MoveOn.org

Trump accuses Clinton and media of trying to 'poison the minds' of voters - POLITICO:

Actually it was BO himself who made the role model remark, but the point is simple. When POWER is your only "morality", hypocrisy is impossible. There is nobody in the elite of TP that has any problem with Trump's behavior, it is all and purely politics.

The memory of the sheep in BOistan is so amazingly short, and the propaganda so thick, that they are scarcely able to remember anything beyond what the media told them to think in the last hour.

The following is from Wikipedia:

The MoveOn.org domain name was registered on September 18, 1998 by computer entrepreneurs Joan Blades and Wes Boyd, the married cofounders of Berkeley Systems, an entertainment software company known for the flying toaster screen saver and the popular video game series You Don’t Know Jack. After selling the company in 1997, Blades and Boyd became concerned about the level of "partisan warfare in Washington" following revelations of President Bill Clinton's affair with Monica Lewinsky. [2] The MoveOn website was launched initially to oppose the Republican-led effort to impeach Clinton. Initially called "Censure and Move On," it invited visitors to add their names to an online petition stating that "Congress must Immediately Censure President Clinton and Move On to pressing issues facing the country."

So 18 years ago, "The Party" (TP-D) decided that even after "feminism" and countless hours of employees being lectured that "sexual harassment is whatever the woman FEELS is harassment", as with any other law, TP was above it. "The law" is just one more thing for TP to use for it's own political purposes, while it's own members in good standing are able to be completely immune to it. MoveOn was one of the mouthpieces to make this truth clear to the sheeple on the issues of sexual harassment, rape, etc.

The really sad part of this is that the natural moral sense of Christians and Conservatives can be used against them so transparently. When MoveOn was founded, they were "prudes, scolds and hypocrites" -- ANY sexual  matter that could be dug up on a Republican, was grounds on which their opinion on Slick was totally dismissed as "hypocrisy". People with moral standards are always beset by hypocrisy -- TP has the ultimate solution, no morals ... just POWER!

No matter what charge was brought against Slick, "it had nothing to do with the important job of the presidency" ... and we desperately needed to "Move on". It was shouted from every corner -- "The  French were laughing at us" for our "prudish attitudes on men in power". That always makes me change my positions -- nothing like cheese eating surrender monkeys finding a position "laughable" to turn my thinking around!

The true bottom line here is simple. TP has **NO** other concerns than POWER, and Conservatives and Christians DO. Most likely the charges will work, and in this case even better than the DUI "news" about W, brought out the weekend before the election to manipulate it. There is very little doubt it cost him 5-10% nationally -- especially in states like Florida.

It is hard to really care about BOistan. Things like Slick Willie establishing that the president need not be a person of any character or moral standard is exactly what makes either Hildebeast or Trump fully acceptible candidates for tribal chieftain of BOistan. "The standard" here is simply whatever TP decrees to to be.

The only quote I found worthy from the linked article is how far out of touch Paul Ryan is -- we ALREADY LIVE IN BOISTAN !!! Look around you! America was lost thanks to people like Ryan who failed to stand up and strongly oppose BO. Had the Republican party opposed BO half as hard as they oppose Trump, we might still have a country. They are just stopping at nothing to KEEP IT the way they want now.

“In the America they want… government is taken away from the people, and we are ruled by our betters, by a cold and unfeeling bureaucracy that replaces original thinking,” Ryan told an auditorium of students. “It is a place where the government twists the law — and the Constitution itself — to suit its purposes. A place where liberty is always under assault, where passion — the very stuff of life — is extinguished.” 

“That is the America Hillary Clinton wants,” he continued, adding, “If given control of Washington — if given control of Congress — it is the kind of America she will stop at nothing to have."

'via Blog this'

Grooming, Gas-lighting,and Gambits -- Pussygalore

Donald Trump’s remarkably gross comments about women - The Washington Post:

In a nation that drops the F-bomb about every other moment, "pussy" is now a really horrible word -- I think this James Bond was rated X.

The sheep in BOistan are now in the same spot as the typical victim in an abusive relationship. Here we have BO on the now supposedly terminally crude subject of "pussy".  Hey, no harm no foul, he is reading from the BOOK he wrote, where he also uses the "N word".

When you live in a totalitarian state, the state tells you what words are acceptable, what words are not, who can use them with impunity and who can't -- the state decides, get your mind right!

FIRST ... this is planned manipulation by "The Party" (TP-D). They had this this whole time, and they kept it to manipulate the election. If you can't understand that you are MORE blinded than the typical abuse victim.

"Grooming" it is what spouse abusers, child abusers, pimps, and totalitarian regimes do to their victims. They prepare them -- say in a spouse case, they are especially attentive, provide gifts, make sure that they spend LOTS of time with the prospect so that she has no friends and is totally sucked in to the abuser. Then they start with SMALL abuse -- and work up until the victim is so dependent and ashamed that they can't see any way out.

Totalitarians make certain that the bar is set to "anything goes" for the dominant party, and "any infringement is disqualifying" for those that are not loyal party members. In this case, we have Slick Willie ... serial ACTUAL abuser of women, and likely guilty of rape (the support in the link is from a LEFT leaning source), and Trump, guilty of "coarse locker room talk", which is amazingly not actually illegal (yet) for even non-party members!

TP makes it CLEAR that unless you cross "The Party", you too can have your way with women, taxes, words, etc -- Bill Cosby was OK for decades, but apparently didn't realize that his privilege was dependent on party allegiance. Obviously Trump was in the same boat -- on sex and on taxes, but he strayed in the only way that matters. He crossed TP.

