class creates few winners and many losers.
Those that provide the consumables, the credit (usually backed and/or aided by the government in one way or another) and orchestrate the politically favored wealth transfers become wealthy, while those that borrow and consume become poor -- so poor that even though they typically have a house, a car, smartphones, flat screen TV, internet, eat out regularly, gamble, etc, they are so cash strapped that they have to resort to payday loans, food pantries, etc to cover the most basic of needs at times.
They are marketed and sold a lifestyle that they are supposed to be "entitled to", taught nothing of delayed gratification and thrift, then further lied to with assurances that their problems are due to "the wealthy", "the 1%", etc. and will be "solved" by some version of government transfer payments.
That is the simple sound-bite answer, now for a tiny bit more depth on specifically how we got here.
I suspect this topic will take more than one blog post, and I'll be looking for articles in support, but I'd like to get a start at the big picture framework -- my order or precedence may well change as I move through the topic (sometimes I change my blog posts after they have been posted).
My top level simple summary is that we have vast income inequality and working poor because runaway consumption fueled by debt and orchestrated by politicians seeking to buy votes from an ever larger dependent class creates few winners and many losers.
Those that provide the consumables, the credit (usually backed and/or aided by the government in one way or another) and orchestrate the politically favored wealth transfers become wealthy, while those that borrow and consume become poor -- so poor that even though they typically have a house, a car, smartphones, flat screen TV, internet, eat out regularly, gamble, etc, they are so cash strapped that they have to resort to payday loans, food pantries, etc to cover the most basic of needs at times.
They are marketed and sold a lifestyle that they are supposed to be "entitled to", taught nothing of delayed gratification and thrift, then further lied to with assurances that their problems are due to "the wealthy", "the 1%", etc. and will be "solved" by some version of government transfer payments.
That is the simple sound-bite answer, now for a tiny bit more depth on specifically how we got here.
- The Consumer Society -- During the latter half of the 20th century, America became a country based on CONSUMPTION. There are lots of things a country can be focused on -- excellence, personal responsibility, independence, learning, beauty, cleanliness, godliness, future generations, thrift, competitiveness ... the list is endless, but the US managed to make a very clear choice, and with the advent of radio, TV and finally the internet, this choice became so ubiquitous that most Americans are like fish in water relative to it -- not aware they are wet. We used to be a nation of fiercely independent hard workers with pride in quality output, now we are a nation of "consumers".
Entertainment is part of that consumption. Americans have next to zero attention span these days, which makes any sort of understanding of any issue by any significant number of them to be nearly impossible. The vast bulk of people have arrived at the state where life involves constant entertainment -- sports, music, TV, web surfing, smart phones, etc, all of which is laced with sophisticated advertising telling them to buy, buy, buy. "Work" if they do it, is a nasty necessity where many of them want to stay plugged in to at least music, if not continued web surfing or other distractions while they bide their time at a job that they see as a "necessary evil". Working is seen as an obstacle to constant entertainment and consumption.
Our nation is focused on a vicious cycle of advertising laced entertainment encouraging more buying that consumes more of the life of the "consumer" -- Americans have largely been converted to 24x7 consuming devices rather than people. - Credit -- Shakespeare says "Neither a borrower or a lender be, For loan oft loses both itself and friend, And borrowing dulls the edge of husbandry". America is sad proof of that maxim, and our knowledge of "husbandry", or wise use of resources, is so dull as to be non-existent. Not only have we been told to consume, consume, consume, but the primary means for that consumption is borrow, borrow, borrow -- as individuals and as a nation we are awash in debt and show no signs of any ability to extricate ourselves.
Indeed, given the consumptive base of the economy, it is hard for most to even visualize an alternative. Mortgage, auto, consumer debt always flirt with new all-time highs, and Americans borrowing and spending more is considered "good news". Local, state and federal government run up ever more massive debt in numbers too big to even really fathom -- hundreds of billions a year, trillions a year, 17 trillion in debt, 60 trillion in unfunded liabilities for FICA, Medicare, and now BOcare. The total red ink hemorrhages to levels where it makes us sick to even consider it -- so we don't, and "nobody can explain" why we have "income inequality" and "working poor".
