Iraq vs Iran, Democrats Have Consequences

The deep meaning of Ben Rhodes | Power Line:

During most of the '00s we got to listen to endless discussion about "Bush lied", his (or Cheney's) supposedly deep and dark motives for the "lies" -- money for Halliburton, they planned to kill W's daddy, neoconservative delusions, etc, etc. Everything was "false pretenses", and of course Saddam was a great guy that we would be much better off to still have torturing and killing dissidents.

In the late '70s, Jimmuh Carter lost Iran in plain site. Since he was a D, that was "inevitable" to the extent the MSM cared to cover it at all. The left likes to make the establishment of Israel as the source of "Islamic extremism", but the loss of Iran is a far more proximate genesis. Democrats never screw up, so it can't be that.

If and when an Iranian sourced nuke explodes somewhere in the world, we can rest assured that it will NOT be the fault of BO! Either there will be a close proximity R to take the blame, or some R in the past (possibly W), or the blame will go back to the creation of Israel -- or maybe just "religion". Only positive causality ever accrues to Ds ... which tends to make one wonder if they ever really "cause" anything after enough years have passed! I mean, FDR isn't responsible for problems with FICA is he?

Here is a nice concise summary of how BO misled us on Iran. When that bomb blows up, we will know that Jimmuh's 2nd and 3rd terms really did have some results beyond just the destruction of the Constitution, the US economy and the conversion of a once great nation into BOistan.

The strategic goal of the President, Doran says, was to end the conflict with Iran in order to extricate the US from the Middle East and make Iran part of the “security architecture of the region.” To do this, he misrepresented not only what was in the deal itself, but everything around it. 

Doran identified five components of the deception: 

Conjuring moderates within the Iranian government. This created a false moral equivalence between those opposed to deal in the US and Iranian hardliners, as well as a false sense of security about the concessions the US has made. 

Falsifying the chronology of negotiations, which started prior to Rouhani’s assuming office. 

Erasing US concessions. 

Hiding the regional cost, in particular with respect to Syria. Rhodes, Doran argues, tried to prevent people from connecting Obama’s Syria policy to his Iran policy (as Doran correctly identified over a year ago). 

Blaming the US’s Sunni Muslim allies as well as Prime Minister Netanyahu.
Finally, Doran points out that even today, we still don’t know the full terms of the deal.

BO is a D ... "misleading" is simply "convincing the foolish to follow him" from the MSM point of view. Nobody cares -- when it goes "blindingly boom" it won't be his fault.


'via Blog this'

Constitutional Convention of the States (Placeholder)

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/05/america_the_founders_dream_and_the_nightmare_of_decline.html

Mostly just linking this so I have it for reference -- not bad, but not top grade in my book.

I was struck by the fact that the men who gathered in Philadelphia in 1776 and 1787, while knowledgeable about history, understood human nature. That there are two driving forces in mankind: 1) survival and 2) the insatiable need for some to dominate and control others.

If I was to distill human drives to two items, I'd pick love and power. Under love, there are all sorts of things -- happiness, comfort, sex, family, security. Under "power" is money, possessions, political power, fame, etc.

The easiest course to assume this power was to promise, in return for the support of the people to overturn the existing order, that the state through a new ruling class would provide cradle-to-grave economic security. Thus, a Faustian bargain encompassing the desire by the majority for ease of survival and others for the need to rule would be entered into. In the case of Russia, Italy and Germany, this bargain resulted in the ascension to power of megalomaniacs who destroyed their nations and brought about the near destruction of a continent.

 The age old tradeoff of the sheep -- give up your freedom to be fed and cared for, BUT do your masters REALLY care?

America is living out the scenario the Founders feared, as they knew whatever framework they created would be viable only as long as the citizenry remained vigilant, informed and a just and moral people. Anticipating that at some point in history what is happening today would occur, these men provided a mechanism within the Constitution to peacefully change course and return power to the people if the American people choose to do so.

What he is talking about is a Constitutional Convention of the states -- where 2/3 of the states would have already signed up for the agenda. I don't know much about it, apparently "The Liberty Amendments" is a book that covers this potential.

More reading!

Prager #NeverTrump, NR, Sin

#NeverTrump Wrong: Beat Hillary Clinton | National Review:

The fact that NR published this column is the MOST important point here. True conservatives believe in diversity of thought, and the center of the #NeverTrump movement being willing to publish a strong dissenting voice is far more than what we commonly see from the left. Actions speak louder than words.

My BIGGEST concern with #NeverTrump is just that -- I see the tendencies of anger and ostracization of disagreeing voices from both Trump and #NeverTrump. I'm less concerned about the Trump people -- they never said they supported him "because he was a Republican", or even  "because they are conservatives", but rather only because he was Trump. The #NeverTrumpers however like to hold up their conservative principles at bit like Scribes and Pharisees -- allowing diversity of thought is supposed one of those principles, and it is GREAT to see this action from NR.

I deeply respect Dennis Prager, and I agree with his decision to vote for Trump as the best chance of defeating Hillary. I do not agree with the core of his logic as to why, for religious reasons.