On the non-TP side, we had W Bush. HAVING an Honorable Discharge was completely useless -- it needed to be questioned, up to and including using forged documents. If  BO had been a Republican, his producing a valid birth certificate would not have satisfied the media, they would have been running around trying to find out if it was fake,  having Dan Rather lose his job forging documents trying to prove it was a fake.

For Clarence Thomas, the bar was that he MAY have mentioned an X-rated movie and possibly a pubic hair on a coke can to an employee that continued to follow him to multiple jobs for a decade -- but as a conservative, that was "sexual harassment". Yes, he squeaked onto the court, to be a pariah for the rest of his life -- a "win" if you oppose TP. Let that be a lesson to you!

Slick Willie dropping trou in front of employee Paula Jones and asking her to "suck it" either never happened, was politically motivated, or was "acceptable". All manner of ACTUAL groping, staining, and even rape accusations were  just fine for Slick -- but for Trump, the "new standard" is that "crude locker room talk" is now completely disqualifying.

Naturally, "The Republican Party" -- now pretty much another wholly owned subsidiary of TP, has a whole bunch of rats jumping ship. They will do all in their power to hand this to TP -- but as a famous head of a crime family once said; "What difference, at this point, does it make?". Certainly, many Republicans can be excused because they hold moral standards higher than all politics, and feel they can't actually vote for Trump because he is "coarse". They DO need to remember that Jesus said to "render unto Caesar", and Caesar was NOT a "nice guy". He also told us to love our enemies, not to avoid having any.

For the bulk of the sheep, they have been gaslighted so badly that they no longer believe their own minds -- only what TP tells them. BO ended the war in Iraq, but he didn't make the decision to pull the troops out. Bill Clinton says that Obama Care is "crazy", but Hillary supports it.  We get along fine with Russia and Mitt Romney was an idiot for thinking otherwise ... or, Russia is our worst enemy -- or both. Oh, Russia is trying to "manipulate our election" -- and the Washington Post just pulled a tape of Trump out that they have had forever -- and they are trying to? Oh, wait a minute, Wikileaks just pointed out that Hillary told Goldman Sacks what we all thought she would for a $650K bribe  -- BUT TRUMP!

Spun, manipulated, gaslighted -- the BOistan sheep run to the fences and cower in confusion. 2008 was sad, 2012 was tragic, but in 2016 it is clear that this is moral and intellectual wasteland that richly deserves just what we are seeing. It is getting more than a bit humorous, and it appears that the clowns are being sent in nationally! How fitting!

BOistan is built on the rotting corpse of America -- and we are really only in the early stages of the stench. Excrement smells badly, but rotting flesh is especially pungent. Remember, it IS BAD, and it is going to STAY BAD for a good long while, but if you decide to not vote for Trump, you are deciding to deepen our loss of free speech, religious freedom and shredding of our already terribly tattered Constitution.

'via Blog this'

A Liberal Thought On Trump

I believe the cartoon captures both the religious and cultural state of the west today. The moderns gleefully want to kill the culture, tradition, Christianity, Capitalism, the family, philosophic and often even scientific truth -- yet in their glee, they fail to realize it leaves them nowhere to stand!

The following is written by a liberal friend on FB. I know him to be intelligent and totally believing of the dominant left narrative taught in US public education, the media and entertainment. He is not an atheist, but has moved to become a modern secularized Christian, denying the Bible on at least sexually related issues like abortion, homosexuality and gender. As with all people of the left,  I certainly do not blame him in a human sense for "following the crowd". Holding the beliefs that I do is often costly in certainly friendships, some family relationships and possibly job and career.

While he as at times "unfriended" me on FB, I believe he attempts to be civil. I certainly have no trouble remaining his friend, FB and otherwise, because I hold this mortal coil to be but the most fleeting of experiences for our true eternal selves. To even consider judging or "unfriending" someone over the merely political would violate my own values, but given life in BOistan today, I fully understand why members of "The Party" (TP-D) feel they have no choice but to do so.

 I'll summarize and give my views on the quoted FB post below.  He titles it: "Leave it Blank?":

Though I am clearly a Democrat, I live in this country, I work with lots of good people, and so I know lots of good people who are Republicans. Honest, moral people with integrity. They think there's a better way to go about governing than what Democrats do. I respect that. 

And in a normal election cycle, I would expect them to support their "team president" because that person, the GOP Presidential Nominee, would represent their conservative values -- and would probably also be an upstanding representative of the kind of personal behavior they prize. Mitt Romney was not a "perfect" Republican for some conservatives and some Evangelicals, but he was/is Conservative, spent a long time as a public servant, and presents himself as an honorable, respectful man. John McCain was even better (the closest I've ever come to supporting a GOP candidate.) When their "team leader" is a person like these two, I can't blame Republican friends for supporting the leader.
What we have this time, though, is a candidate who quite simply does not represent the demeanor of a President, who doesn't have enough respect for the job, or the people with whom and for whom he'll have to work, to truly represent the kind of Republicans I know. 

So, can those people really vote FOR Donald Trump, just because he's on their "team?"
Now, I don't expect most of them would vote FOR Hillary. I can dream, but I do recognize that Secretary Clinton is more liberal than they are. And there are really good reasons a traditional GOP Conservative would not vote for Gary Johnson, and Jill Stein -- well, if Clinton is too far left, Jill is not right for a Conservative either. 

So, what I am wondering is this: Will these true honorable Conservatives just leave the Presidential candidate selection blank? I mean, in the future, whether Trump loses or wins, would these people want to have voted for him? 

Or does some sort of "team loyalty" require them to do what Ted Cruz did --- go against the very morality which matters so much to them and vote Trump? 