The most basic reason is because the folks providing the consumables and the credit to the "consumers" build wealth, while the consumers get "stuff" (soon worthless) and debt. Anyone who consumes all they make are effectively "the working poor", those that consume MORE than they make (debt) are even poorer. No matter how high the income, they are a paycheck away from financial disaster, and no matter how big their home, shiny their car, large their TV, etc, they are actually poor. The typical dual income "good job" US family is a microcosm of how our government operates -- over extended with ever ballooning payments due.
- Government -- The big daddy in all this is bloated government at all levels. Government is an EXPENSE. It produces nothing on it's own, and right now the layers of government in the US are taking something around 40% of our GDP and rising. Most of our population has consumed itself into being working poor, and the government that is somehow supposed to "fix this" is poor as well.
Ah you say, the government is the "only friend of the average American". Well, yes if you consider the pimp, the pusher and the loan shark to be "friends" of those that believe themselves in "need" of those services. In fact, when I was watching TV as a child in the '60s Dragnet, Streets of San Francisco and such often arrested guys "running the numbers" -- today, the states "run the numbers" in lotteries as one more way to fleece their citizens.
The primary business of government in the US today is the transfer of payments from the pockets of one set of people (mostly the young) to another set of people (mostly the old) -- entitlements are 75%+ of current US government "spending" -- which is essentially calling what Jessie James and Billy the Kid did "spending" rather than stealing. Stealing is taking money from one person by force and allowing another person to decide what to do with it. The purpose of government transfers is to buy votes for the ruling party (TP "The Party, Democrat), so the allocation of the funds is random to completely adverse to actual productivity. Productivity which would build capital, lower prices and provide the hope of an actually better future is replaced by an economy of buying more power for TP.
The price of everything purchased is increased by government -- regulations, fees, taxes, licenses, permits ... each is a cost and each is added to the cost of the product. One of the larger lies of government is the constant direct or indirect promise of a "free lunch" -- as in raising the minimum wage. When the wage is increased, the price of the product goes up, labor is reduced by automation or less service, or the production moves offshore ... most likely some combination of all three.
What about the businessman making less profit? Very unlikely -- most small businesses are largely based on the idea of building up equity in a going concern. The dream that they can work hard, not take much income out, plow profits back into improving the business and build a better future. Government is certainly fine with killing that dream and putting another entrepreneur out of business ('you didn't build that"), but for those that had the gumption to go into business in the first place, it is a hard dream to kill -- they will try to raise the prices or increase efficiency.
It works no better for the large business. Increase the cost of production in the US, tax profit, etc and first the jobs leave the US, and eventually the entire business (see Burger King moving to Canada, Medtronic and many others). The government policies make the US a poor place to invest, so the business goes elsewhere and the US has less jobs. Another win for TP since DEPENDENCE ON GOVERNMENT is what the TP agenda is all about!
Prior to FDR, a common view of financial life for a person in the US was "work hard, spend less than you make, and invest the difference in something that goes up in value". Such a view is likely to create largely successful people and a largely successful nation over time, which makes it a hated view for TP. TP grows in power by the creation of ever more dependence and resentment in a greater and greater percentage of the population. That is their bread and butter in building their majority and power.
Replacing "work hard, control spending and invest wisely" with "join a union, spend everything you make, and the government will take care of you when you are old" was and is the core brilliance of TP in gaining power. As unions and government priced the American worker out of the world market with ever higher wages, more benefits and more restrictive work rules, TP faced a challenge. Their solution has been brilliant -- ever increasing unemployment benefits, re-training payments, "disability" payments and out and out income support for less and less output (Earned Income Credit). Over 50% of our population is now receiving a government payment of one sort or another -- the TP voting bloc is ever more secure.
I see those three legs of the stool of dependence, debt, poverty and eventual economic collapse as being the main aspects that need to be understood in approximately that order -- one could argue that government is #1, and that 1 and 2 are EFFECTS of the designs of TP as well, I'm not really that concerned about the order, because all three legs have to be basically repudiated for the nation to move forward, and they are all very much linked ... and largely unknown to the average constantly entertained "consumer", more and more afraid and "bitterly clinging" to the supposed safety promised by their keepers -- TP, and it's wealthy elite.