... Because circumstances almost always determine what is moral — even for religious people such as myself who believe in moral absolutes. That’s why dropping atom bombs on Japan was moral. The circumstances — ending a war that would take millions of more lives — made moral what under other circumstances would be immoral.

We don't have the power to declare "circumstances almost always determine what is moral". God has that power -- and in the Old Testament, he declares genocide moral in some cases and not others, and since he is sovereign, that is his declaration to make. From this point in history, we can understand that genocide has the result of removing a portion of the gene pool, knowledge the founders of abortion clearly had as they intended to remove "undesirables", knowledge we have forgotten as we abort millions, have smaller families, and focus on things like gay "marriage". God doesn't extend the power of situational morality to us -- however, we die when we don't propagate our race / culture.

Prager is Jewish, so the issue of Grace and forgiveness is less clear than it is for a Christian. Man has free will -- apparently he always did, since he chose evil in the garden. Free will means that we sometimes overtly choose to sin and sometimes sin when we believe that we made "the right situational choice".

Certainly we make choices based on context, but at least Christians need not declare mass murder to be "situationally moral" to bomb Hiroshima.  Would you purposely allow one person to die to save 10? How about a million to save a billion? These are questions beyond human moral reasoning, thus killing is declared to be sin. (We aren't going into capitol punishment, self defense, police/military today ...) Sometimes we trust God to forgive us if we choose poorly.

Overt on purpose sin is always an issue -- but unfortunately it is way too common for all, but typically along the lines of "I yelled at the SOB in line again", "I took the Lord's name in vain again" .... etc, rather than "I killed 200K people with an A-bomb".

I think the quality of some of the names on the #NeverTrump list has spooked Dennis a bit. All those names put their pants on one leg at a time, and my guess is that when NR came up with the whole deal, they ASSUMED that they would prevent the nomination of Trump. They guessed wrong and now their character prevents their change of mind -- my guess is that many of them will do what is right in the voting booth and vote for Trump.

Voting for Trump should NOT be compared with bombing Hiroshima or even becoming a Nazi mistress in order to save Jewish lives. (I'm surprised that Dennis followed that road) It is more akin to attending a funeral that might be good for you in business and one for some old lady from your church that you "feel you should attend". I say let the old lady rest in peace without guilt.

Besides, voting for the fascist with opposition is at least as good as Prager's 9 reasons ;-) Nothing like a little hubris on a nice day that I'm struggling to get a Chinese camera configured!

'via Blog this

Living "As If", Socrates, Plato, Sinatra, Shirley

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/435638/transgender-identity-biology-gender-social-construct-anatomy-binary

The article is on transgender and the basic conclusion is that there are tremendous conflicts about what the whole political transgender movement is, or even wants to be. That isn't what this post is about, the following paragraph struck me:

Maybe, however, this transgender person means that he wishes to live as if he were a woman, rather than to be a woman. Nonetheless, living as if one is a woman is not the same as being a woman, which is what gender identity is taken to mean. Living “as if” one is a woman appears to conflict with the idea that one’s gender is determined by one’s deepest self-perception. Surely the very concept of identity is what one is, not what one pretends or wishes to be.

The core of religions, cultures,  gangs, cults, groups, marriages, etc is simply "living as if" much of the time at least. If we take that paragraph as gospel, we are doomed to forever be completely disconnected "identities", fated to be alone.

Animals are driven by instinct to perform instinctual behaviors. Man is blessed and cursed with consciousness, reason and will, which allows us to CHOOSE what emotions, impulses, stimulus, etc we will seek and how we will react to what happens in our lives. For animals, doing and being are always one.

The base of this question is one of the oldest of religion and philosophy, What is man?  What does it mean to be human? The old joke that Socrates said "To be is to do", Plato said, "To do is to be", but Sinatra is the greatest philosopher, "To, be, do be, do!"

Grace or commitment? Are you saved by Grace, or are you saved by "giving your life to God"?

I'm not attempting to answer these questions today -- nor at the moment am I even searching my blog and linking to some of my and others opinions on them. What I AM doing is pointing out that simply stating that "Surely the very concept of identity is what one is, not what one pretends or wishes to be" is no reason to call someone Shirley! (and YES, I understand that "fixed gender" is the conservative position and variable gender is the liberal position ... this is about thought, not gender other than a jumping off point).

"We are what we are" vs "You can be whatever you want to be"! To a large extent, that is the greatest personal question and drives pretty much all political thought. Any person of thought knows that there are elements of both in all our lives.  As a Christian, we are what God created us to be  (male or female being part of that), and if we submit to his will, we will perfectly fit with and DO what is his will is for our lives, and therefore be temporally and eternally divinely fulfilled.

To be "liberal" means that there is no created order and personal choices about "being and doing" are completely open to individual and state interpretations defined by power. Might is right, because there is no higher authority. There is no fixed reality, and "we" are only temporary physical creatures, nothing else.

To be "conservative" means that the universe is ordered and intelligible. Man and everything else is here for a transcendent reason. The problem of life and culture is accepting (through revelation), or searching for that reason and then conforming our "lower selves" (the animal part) to that purpose. Each person is eternally "more than this world", and we live by transcendent values above the physical and animal world.