Now, I am sure I also know some Republicans who honestly support Trump. I don't get those people, but they are there. But they were not in the majority in the the early days of the GOP primaries, and many of that majority fought against Trump precisely because of the attributes he has continued to display. 

I expected the "politicians" to fall in line -- I had some hope that Cruz would stick to his principles, but even he recognized the future political disadvantage of not being a team player. 

But the average GOP voter does NOT have future politics to consider. They have to decide whether a vote for Trump is something which will weigh on their conscience in the future. 

Now, perhaps Trump would not be another Hitler, as so many of us liberals (and non-US people) worry about. Perhaps the checks and balances in place would keep him from truly taking the US in dangerous directions. Perhaps, once his records are made available, we won't find anything impeachable, and when his financial assets are placed in a blind trust, he'll be unable to try to work the system for his personal benefit, and he'll stop trying. Perhaps the "only" thing he'd do is continually embarrass us until 2020.
But even if a President Trump is only embarrassing, will a typical Republican really want to admit, 20 years from now, "Yes, I voted FOR Trump" or will they just leave that part of the ballot blank? 

That's what I am wondering today.

This post boils down for me to:

1.  Democrats have been saying the Republican nominee is "Hitler" at least since Nixon, with Reagan and W being prime past examples, and this whole straw man has it's own name (Godwin's law). The entire argument is based on the fallacy that "right" is control  and "left" is chaos/freedom, when of course the opposite is true. Whole books are written on this standard piece of TP propaganda, which I cover in summary here.  The charge has been repeated so often that one wonders why anyone would bother to do it yet again.
   
    In my mind, killing over 60 million babies in their mothers wombs is easily comparable with Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, or Biblical sacrifice to Moloch ... but that is a world view that radically differs from the approved world view of TP.
   
2. There is the "metaphysical certainty" that Trump is somehow "evil, bad, embarrassing, etc" ... which TP assured us was true of at least Nixon, Reagan and W. In this case, "somehow", one would be "embarrassed" years later to have voted for Trump ... and least at this point, supposedly worse than they would have been for Nixon, Reagan or W. Therefore, they would "leave the space blank", implicitly helping Hillary. 

I voted for Carter, and I'm not "embarrassed". I was young, I had just been fully indoctrinated by 16 years of schooling, my family voted Democrat, so I voted for him. The loss of Iran as an ally certainly caused and continues to cause world problems. The miscalculation on Afghanistan also had far reaching repercussions. Could these had been avoided with a better leader? I firmly believe so,  but as with pretty much anything outside of proven mathematical equations, reasonable people can  and will vary in their opinions. My only claim to wisdom is the fear of God -- I prayerfully consider decisions and study hard -- I don't take credit for Reagan, nor blame for Carter. I doubt that will ever change. 

I have no confidence in Trump as a leader -- as I have commented on the writings of Decius, I see this as the first of likely many Russian Roulette elections. Hillary is roulette with a semi-auto, Trump is a revolver -- at least for people that have nostalgia for the old Constitutional Republic that was America. Best to have an outside chance of a pause in our decent to totalitarianism. A Trump victory would be a chance for the left to revisit how they felt after Reagan, Newt as Speaker, or Ws election. People with a rightward tilt got to feel that way for the past 8 years -- only I suspect we don't feel it as deeply as they do, since politics is WAY below God for us.

BOistan is a territory based on no principles, save possibly the hope that "with more government everything is better".  2008 was the HUGE election, 2012 was the "kill shot" for America. America is dead already, many people are just not aware of it -- and some, (as I suspect the author of the post above) celebrate the "change". 

If Trump wins, as Scott Adams, the writer of "Dilbert" expects him to, it will be a LONG way from any indication that "good things will happen". It will merely be proof that there are still a lot of people out there that oppose the ending of America that BO was able to accomplish. Any road back to a Constitutional Republic is going to be LONG and arduous. The most positive aspect of a Trump win in my mind is the potential for some level of national "dialogue", more likely to be a shouting match, since the majority of the Trump supports merely sense that things are broken really badly, but have no idea at all why America once worked, how it was destroyed, or how to rebuild it.

The left will of course continue to arrogantly dismiss all who disagree, as is covered here. 

As the copied post tells you, loyal members of TP see no reason to even attempt to "reason" or consider any alternative views. Indeed, in BOistan,  POWER is all that counts, and increasingly it is coercive power as in "we will put you in jail if you claim Global Warming isn't gospel" (Exxon, NY).

The smarter TP members (like the post author) vaguely realize that once law has been abandoned, such mechanisms could theoretically be used by the opposition. I think they are wrong ... they forget the power of the administrative state, which only operates for left leadership. 

For people who hold traditional Christian views, own guns,  etc we are left with no rational choice but to vote for the candidate who will be most opposed, which is clearly Trump. 

Most of all, I wish for a renewal, which I believe must be a revival, of acceptance of Christ and Biblical principles as the transcendent values that the vast majority of Americans would be again in agreement on, and thus see government as FAR beneath those principles.

Government would be returned to being a SERVANT of both God and the people.  In America past, and I hope in an America or at least "remnant" of it, future, Christian friendship would FAR outweigh anything political, not only because one is eternal and the other but a tiny temporal moment, but also because God's Wisdom would be what drives the lives of a clear majority of Americans. 

Both Trump and Hillary are so far from decent leaders that such a vision most certainly requires a miraculous intervention from on high. Both are likely to make such a vision less possible, but I see Hillary as certainly continuing on the path to Bible following Christians being directly persecuted -- a threshold we are perilously close to.

Heavenly Father, please forgive this broken country, revive us, restore us. Amen. 