Who and where are "the wealthy" in all of this? The favorite bogymen of TP? In general, they are quite happy members of TP -- unless you are a VERY brave wealthy person, you nearly have to be lest the IRS, Environmental Protection Agency, OSHA, one of the myriad of anti-discrimination agencies, or some other in the alphabet soup of TP enforcers takes you down -- HARD! So the Gates, Buffets, lawyers, finance and entertainment types play the TP game -- let "the marks", the consumer debtors believe that TP is somehow "hard on the rich" if it makes them feel better. There are only 1% of them anyway ... they have control of education, the media and largely the political discourse except for FOX news, talk radio and some renegade bloggers, so it is very easy to control the story line that the typical low information voter is indoctrinated with.
The way out of this morass is simple, however the hole that has been dug is massive. As individuals and as a nation we need to work hard, consume less than we make and invest the difference in things that go up in value. At a basic level, I believe we all know this -- it is one of the reasons that the constant distraction of the media machine is so critical to the continued power of TP.
TP and it's supporters will naturally scream "well, EVERYONE CAN'T do this" ... Indeed. Much as the old joke of the two folks facing a bear when one guy starts putting on tennis shoes. The other says "You don't really think you can outrun that bear do you?" The guy with the tennis shoes says "I don't have to outrun the bear, only you!"
How cruel you say. Indeed, it is a joke of course, but the message is that winners and losers are inevitable. Right now TP and the 1% are the ever increasing winners and the 99% are being eaten by the bear. Break the stranglehold of TP, consumption and debt, and something like 80-90% of the population and the nation as a whole become far wealthier, the future begins to look like prospects of ever increasing wealth, and the US becomes ever more competitive against "the bears" on the world stage. The BIG loser is TP and the current 1% -- who will be replaced by a different set of 1, 10, 20, 30%ers with far more wealth than the current concentration enjoys.
Ah, but what about "the bottom"? As Jesus said "the poor will always be with us", BUT, rather than 40, 50% and much more of the population living from hand to mouth and demanding help from TP and it's minions, 10 or 20% will still be at food pantries and needing support -- there will just be a lot more REAL resources (not borrowed) to provide them with true basics -- not continued consumption and dulling mindless entertainment to be "consumed".
Much like what it used to mean to "grow up", being an adult in a non-TP America would mean focusing on responsibilities vs "rights". We have lost our way, but the way out is actually far more meaningful and conducive to human happiness and growth than the false narrative that has been sold to most of us by TP in it's drive to destroy the fabric of America to be replaced with their own raw power.
The way out of this morass is simple, however the hole that has been dug is massive. As individuals and as a nation we need to work hard, consume less than we make and invest the difference in things that go up in value. At a basic level, I believe we all know this -- it is one of the reasons that the constant distraction of the media machine is so critical to the continued power of TP.
TP and it's supporters will naturally scream "well, EVERYONE CAN'T do this" ... Indeed. Much as the old joke of the two folks facing a bear when one guy starts putting on tennis shoes. The other says "You don't really think you can outrun that bear do you?" The guy with the tennis shoes says "I don't have to outrun the bear, only you!"
How cruel you say. Indeed, it is a joke of course, but the message is that winners and losers are inevitable. Right now TP and the 1% are the ever increasing winners and the 99% are being eaten by the bear. Break the stranglehold of TP, consumption and debt, and something like 80-90% of the population and the nation as a whole become far wealthier, the future begins to look like prospects of ever increasing wealth, and the US becomes ever more competitive against "the bears" on the world stage. The BIG loser is TP and the current 1% -- who will be replaced by a different set of 1, 10, 20, 30%ers with far more wealth than the current concentration enjoys.
Ah, but what about "the bottom"? As Jesus said "the poor will always be with us", BUT, rather than 40, 50% and much more of the population living from hand to mouth and demanding help from TP and it's minions, 10 or 20% will still be at food pantries and needing support -- there will just be a lot more REAL resources (not borrowed) to provide them with true basics -- not continued consumption and dulling mindless entertainment to be "consumed".
Much like what it used to mean to "grow up", being an adult in a non-TP America would mean focusing on responsibilities vs "rights". We have lost our way, but the way out is actually far more meaningful and conducive to human happiness and growth than the false narrative that has been sold to most of us by TP in it's drive to destroy the fabric of America to be replaced with their own raw power.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)