"Being fruitful and multiplying" is a core purpose in religion, as well as in a naturalistic / deistic evolutionary view. I find it is no accident that abortion, gay issues and transgender are at the forefront of the "culture wars". Although our current overlords try to prevent even the most cursory of thought beyond the mere nominalist, the "there, there", the spiritual, keeps showing through.

Without the perspective of the eternal, even laughter becomes difficult. Without light there is no dark, and without the serious and ultimate, there is no true humor.

The very least the liberals could do is to stop calling us Shirley!

Stop The "Johnson" Talk!, Sheep, Fools and Tools

Gary Johnson & Libertarian Party -- Conservatives, Beware | National Review:

It is hard to imagine that anyone that is not simply "protesting" would vote for Johnson. He has no chance of winning, and as I've mentioned before, I'd be unsurprised to see the "Libertarians" pick someone else anyway. My answer is that libertarians just want legal drugs and hookers at heart.

The article is a little on the long side, I think a couple of things summarize it rather well.

Johnson inherited a debt of $1.8 billion and left a debt of $4.6 billion, a rate of increase unmatched by the 22 governors in either party who have filed for presidential primaries in the past two decades, with the exception of Governor Tom Vilsack (D., Iowa) in 2007. During every year that Johnson, as he says, balanced the budget, he added to the debt.

So much for "small government".

Want to know who to blame for BOcare? Libertarians in MN.

... Al Franken beat Norm Coleman by 215 votes, with the Libertarian party netting 13,916 votes for a candidate focused on economic issues, particularly drilling. A little more than a year later, Obamacare passed with 60 votes, Franken providing the 60th. With public funds and a professional ground game diverting votes, who knows what Congress might pass?  

As Libertarian-party activists like to say, don’t vote for the lesser evil. If you want a libertarian, please consider writing in Janice Rogers Brown or Penn Jillette. If you want someone who isn’t a barbarian, please consider Mitch Daniels. By all means, give up on this year’s presidential race if you must, but please don’t throw away 2020.

The basic Libertarian arguments are:

1. There is NO DIFFERENCE between the other two parties!!!!
2. Everyone who votes for the two political parties is a "sheep, fool, tool, etc" 
3. Libertarians are not cranks! Quit saying they are cranks! ... you sheep, fools, tools ... 
4. Voting "your heart" is completely honorable, can't hurt anything, and is NOT a "wasted vote" ... see #1. It's the political equivalent of leaving your wife and 5 kids for "love" ... ya just gotta do it!

Like "liberals", libertarians tend to have a rosy vision of "something" in their heads that is just wonderful and "is GOING to happen SOMEDAY" -- so looking at things like actual track records and actual results of voting for unicorns is not what they are about.

But if you are NOT a libertarian or liberal, please, no "Johnson talk", it is obscene! You sheep, fools and tools!


'via Blog this'

The Face Of The Ubermensch?

Obama Appoints Transgender Person To Advisory Faith Council - Breitbart:

When Nietzsche decided god was dead, he realized that new "myths" would be required for mankind to function.  I look at this face and think of Helen of Troy, the woman over whom the Trojan War was fought in Homer -- "The face that launched a thousand ships".

That is "Barbara" Satin, a "woman" whom BO appointed to the President's Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships.

I believe that I shall remember that face as "The face that launched millions of men into the bathrooms and locker rooms of our wives, daughters and granddaughters".

From reading Nietzsche, I know his "Ubermensch" ( "Superman", maker of myths) was imagined to be more like Hitler -- and Hitler considered himself a "post god, god", much as BO does.

We have forgotten all the myths -- Icarus, Prometheus, Pandora. We are certain we can strike down the "old" and "something wonderful" will this way come.

Indeed, Ideas DO have consequences!

'via Blog this'

America Never Great, Is BOistan Great?

‘America Was Never Great’ Hat Leads to Death Threats - The New York Times:

The NY Times naturally presents this as a "free speech" issue. The woman has received some "threats on the internet" -- ho hum.  Not supporting gay "marriage", men in women's bathrooms or saying "all lives matter" is good enough to get one at least internet death threats in this time of incivility, boycotts, and loss of jobs for non-PC speech. Meanwhile our tender college students demand to not even hear the name "Trump", nor see it chalked on sidewalks.

The pictured young woman expects to graduate in a couple of weeks and is seeking a career in media,  I know it is the most egregious of cynicism to even suggest that wearing such a hat and getting covered in the NY Times might be an asset to such a career.

She said she was set to graduate in two weeks with a degree in media studies from the College of Staten Island and wanted to pursue a career in music, radio, social media or journalism. She has already started looking for jobs in those fields.
As for the custom-made cap, Ms. Lake said she had ordered only one but planned to buy many more.

We know of the long list of terrible sins against the secular god of Political Correctness that may not be uttered or even alluded to lest someone be offended. But how WOULD someone have a "nation" these days? Back in 2008, Michelle Obama was for the first time "proud of America" -- but only because she saw it stepping up to be "Fundamentally Changed".