Winning Battles, Losing Wars (Dilbert)

I Score the First Debate | Scott Adams' Blog:

If Trump is bright and has a strategy, I'm pretty sure Adams is right and it is over. If he is a plant or an idiot, or if "The Party" (TP-D) decides to go full voter fraud this time ...

Winning the first debate is a bit like doing well in the NFL pre-season, but I hadn't thought of Adam's angle -- Trump just needed to not seem like some scary orange madman.

What is less scary than a loser?

'via Blog this'

100% Of Political Supporters Racist

Yes, half of Trump supporters are racist - The Washington Post:

The fact is that 100% of humans "prefer people like them" -- it is wired into the wetware. As "liberals" have become more powerful, they DEMAND that people at least claim to be "like them", or they will throw one of their labels on them --- "racist, sexist, islamophobe, homophobe, climate denier, etc".

To a person capable of independent thought, it is obvious that screaming labels at somebody is taking part in exactly the same kind of generalization, objectification, stereotyping, etc that the accuser (TP) is accusing their target of. They are merely taking advantage of the fact that their tribe is dominant, so they can place the label, write the articles, and demand that everyone agree with their position or the targets unwillingness to bow is taken as proof of their label being "real", while TP is "right".  As they say, "it is good to be king" (in the dominant party).

"Trump supporters (or half of them) are racist, white, elderly, disaffected, uneducated, angry, less intelligent, afraid of losing status, etc, etc" is the same type of statement as "Blacks are prone to crime, poorly educated, emotional, on welfare, lazy, violent, unpatriotic, etc". Like all generalizations, there is both truth and falseness in both cases, but for the dominant party ("The Party" (TP-D)), the first generalization is pretty much gospel, where the second is "racist".

As Kierkegaard said "Once you label me, you negate me". The power to reduce a person to a mere label is a truly awesome power. The fact that TP is able to increasingly accomplish this and hold sway over so many minds who are either too brainwashed or too afraid to question the power of TP lest THEY be labeled shows how totalitarian our situation has become.

The proper label for TP is FASCIST -- using raw power and complete absence of morals to declare their position to be "godlike" merely on the basis of raw political power.

Christianity gives mankind a potential to rise above our condition by declaring that ALL are flawed and power is meaningless next to morality, which is transcendent. (might has no bearing on RIGHT!!) Take transcendence away, and the only possible order is based on power and coercion rather than love and the God given order which created Western civilization.

'via Blog this'

Crazy Trump a Plant? , 2nd Amendment Hints

Why Gun Owners Should Reject Trump’s Call to “Second Amendment People” - The New Yorker:

Remember when that crazy Trump said  "No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms."? Oh, oops, that was that crazy Thomas Jefferson.

Trump is ALWAYS talking violently. Remember when he talked about "bringing a gun to a knife fight"? Oh, wait, that was BO in 2008. 

See Michael Hayden, the director of the NSA from 1999 to 2005 who says that the WMD assessment was all the intelligence agencies fault -- Bush never lied! says Trump is DANGEROUS! The left suddenly finds Hayden a very believable guy saying Trump is a "clear and present danger". "Clear and Present Danger" is a legal definition under which the 1st Amendment can be suspended because the danger outweighs speech rights. In national security circles, a "Clear And Present Danger" is one that literally MUST be "neutralized" ... "terminated". So what are articles that call Trump a "Clear And Present Danger" saying?  Obviously nothing that would encourage anyone to take violent action against Trump, we have seen NONE of that, right?

We live in such a fun house now that no sane person has any idea WHAT to believe about our national government, political process, etc. I attempt to maintain SOME minimal sense of "logic / reason / truth / etc", but given what is happening in BOistan, such is really no longer possible.

Hillary once voted to go into Iraq, then she said it was a mistake and said that "Bush lied" and talked about General Petraeus as "General Betray Us" ... Hayden was head of the CIA at the time of the surge. Now, Hildebeast is back to claiming that W's original decision was reasonable because Trump is saying it wasn't. Does she even have any "real positions" other than  she wants power and money?

Hayden? Who the hell knows -- he is obviously closely connected with the Bush family and the Bush family is at the CORE of the Republican Establishment which obviously hates Trump. I'm convinced that the corruption in in BOTH parties is WELL beyond my ability to comprehend it.

I have no idea what is happening, but in an insane world, you have to start thinking "insanity".

The degree to which the Republican Party lap-dogged it with BO and the degree to which the establishment Republicans have gone raving lunatic against Trump leads me to a few not necessarily mutually exclusive scenarios.

• "The Party" (TP-D) has already totally won on all but collecting the guns. The IRS is being used to reward their friends and punish their enemies. The NSA, FBI, or other intelligence agencies has enough "goods" on EVERYONE that are either real or manufactured to execute blackmail on a massive scale. (How hard do you think it would be for the NSA to provide "proof" that you trafficked in child porn?) In the virtual electronic world you can be set up as a trader in slaves, drugs, weapons ... an embezzler, etc, etc. The temptation to power just became too great, and TP has total control of the Federal Bureaucracy, so it all just "tipped over" and anybody that talks is dead or dishonored. I cover that a bit here.
  
• Trump is either a TP or pure Clinton Foundation plant. There are plenty of photos of the two couples together at weddings and other events, their daughters are best buds. The meeting is easy to envision:
  
• Slick ... Don, the Foundation is doing north of $200 mil a year REPORTED, and DECLARING < 10% going to "charity" (wink, wink, nod, nod) ... we are REPORTING that and getting away with it with no significant public concern! Of course the reality is we are taking 10x that and "giving" 1/10th what is reported. There are BIG investors that have BANKED on Hillary taking over from Barry. We need to insure this election, it is the best thing for everyone.
  
• Don ... I understand, what do you want me to do and what is in it for me?
  