It has been, and now we live in BOistan -- and nobody ought take offense at a hat saying that "America was Never Great".  They may have fought for that never great nation, possibly have been wounded and still bear many scars, but their view is wrong and to be offended by such a hat is WAY outside the bounds of what is now allowable in this territory.

There is  LOTS of right to take offense at a Confederate Flag, somebody saying "All Lives Matter", a person objecting to a man in a wig and a dress (or apparently just "feeling girlish")  entering a woman's changing room with their 12 year old daughter however -- in fact, the Totalitarian State of BOistan may well prosecute for "Hate Speech" if they step out of line and transgress these disallowed types of speech.

Yes, Trump has all sorts of flaws, but look at the hat and read the article.

This election is about "Is BOistan Great"?

 If you vote for Hildebeast, or stay home, you are voting for speech like this blog to suppressed.

In BOistan as advanced by the Hildebeast, there will soon no longer be dissension -- we are RAPIDLY getting to the point where all MUST agree with whatever edicts the head of "The Party" chooses to hand down, and the "Bitter Clingers" will shut up or disappear!

'via Blog this'

Better A Fascist With Opposition

This is how fascism comes to America - The Washington Post:

In a world with no such thing as "truth", definitions for words, especially incendary ones becomes very problematic. I and Thomas Sowell cover the "fascist" term here.  At the high level:

Communism -- The State owns everything, nobody has any "net worth" since there is no private property.

Socialism -- The State owns most of the means of production, but people have SOME private property at the pleasure of the State -- it makes things "equal" as it and it's voting blocks see fit.

Fascism -- Crony Capitalism / Socialism mix. The State has at least near dictatorial control as in Communism and Socialism, but it keeps "private" industry to be blamed when there are economic problems. All totalitarian states use "scapegoating" since the state is NEVER "the problem", Fascists tend to use this the most.

Capitalism -- An attempt to reduce the government to "referee only". Economics is intended to be free and under private control.


We then have the "Hitler Factor". Even though "Nazi" stood for National SOCIALIST, we were fighting on the same side as Communists (although they ALSO called themselves "Socialists"), so "Fascist" was selected as the appropriate term -- and since Communists are certainly "left", Fascists were made to be "right" -- I cover this here.  While Hitler killed 6 million Jews, the communist / socialists in the USSR, China, Cambodia, etc killed over 100 million -- STATISM KILLS, in this country, 60 million babies so far as well as ever increasing suicides.

The whole linked article has been written about BO multiple times -- the Grecian columns, the cheering masses, the vacuous "Hope and Change", the BO "symbol", the narcissism -- all of it there. The "we are the people we have been waiting for". We already had 8 years of Fascism.

And he came through. He trampled the Constitution, he used the IRS to prosecute his enemies, he opened the borders, he purchased GM and then "sold it back" under effective government control,  he unilaterally declared that men can be in women's bathrooms and locker rooms, he spent unappropriated money on BOcare  -- he did what he wanted and ignored the Constitution and any feelings that the "Bitter Clingers" might have.

Of course Kagan (author of the column) LIKED BO's brand of lawless state control, so he saw no problem with BO being a Fascist. Interestingly, the Republican Establishment is more concerned with Trump than they were with BO. They have been "Statist Lite" -- effectively doing what the columnist suggests and now worries about with Trump:

In such an environment, every political figure confronts a stark choice: Get right with the leader and his mass following or get run over. The human race in such circumstances breaks down into predictable categories — and democratic politicians are the most predictable. There are those whose ambition leads them to jump on the bandwagon.

A solid description of the "Tea Party" vs the "establishment" Boehner, McConnel and Ryan. The establishment Republicans crawled on the bandwagon and licked BO's boots, while some of the Tea Party, Ted Cruz being an example, did not. The Tea Party never really developed a coherent position beyond they didn't enjoy the idea that they were just a speed bump for his most odoriferous excellency BO!  For not jumping on the bandwagon, they were naturally labeled "racist" by guys like Kagan .... in his mind, there was simply to other reason to fail to kneel before the stench of BO!

So we already crossed the Fascist rubicon, and it is now certain that either Trump or Hildebeast will attempt to be as lawless as BO. Hildebeast has already promised to ignore the Constitution and attack the 2nd amendment with executive action. She will clearly appoint SCOTUS judges that will rubber stamp what she does and continue to shred the Constitution on their own.

One thing seems very clear. The DC and MSM opposition to Trump will be GIGANTIC, while Hildebeast will be given the same sort of free ride that BO has received. The Democrats and Republican Establishment will be looking to make him a one-term wonder as well as the entire MSM, education, etc.

I could go on, but for that reason alone, the choice of Trump is HUGELY important vs Hildebeast. A Fascist with strong opposition is going to be very limited in what mischief they can accomplish to the negative -- and MAYBE, just MAYBE, they might be channeled to doing some good.

Yes, I know, that is probably rose colored glasses, but it is hard to ALWAYS be as negative as these times call for, and it is a BEAUTIFUL day here on my deck!

'via Blog this

Fragmented Society, Brooks Slides More Statist

The Fragmented Society - The New York Times:

David Brooks of the NY Times is a great example of what "The Party" (TP-D) believes a "conservative" should be. Every Friday he shows up in NPR for a little segment with EJ Dionne that is a great example of how NPR and the MSM cover "both sides". The left, and the far left. Brooks voted for BO, hates Trump, and found Cruze to be just as bad as Trump. Both the NY Times and NPR believe that he is a good representative of a "conservative" view.

I suspect that I'll have to read the "Fragmented Society" book that he is reviewing, I found the following observation interesting.

"I’m acknowledged in the book, but I learned something new on every page. Nonetheless, I’d say Levin’s emphasis on subsidiarity and local community is important but insufficient. We live within a golden chain, connecting self, family, village, nation and world. The bonds of that chain have to be repaired at every point, not just the local one. It’s not 1830. We Americans have a national consciousness."

I'd love to know "why 1830"? Maybe election of Andrew Jackson? Why not say 1860? (start of Civil War), or 1869, the completion of the Transcontinental Railroad, or some other watershed date. My guess is it was just Brooks way of saying "long ago".

I also found this factoid interesting.

For example, religious life has bifurcated. Church attendance has declined twice as fast among people without high school diplomas as among people with college degrees. With each additional year of education, the likelihood of attending religious services rises by 15 percent.

Not what the the MSM tries to convince us of is it? One would THINK that "more education = less religion", but that is not so. I was somewhat aware of this, I read "Coming Apart" which Brooks mentions in the column, but for some reason I failed to blog on it -- there are only a few HUNDRED books of which I'm guilty of that!

So, "we have a national consciousness"? What might that be? Is it represented by Trump, Hildebeast, or Bernie? Perhaps it is best revealed by the emperor's decree on bathrooms and locker rooms?  I readily agree that is not "1830", but if you started at the OTHER end, with the "individual", could not one expect many of our "modern" youth to compare tattoos and body piercings with some primitive of a thousand years ago or more? 

Our personal spiritual level is that of primitive pagans, we are gender confused, "marriage" is legal for undefined pairings ("bi-sexual marriage"?), village? There is no "chain", and there is no "national consciousness". We are broken -- things were much better in 1830.


'via Blog this'

Hildebeast Human DNA Challenge

Hillary Clinton: Donald Trump not qualified to be president - CNNPolitics.com:



Qualifications?  US President is one of those jobs that just demands a warm body over the age of 36 that can make some sort of claim to citizenship. I'm not really sure you would have to show an ID to be elected President anymore -- I mean, doesn't it seem like "discriminating"?



WOW, I REALLY wish she would just LEAVE! Let's review:



1). Slick Willie established that there was NO CHARACTER REQUIRED to be president. You could lie, you could break laws, it doesn't matter. Both Trump and Hildebeast are only present in the race because of this requirement being removed. Hildebeast is as close to pure evil as you can get -- but then she may be lying about that too. Trump is at least an unknown quantity. Character IS NOT AN ISSUE!



2). Competence. BO established that one could be president with NO DEMONSTRATED COMPETENCE! He tried to claim that running a campaign (or having others run it) was all one needed. Hildebeast has failed at everything she has ever tried -- if she wasn't a Clinton, she would already be in jail for CRIMINALLY failing at the SOS job! Trump at least has a few buildings and some nice toys, a few bucks, and people employed, but there are no experience qualifications to be president!



Hillary's ONLY "qualification" for ANYTHING is that she married Bill. Take that away and we would have (blissfully) never heard of her!



I can't even imagine that screeching harpy being in the White House. Every time she opens her mouth it is like listening to a dental drill running while it chews it's way through the roots of a tooth into your jaw!



Can she actually be human? Is this Hell? I was thinking that they ought to demand a DNA sample because it is doubtful she is actually human. Demon spawn? Undead?



However, I'm guessing that requiring that presidents be human is no longer valid. No standards really does mean no standards.



Could somebody shut that drill off!!!!!



'via Blog this'

Prager, Name The Enemy, Soaking In It

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0516/prager051716.php3#2gE0J3QSLYRYlRrC.99

A column in which Prager points out the obvious fact conservatives, Republicans, etc pretty much never state the name of THE PROBLEM that is killing us.

Why? Because they assiduously avoid identifying who or what acts are causing our universities to mimic fascist institutions, namely: ruining dissenters' careers; penalizing dissenting students; not hiring dissenting professors; disinviting the few invited speakers with whom the majority differs; shouting down dissenting speakers; students and faculty occupying and taking over college administrators' offices, etc. 

The Bloomberg-Koch column is like going to your doctor and getting back a fully accurate report that you are dying that doesn't even hint at why you are dying. 

Why don't Bloomberg and Koch mention the words "left" or "progressive" or "liberal" even once? The entire deterioration of the American university (and high school and elementary school) is the result of leftist influence. How could they not mention this?