• Slick ... We always play both the top and bottom of the deck, on the bottom, you don't want to be prosecuted on any of items that we have. They are not all factual, but they are all guaranteed to stick -- we own the judges. But I hate to be unfriendly, the upside here is INSANE for you. We know you want to move up the billionaire list, and we can guarantee it. Look at Warren ... just stopping the pipeline alone poured billions into his railroad! I can guarantee you move up the Forbes list from 120 to the top 10 ... Donald Trump, the genius that went from $4.5 Billion to $45 Billion in 4 short years!
  
• (D) So I'm supposed to?
  
• (S) Win the Republican nomination for President.
  
• (D) ... sound of choking, laughter .... that is a good one!
  
• (S) No, we are completely serious. The media will aid you early on -- you will hint that you might go 3rd party and they will be like Pavlov's dogs salivating over the crazy Ross Perot stunt we pulled in '92.  We have enough boughten folks in the Republican Party that will start a #NeverTrump movement and create a civil war in the party. They are a shell anyway after BO did enough deals to pay off the guys at the top to screw the folks that honestly believe in crap like "God, Country, Truth, Honor and shit".
  
• (D) My God, I can't imagine campaigning, it will bore me silly!
  
• (S) You WON'T campaign ... you will entertain! It is "reality politics". Hell, the "average white conservative voter" has been ground down so much they are mostly a bunch of drug addicts and drunks ready to kill themselves! To them, you will look like "Hope and Spare Change" ... hey, you could even make "America" great again! ... not that there IS any America left, but lots of the folks are too stupid to understand we took it from them and sold it to the highest bidder!
  
  You know a lot of people don't like "the beast" (Hillary) ... and hell, I can't say I blame them, but having you out there throwing bombs and crazy shit all over will get PLENTY of votes with the long list of stiffs running. My God, "JEB!" ... they would reject him as a cadaver!
  
  Besides, I like you Don ... I don't want to see you locked up or dead.
  
• (D) $45 B for throwing an election, or I'm a dead man. ... doesn't seem like there is a lot of "art" to this deal, I hope it is at least some fun.
  
• (S) Hell Don, it will be a HOOT, and if you can manage to deliver the House and Senate to TP, we will be talking BONUS ... Warren is old, sanctimonious and not all that bright. I can see you as our "richest man" -- telling everyone that you are all for big tax increases while putting your money in a foundation so none of it is ever touched. I have ALWAYS admired your taste in the ladies!
  
• (D) I appreciate that Bill, pleasure doing business with you ...
  
• Or maybe Trump looked around one day and realized that he knows the game is rigged, he is one of the riggers, but he was NEVER going to be "top dog" because, well, the game is rigged! So he decided that he was going to "change the game" -- he actually COULD run for President and WIN! He understood how he could make the media dance to his tune exactly how he wanted them to, and they would be powerless to figure out that they were going WAY too far and that voters love the rich, the famous, the outlandish, especially when they are UNDERDOGS ... a lone champion fighting a rigged system run by Wall Street and two massively corrupt political parties. He may not have much of an idea what to do with it if he wins, but he understands that winning would change the game in unpredictable ways, and he finds that more interesting.
  
• He may just be having fun. He likes being rich, famous, getting attention, being talked about, being outlandish, jerking people's chains, etc, and he is having A BLAST! He well knows that if Slick Willie and BO can be president, ANYONE can be president -- certainly a guy that runs companies worth billions of dollars rather than a hick that ran a poor southern state, or a failed community organizer that never ran a lemonade stand. He is running for the hell of it -- BOistan is a shambles anyway, the scarecrow from Wizard of Oz would be better than Hildebeast (sans brain). 

So does the New Yorker really think that anyone that remotely knows what the 2nd amendment is cares about their opinion?

For anyone who cares about the future of American politics, the comment represents a dwindling commitment to politics itself, to the notion that, through rhetoric and competition, we might find a common way as a people. Instead, the Republican candidate made a casual nod to the final force of arms. At this stage, so little that Trump says shocks us, but, now and then, it is worth stepping back and regarding the full damage of it all: the wounds to our fading global image of openness and generosity; the stomping on our admiration for intelligence, eloquence, or honesty; and now the blithe contempt for safe and civil government.

 I understand that the New Yorker thinks that BOistan is a super great place, but do they REALLY think that anyone else in the world has a SHRED of respect for BOistan? Red Lines? Ransom Money? Chinese islands, Putin, Syria, ISIS, ... we are a laughing stock. BO defeated us, he succeeded in destroying the colonial powers.

 I can't imagine that the author of that paragraph actually believes any of what he is writing. "through rhetoric and competition we might find a common way" ?? We actually had a CONSTITUTION once and shared values that were supposedly "endowed by a creator". So I assume we can interpret "competition" as POWER and "rhetoric" as false advertising or essentially LIES.

Yes, BOistan is based on POWER AND LIES ... what else would one base tribal corruption on? "Shocked"? It is obvious that both parties and the media are shocked that there seems to be some shred of resistance to the power of the elite, and they are VERY excited to get it stamped out ASAP by ANY MEANS POSSIBLE ... they absolutely DO see Trump as "a clear and present danger", and I hope he DOES have some inside dope on some people in high places as well as some VERY capable people guarding his life. **IF** he is not a plant, he is in GRAVE danger!

'via Blog this'

David Brooks Summarizes The BOistan Problem

Trump’s Enablers Will Finally Have to Take a Stand - The New York Times:

When you lash out at someone in anger, you have an extreme tendency to unwittingly admit the truth of your own soul. It tends to be unavoidable. Here is Brooks on Trump:

"He is a slave to his own pride, compelled by a childlike impulse to lash out at anything that threatens his fragile identity. He appears to have no ability to experience reverence, which is the foundation for any capacity to admire or serve anything bigger than self, to want to learn about anything beyond self, to want to know and deeply honor the people around you."

What a wonderful statement on the human condition and the condition of man in BOistan. "Slaves to our own pride". Jesus diagnosed PRIDE as being at the center of both the original fall and the ongoing nature of fallen man. So, we all -- like Brooks in this column, lash out like children and what we see to be a threat to our fragile identities, unless our identity is in Christ.

America was a nation "under God". It revered God, our Founders, the Constitution and the Family.

BOistan is a nation without reverence. Each persons own truth is supposedly "sacred" and to be revered, which means in reality that only the truth of "The Party" (TP-D) is actually to be revered and admired, or at least submitted to. Brooks wants TP to be revered, and anyone that doesn't bow to TP must be destroyed ...

You either stand with a man whose very essence is an insult to basic decency, or you don’t.

At one time in a country known as America, the fallen nature of ALL was an "insult to basic decency", but all were worthy of redemption by Christ's Blood.  We were and are ALL filthy sinners, thus "insults to basic decency", but we are also all precious in that God loves us and wants to save us. We were a nation "under God", with a limited government and a shared morality.

In BOistan, 60 million innocent babes in their mothers wombs have been declared to be "unfit for life" and "decently"? slaughtered.  When man takes such power to himself, the entire concept of "decency" is destroyed and replaced by POWER. Brooks believes that POWER  actually IS "decency". When you replace God, you have to -- power is all that remains.

There comes a time when neutrality and laying low become dishonorable. If you’re not in revolt, you’re in cahoots. When this period and your name are mentioned, decades hence, your grandkids will look away in shame.

Speaking out for God's decency has already become a cause for shame before our children and grandchildren, and many Christians have already paid a HORRIBLE price for their faith. Defending the Constitution, the right of the unborn to live, the right of prayer, the right to honor marriage as between a man and a woman, the right to understand humanity as male and female -- all these and more have been declared "immoral before TP", and those who hold to these timeless values in the face of  the power of TP are regularly shamed by the educational and media system.

Since they are shamed by education and media, they are often shamed by their own children and grandchildren who can't stand up to the deluge of the left wing machine. Each time we are shamed we pray harder that there will come a time when they come back to the love of God and we will see them in eternity.

TP has indoctrinated the young to dishonor their parents and grandparents if they refuse to bow to the "truth" of TP vs the Truth of Christ. The government of TP is declared to be "god" in the stead of God. TP breaks the 4th commandment to "honor your father and your mother", with "shame your parents into supporting TP, or at least into keeping silent under threat of losing contact with you". What a friend Satan has in TP,

BOistan stands as a monument that "power" and "decency" only go together in the hand of God. Christians pray to God, not BO nor Brooks.

For Thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever and ever. Amen.

In BOistan it is the duty of all who obey Christ to do whatever we can to oppose the immoral and ALWAYS highly imperfect government.

Trump is certainly an imperfect vehicle, however compared to the alternative, he is a Rolls Royce!


'via Blog this'

Facts, Belief, Truth, Convincing

Why facts don’t matter to Trump’s supporters - The Washington Post:

When the USSR and the Berlin wall fell, I learned the absolute depth of "belief over fact" personally. I actually BELIEVED that the US could and would consign the USSR "to the ash heap of history" as Reagan had promised on June 8, 1982. From the time Reagan was elected, and during at least the first six years of his term, I would have been one of those people that the media would have argued "fact's didn't matter".

During those years, papers like the WaPo regularly referred to Reagan as a "madman", "simple minded", "unable to listen to reason", etc. In the world I lived in, the USSR **WAS** an "evil empire" that enslaved it's people, killing millions in Gulags and leaving all but the most elite standing in line for basic necessities. Even the most elite lived lives less luxurious than an average middle class family in the US. It was clear on NPR that the USSR to them was a very reasonable place -- not perfect, but often better than the US in "free education, healthcare, etc".

But by the time the wall fell, those who had once had so much passion for how foolish and "ignorant of facts" Reagan and his supporters were, lived in a different world.  Now, "Everyone had always known that the USSR was in serious trouble and likely to implode". Reagan and his supporters like Thatcher actually DELAYED the end of the USSR with their "bellicose tactics". "It was all Gorbachev ... he was a visionary guy that came along and changed the game". Fools like me were still ignorant and unable to accept facts, that part had not changed.

Being part of "The Party" (TP-D) means that you are ALWAYS right and you can point at the poor unwashed masses and tut-tut about how they completely ignore "facts". How confidently you can support your own candidate, the wholly truthful Hildebeast who has indeed never told a lie!

The article does have some insights into human thought, but they are REALLY not new at all.

The authors wrote: “The more often older adults were told that a given claim was false, the more likely they were to accept it as true after several days have passed.”

"The lady doth protest too much, methinks" ... Hamlet, written in 1600. How many times do you REALLY need to tell me how much of a liar Trump or Reagan is? How crazy they are? How they are/were "a danger to life, the universe and everything"? Isn't it surprising that if you are a chain smoking parent (your candidate is at least as big a liar), screaming about the evils of smoking to a teen every day is more likely to make them want to try smoking than to avoid it? Perhaps the brilliant left knows a great deal of the science of human nature, but they have failed to figure out that it has MUCH more to do with emotion than science.

When critics challenge false assertions — say, Trump’s claim that thousands of Muslims cheered in New Jersey when the twin towers fell on Sept. 11, 2001 — their refutations can threaten people, rather than convince them. Graves noted that if people feel attacked, they resist the facts all the more.