The simple answer they don't name it is because they don't want to be called idiots. There is a whole book that covers a lot of this, Roger Scruton, "Thinkers of the New Left". The left already took over the university, and if Prager hasn't noticed, the entire Federal / State and Educational bureaucracy, as well as most of media and entertainment, law and a few other major parts of our world.

I enjoy a lot of Prager's thinking, but I really think this is one he knows. Calling the left out is like calling out Godzilla, or going for a stroll in Iran with a funny picture of Mohammad on your shirt.

No, if you are in the public eye like Bloomberg-Koch, you better try to pussyfoot around like mammals hiding out from T-rex. Also, since Bloomberg is a lefty and Koch is a libertarian,  it really would not do for Koch to say that "Bloomberg is the problem" if they want to write a column together.


The BIG reason for not naming the left as the problem though? Like fish in water, or Madge and Palmolive, "We're Soaking In IT!".

A Little Lefty Lecture, Tactical

http://mindy-fischer-writer.com/2016/05/conservative-friends-family-need-talk/

I like to expose myself to how the left "thinks" from time to time. It is kind of like how I used to look at spending a few days in a canoe and tents, or camping out on islands in freezing temps or fishing  years ago -- mostly soaking wet, sometimes close to dying of hypothermia, but HEY, I **DID IT**! Lots of human endeavor has been undertaken on that basis ("It was there!").  Thus, actually reading the linked column, from which I grab this ...

If I’m right about climate change and we clean up our act, we save the planet and humanity in the process. But if we go your route and do nothing, we all die. So all I’m saying here is how about a little compromise on this one? You can go around calling me a hippie-dippie tree-hugger liberal WHILE we clean up our act with the environment, just in case. Why not err on the side of caution on this one?

I mean, if your fantasy-land alternative reality is correct and there’s no such thing as climate change, then what’s the worst thing that could happen here? We get a cleaner planet? And some fresher cleaner air? And plus you get to make fun of all of the silly paranoid hippies. I believe we can call that a win-win.

This young lass has "condescending" down to a real science. I recall one time in particular on a way back from Germany when I had to sit in a middle seat -- people tend to look at me like "Oh, God, PLEASE no!" as I walk down the plane aisle. In this case however the 30ish stylish woman in the seat right of me grabbed on to me as if I was her long lost brother. Turns out the guy to my left, an average gent, was rather inebriated and rather amorous toward said woman. Size has it's privileges, he shut up and went to sleep.

There were other cases in bars and elsewhere where being a reliable and BORING Moose was similarly appreciated by some young lady of acquaintance or at least simulated acquaintance in like fashion.

Back to the article. Big guys are big kids for their age, which means that they get beat up a lot before puberty -- it's not fun, but at least in my case it made me appreciate how it feels to be powerless. Has this young lady somehow completely missed such experiences? Has our world gotten THAT sheltered? We are in graver danger than I even realize.

As I've covered before, wind and solar can be used to cover TWENTY TWO PERCENT of the FEDERAL required peak load coverage.  Clearly this young lady is convinced that her electric power will stay on "no matter what", but in the "imaginary world" that she feels that ridiculous folks like conservatives, engineers, etc live in, the watts to run her blog don't materialize out of the ether.

Shut off the power, shut off the water, and I suspect that miss smug would become a lot less smug very quickly. Were she being raped on the street after a few days with no power and no showers, I'd likely still shoot a couple predators to allow her sweetness to live on in smugness a bit longer. I'm guessing there would be no reason to remind her of "Plus, people would have more sex, which would put the entire country into a much better mood. See? I’m a born problem solver."

It is always POSSIBLE that she could learn to operate in a less sheltered and predictable world. Maybe she just never had the chance!

So see my righty friends, we really can all get along. And you really can read a Liberal article without your heads exploding. Oh, and I almost forgot one last point for my conservative friends…while we’re working on all of this Kumbaya here, how about you chill with all of the hate and try turning your attention more toward what you love instead. And in exchange, we’ll let you keep your beloved guns…. 

For now.

Oh, I will keep my guns -- both the ones in my shoulder sockets and the ones like the .460 S&W Mag that can bring down a cape buffalo. Your opinion on that really doesn't matter on that sweet pea. I knew long ago you and your friends were not trustworthy, what I wonder is how is that you trust yourself? Or is that just another lie dreamed up to cover your insecurity?

Have we really divorced physical reality from wishful thinking to such an extent that this little woman doesn't imagine meeting somebody worse than her worst nightmare in a "dark alley"? I sometimes joke "I hope there aren't mean looking people in there", because people that don't know me tend to think that I look mean -- but I KNOW that there are ALWAYS tougher people -- and ANYONE can get in a lucky shot.

Does "tactical" ever show up on this girl's screen?

The Lucifer Principle, Howard Bloom

I'm thinking that I'll occasionally link to an "alternate review" for those that want more detail than I provide so here is an alternate view.

"Evil (Lucifer) is a by-product, a component, of creation. In a world evolving into ever higher forms, hatred, violence, aggression, and war are a part of the evolutionary plan." 