"When accused of killing 3 men and a dog, he promptly produced the dog, alive". The dog is "beside the point" -- producing it doesn't affect the important accusation of killing 3 men. The media is doing a version of this relative to Trump. Pretty much anyone remembers seeing throngs of cheering Muslims after 9-11, Paris, Charlie Hebdo, or virtually any other violent act carried out against the west by Islamists. 

The USUAL locale is "The West Bank", but there are others. Here is that violent right wing spewer of hate Anderson Cooper on the uber right wing networks CNN talking about some in the US in 2009: 

So the "fact" is that Muslims often DO cheer violent acts by others in their religion -- because they feel that their religion is correct and such actions are justified. The same reason that this column feels justified in saying that "facts don't matter to TRUMP supporters" when the article points out that it isn't just "Trump supporters" -- it is everyone human. 

Trump’s campaign pushes buttons that social scientists understand. When the GOP nominee paints a dark picture of a violent, frightening America, he triggers the “fight or flight” response that’s hardwired in our brains. For the body politic, it can produce a kind of panic attack.

All humans attempt to "push buttons", as does this column -- it too tries to paint a "dark picture" of Trump. The way that Western civilization once advanced was by putting it's philosophy "outside humanity" in the realm of Christianity and ancient philosophy to have a position of actual moral authority. Science has the authority of mechanism ... it can make things work, and explain how they work, but it has zero moral authority. "Right and wrong" are not within it's purview ... nor is emotion, other than to study the effects of it as we study the effects of gravity. 

Our only hope to return to civil society and the ability to be able to discuss and sometimes even CONVINCE educated people is to return to knowing what epistemology is.

'via Blog this'

As Crazy As Reagan? WDATPDIM

Trump asked 3 times in an hour security briefing why we can't just use nuclear weapons:

Let's not even talk about any "believability" about the "asking 3 times" -- we really don't need to listen to Hildebeast tell us that the FBI said she was "truthful" on national TV, BO sending $400 M to Iran and allowing them to get nuclear weapons in a sham deal, nor reams and reams of what is happening in BOistan.

I need to convert "What difference, at this point, does it make?" into a nice long acronym "WDATPDIM"

"W dat P dim"

It seems like people just have this really big problem understanding that NO RULES means NO RULES!

Horseshoes, hand grenades, nuclear weapons, biological warfare, killing 60 million babies, grownups, disabled people -- NO RULES means no rules! Is that really so hard? What the hell did you expect? "morality"?

My faith in a bunch of guys sitting around on MSNBC looking all serious about making a claim about Tump and "asking about USING nuclear weapons 3 times"  has about a 99.99999% chance of being COMPLETELY fabricated, or possibly just  bit of an "enhancement" of him asking three THINGS about the use of nukes. As in maybe "what is the process from a need to use to actual use", "if we are attacked with a nuke from say North Korea and decide to respond in kind, do Russia or China automatically do anything?" ... oh, I could go on. If I was getting a briefing like that I'd have some questions that could be called "asking about USING nuclear weapons" if you wanted to phrase it that way.

The current media push is to paint Trump as insane. I like Scott Adams on this front. Hollywood notwithstanding, how likely is it REALLY for 70ish billionaires with jets, choppers, beautiful wives and children, etc to suddenly go insane and blow up the world? Well, if you are an easily led, not much for deep thinking left leaning soul, I suppose it might "feel" likely -- Hollywood certainly likes to give you that impression in all sorts of films.

Back in 1980, LOTS if people were absolutely convinced that Ronald Reagan was going to destroy the world. They did a big made for TV movie called "The Day After" and I knew A LOT of people personally that were CONVINCED it was "all over". Reagan was a "madman" and the USSR was populated by nice folks who just wanted "peace". They were in the role of Islam today -- the youth found communism to be "the non-religion of peace" in those days.

The one thing that the left has a real tendency to do if you get them excited enough is for them to completely slip the bonds of any sort of reality and set the bar so low for a Republican that if they can walk on stage, look at the camera and even stammer out of few words, people go "What was the fuss about again"?

They set Reagan up as being so "bark at the moon, foam at the mouth, totally unaware of reality, living in old movies, etc", that walking out, smiling and saying something nice made the media look like they were clueless.  Likewise, with W, he was caricatured as being a combination of Satan and Barney Fife, likely unable to even read, such an odd juxtaposition of pure evil and total incompetence was portrayed in the media  that to even form a mental picture of "what to expect" was impossible. When a pretty regular looking guy walked confidently out and talked plainly and simply with the air of reasonableness, people immediately knew the media view was a complete fabrication.

Is Trump purposely putting them in a complete frenzy so that when people get serious about thinking about the election in October he comes off as totally truthful, competent and reasonable in comparison to the caricature so carefully built by the media -- let alone Hildebeast.

Who knows, NPR is still locked in on the Wrath of Khan angle -- a completely fabricated tempest that is hard to imagine any serious person having a concern about. I LIKED Ronald Reagan, I don't "like" Trump, but that isn't really important to me. I'm choosing the candidate that will be most opposed -- and I think it is clear that is Trump.

'via Blog this'

Wrath Of Kahn, Messin With Your Mind

Broad array of military luminaries condemn Trump over attacks on Khan family - The Washington Post:

Same author, different convention, you are supposed to THINK DIFFERENTLY!

Any thought or discussion of the brave Americans that died in Benghazi under Hildebeast's watch as Secretary of State is to be ERASED from your feeble mind! Those lives DO NOT MATTER! Any "use" (as in their mother expressing her grief) of those deaths is completely off base. GOT THAT???!!!!