Plan? Higher forms? Bloom is an atheist, so he needs to realize the fact that his faith REQUIRES that there IS NO PLAN! There are also no "higher forms". A godless universe has no "preferences" -- slime mold is just as "good" as Einstein, and there IS NOT such a thing as "good / evil / Lucifer / etc" in such a universe. So his premise is completely flawed -- if there is no god, there is NO DIRECTOR FOR EVOLUTION ... it is RANDOM! What survives and breeds survives and breeds, and what doesn't, doesn't. No planner, no plan.

"Lucifer is the dark side of cosmic fecundity, the cutting blade of the sculptor's knife. Nature does not abhor evil, she embraces it."  

Again, no god, no plan, no "sculptor". Whatever form breeds best is just fine with the blind watchmaker. No consciousness in "nature", so no "abhor or embrace" -- it just "is".

The conclusion of the book is this:

Super-organisms, ideas [memes],  and the pecking order, these are the primary forces behind much of human creativity and earthly good. They are the holy trinity of the Lucifer Principle. 

Super-organisms are societies / groups -- the United States, Exxon, The NFL. The assertion is that each individual is like a "cell" in the super-organism in which they live.

Ideas / memes are things like Christianity, evolution, free speech, money -- ideas, beliefs, ideology, religion. The book espouses the theory that these "memes" compete for "the fittest" like genes -- memes are the "genes" of the super-organisms.

Pecking order -- goes back to chickens / barnyard. Dominance hierarchies of people and super-organisms. He goes over the rise and fall of the Roman Empire, the British Empire, and the US Empire along with the rise of Islam as a "killer meme / super-organism". The book was published in 1995, his predictions on the rise of Islamic violence were right on.

The far left hated the book thinking it sounds "Fascist" as in "fittest survive, violence is part of nature / unavoidable / etc". It debunks the "nobel savage" in a number of ways -- one of the most colorful is the !Kung of the Kalahari desert -- very primitive, very warlike, lots of killing, lots of violence. No connection to "corruption" by the west -- they just naturally like to kill each other!

The book would really love to come up with some hopeful note. One example:

It is important that the societies which cherish pluralism survive. It is critical that they spread their values. It is vital that they not mistakenly imagine all other societies to be equal and their own inferior. It is imperative that they not allow their position in the pecking order of nations to slip and that they not cave to the onrush of the barbarians. 

Hmm. That is a very nice sentiment -- he likes "pluralism". Does he "like it" even if it isn't adaptive? I mean, what basis does he like it on? It feels good? He believes there is no god, so the ONLY standard is "what works" -- in evolution, what breeds. As I've pointed out, current "pluralistic", "relativistic", "post-modern" western society DOES NOT BREED! Islam does. Mormons do. Primitive backward groups in Africa do.

In the absence of a "divine meme" that is BELIEVED, then all civilizations really are "equal", because the universe has no order. At a number of places in the book, the above being one, Bloom clearly realizes at some level that "no rules means no rules", which means that the Western "pluralistic" societies may well lose out to societies of "true believers" that are interested in conquest while we are interested in getting men wearing dresses into the ladies room.

Gender uncertainty, homosexuality, abortion and birth control are not really the stuff of "healthy super-organisms" -- in fact, they are a pretty solid indication of a near death super-organism. Organisms that stop replacing their "cells" (eg stop having children), and spend their energy killing off unborn children and encouraging same sex unions really don't play in the godless naturalistic universe. "Pluralism" might feel nice to some authors, but it doesn't play well in the model universe he imagines we live in!

It is hard to recommend this book. There IS a lot of "interesting stuff" in it, some of which was new to me, but given it's flawed premises and rather dark with some "wishful hope" conclusions, it can pretty safely be bypassed for better fare. "Sapiens" would be a great example of that fare, along with "Darwin's Cathedral" to round out the "meme" part a bit.

Bloom manages to criticize "Closing of the American Mind" as "blaming our problems on progress". As you can see in my critique above, I think Bloom fails to understand the results of his own world view, so is casting around for whom he can blame -- "Closing" is just a random target.

I'm just going to stop here -- one can't love every book you read! I think the core issue is really just another attempt to get "Science" to carry the load of philosophy and theology.

Congress, Not BO, Shall Appropriate

http://www.wsj.com/articles/vindicating-congresss-power-of-the-purse-1463094840

The link to the article might not work for you. The WSJ puts a code in the link so that it is a one-time access -- at least for me. When that happens however, just Google "Vindicating Congress Purse" or some such and you will get access through google for at least one read.

When I get behind on my blogging I put draft entries out that sit for awhile sometimes -- this ruling was in early May and it has NOT gotten much in the way of reporting. It is a SIGNIFICANT setback for BO, or would be if he wasn't above the law, because it says that if Congress does not appropriate money for BOcare he can't spend it -- which is what the Constitution has ALWAYS said, but is yet another place in which BO has explicitly broken his oath to support the Constitution.

Judge Collyer takes 38 pages to eviscerate the Administration’s claim that it can infer an appropriation if Congress has merely authorized a program. Congress authorizes all sorts of programs without spending money on them in one year or another. Presidents before Mr. Obama have understood that no money can be spent without an express appropriation.

This brings us to the Iran Contra debacle. The LEGAL issue at stake, and the one that TP was certain would have been impeachable had they been able to prove it, was if Reagan directed the funding of the Contras in Nicaragua when Congress had not appropriated funds -- and if Congress could control the executive movement of monies that were not directly appropriated, but in this case "black", as they came from the sale of arms to the Iranians.

"The Party" (TP-D) was 100% certain back then of "Constitutional limitations on executive power", and how CRITICAL it was to STRONGLY enforce such things against Reagan, up to and including IMPEACHMENT for transfer of money that may have been in violation of the "Boland Amendment",  an attempt by a Democratic Congress to limit Reagan that they repealed before it could be tested in the SCOTUS for Constitutionality. (the President can't spend money not appropriated, but can Congress explicitly control his FOREIGN policy via controlling even "off budget" spending? It gets into things like CIA, espionage, secret programs, etc -- before you say "we don't need them", consider the "Manhattan Project" which built the bomb ...

Strangely, BO smells differently to TP and it's media propaganda arm. In the Reagan days, the House of Representatives was POWERFUL. The head of the House Ways and Means committee, Dan Rostenkowski , was one of the best known names and most powerful men in Washington until he went to prison -- like many Illinois politicians.  Can you even tell me the chairman of Ways and Means? It's Kevin Brady -- I didn't know and you didn't know. The MSM doesn't talk about them because the Constitutional power of the purse no longer resides there -- it resides with BO!

Do you have any idea what the deficit is projected to be in 2016? I didn't, so I did a Google -- the MOST striking thing is how VERY few articles show up on the deficit. During the Reagan years and the W years, the deficit was one of the biggest stories going! EVERYONE knew how the "failed policies" of Reagan and Bush caused high deficits, which were VERY bad! It's supposed to be $544 B, up $104B from last year. Nobody cares!

The media is very strange on deficits, CONGRESS controls the power of the purse! Clinton gets credit for all the deficit cutting that Gingrich did, and Newt is blamed for being mean and nasty for cutting the budget. Similarly, W gets the blame for the rapid rise in budget deficits after the D's took over Congress in '06, yet once the deficits when over $1T and even to $1.6T in 2010, the deficit story simply disappears! The media however LOVES to call '09 the "Bush budget", with Nancy Pelosi running the house and Harry Reid the Senate, plus BO adding $900B of pork in March of '09 -- but hey, that is a BUSH budget!

The highest actual W budget was $413B in '04 -- when the same party is in the WH and Congress, THEN it is FINE to blame the President.  The R's took back the house in 2010, and by 2013 the deficit had dropped from the $1.6T in 2010 to $679B in 2013 -- and although we no longer heard about the deficit, we DID hear about how MEAN the Republicans were!

Up until BO started spending money on BOcare unconstitutionally, CONGRESS did ALL the appropriations! Now, since we no longer follow the Constitution, such a breach as BO has committed for BOcare subsidies is barely news, but at one time during Iran - Contra it was headlines news every day!

We live in a media echo chamber and we are fed what the media wants to feed us -- all of us, me too. Sure, I run across these things and blog on them, but it is humanly impossible to not be affected by the mass of people and our day to day interactions. TP has got us under their spell -- all of us, and unless there is a miracle of some sort of a "movement", "revival", etc, we will continue to fall prey to "well, this is just the way it is".

Kitty Lock Fever

This is "Cabbage", a poor kitty who had to be re-adopted from our son when his life situation changed. We call him "Cab" for short, but I typically call him "The Ferocious Cabadocious" because he still retains a tendency to suddenly bite or claw out of the blue while you are petting him. He has a complex personality, he can also be a real lover.

He has also become the "traveling kitty". He likes to sit on my knee right next to the drivers window as we are going to IA and back to watch the other vehicles -- he gets excited when we pass someone and gets unhappy when we are passed, although that behavior has settled down as he has gotten more used to road travel.

He tagged along last Friday - Saturday as we headed to IA and back to enjoy the cold and rainy weather with a view of the lake. About 10 min into the trip back on Saturday PM, the one side of the tailgate on our trailer popped off and drug in the pavement, so we had to pull over. A pin had come out, so we took care of that and went back to get going and .... the Avalanche was locked!

See, Cab likes to press the buttons on the armrest on the drivers side, when I'm driving I have to watch if he gets over there and cover up the buttons, or a window will soon go down at 75mph on I-90. The vehicle was running in park, Marla's purse was inside, and we were sunk. We coaxed him up to the drivers armrest position, but after about 10 min or trying to randomly get him to move around by waving at him and tapping on the window to press the lock button again, we were calling a locksmith.

I'm sure we looked like idiots as well, but Kitty Lock Fever tends to cause that.

Suddenly, while Marla was looking for a locksmith,  I noticed him heading toward the back seat passenger side and realized that he had opened that window! I got around to intercept him and Marla was able to crawl in with some help and save the day -- not all that dignified, but saved!

Thus ends the story of Kitty Lock Fever -- a story which will no doubt make Cab immortal in Kitty fame at our place for years to come!