However, an Arab Gold Star Father being put up at the convention for "The Party" (TP-D) is TOTALLY DIFFERENT (TP is doing it, it is GOOD!). Indeed, a WONDERFUL thing, and oh so useful and worthy of many press cycles worth of castigation for Trump and his assumed to be subhuman supporters.

Trump BTW was against the invasion of Iraq and in any case, was not in the government at the time, while Hildebeast voted FOR the invasion -- oh, "But what difference, at this point, does it make?" Mind control isn't about facts.

But it gets deeper:

But until now, it looked like the Khans were just Gold Star parents who the big bad Donald Trump attacked. It turns out, however, in addition to being Gold Star parents, the Khans are financially and legally tied deeply to the industry of Muslim migration–and to the government of Saudi Arabia and to the Clintons themselves.

Unsurprisingly, Republicans are on the list of those attacking Trump. News at 11, corruption has destroyed BOTH PARTIES! The system is rigged through and through and WE ARE THE PATSIES!

They are determined to control your mind and get you to follow the TP narrative!  We are fast approaching the point where "the little people are relieved of the burden of their failed and useless lives" with no more concern than BOistan gives babies in their mothers womb today.

Might Trump merely be a "show candidate" who will purposely hand the election to Hildebeast? Certainly, I'd argue 30% chance at least that is the case. But then why not play it out? Vote for Trump, the establishment (both parties) will make LOTS of attempts to stop him -- all sorts of rigging work like this up to election day, no doubt maybe millions of fraudulent votes, and if that doesn't work, the left is already thinking of usurping the will of the people in the electoral college!

Wow, I've been listening to NPR and they haven't been this concerned about "Gold Star Parents" since Cindy Sheehan! Deaths of soldiers have become as non-interesting since BO as are deficits or poor economic numbers.

At this level of corruption, the media is one big exercise in mind control. It is still barely possible to combat it with greater and greater effort, but the point at which it is ALL pure control creeps closer and closer as life in BOistan continues to descend.

'via Blog this'

Believing Hillary, Trump Treason

Bill Comes Due - WSJ:

Near the end of the linked article, we find this from the WaPo :

• “And [Romney’s] unscripted moments have not inspired confidence: calling Russia America’s greatest foe, for example.”—editorial,Washington Post, Oct. 25, 2012
• “This pro-Kremlin tilt is unprecedented in the Republican Party and would represent a radical and dangerous shift in U.S. policy.”—editorial,Washington Post, July 26, 2016

WaPo reporting is pretty easy -- first you identify the party of the candidate. If D, then what they are saying is brilliant, credible, important, etc. If R, then  what they are saying is ridiculous, false, or maybe even treasonous. Well, at least they are consistent if you look at it that way! They are ALWAYS pro-D and anti-R -- it's just that the facts change to fit their bias.

Let's forget for a moment that pretty much since the Pentagon Papers, "leaks", "hacks", "whistleblowers" that uncover the "nefarious deeds of the right" have been left wing heroes, no matter where they come from. In fact, back when we cared about fighting ISIS and such, leaks of "secret Bush stuff" was patriotic beyond belief.

When the old leftist ally the USSR folded in the early '90s and their archives were opened, we found that Teddy Kennedy lobbied them to try to directly influence the '84 election  ... needless to say, the left could care less. For them, beating Reagan was of such importance it justified any actions, so certain are they that their positions at any given moment are the highest potential expression of human morals. (up to that moment .... they will be better yet in the next moment!)

But what does THAT have to do with Hildebeast's emails? Has she not already assured us MULTIPLE times that there is NOTHING even remotely secret in any of those? "Yoga schedule and wedding plans".  Clearly there is nothing to be found!

She told us that she has NEVER lied and NEVER will! Certainly the Democrats believe her -- don't they?


'via Blog this'

Open Letter From BOistan, Lost In Wrong Country

An Open Letter to My Friends Who Support Donald Trump:

This "open letter" gives us a wonderful insight into "liberal" thinking.

But I can’t understand why you would support someone as hateful, sexist, racist and ignorant as Donald Trump.

If some crackhead black mom murders her children, it would be SHAMEFUL to "judge her" -- why it would be societies fault, hundreds of years of racism, her poor childhood, opportunistic drug dealers, urban blight, income inequality, global warming, ANYTHING but her fault!!  In any case, "labelling" people  is always supposedly wrong for liberals  -- with enough government spending, unionized education and community programs, ANYONE can be "rehabilitated".  (but then consistency is unknown to liberals, so who is to say?)

But Trump and his supporters CAN be labeled!  ... he is "hateful, sexist, racist and IGNORANT".

So does that sound "hateful" to you? Isn't this "open letter" just the reverse side of what is claimed to be the problem of Trump? Doesn't the author in fact hate Trump and find anyone who supports him to be pretty much similarly worthy of hatred?

Well, why? See, cuz Trump is "sexist". So the Democrat candidates husband is a serial abuser of women with very credible rape charges against him. You don't have to believe me ... go read the liberal rag Vox on the subject. Back in the old days of Slick, a man was to be judged purely by his wife's opinion of him -- if Hildebeast thought Slick was "ok", then how could anyone criticize his behavior? Let's see, if the Trump wives or daughters think the Donald is OK, then how can he be questioned? We aren't even talking "fondling" here, we are talking "comments".

"Racist". Is this like the "Taco Bowl Outreach" that we find out about today? I wonder what color the "bitter clingers" were -- or if you go read BO's "Dreams", is the idea of filtering out your white mother's blood racist at all? See the fact is that EVERYONE is racist -- it is just that the MSM likes to use that label like others to take down people they find objectionable. That "PC Power" and the fact that Trump seems immune to it is one of the BIG reasons for his popularity.

"Ignorant"? Say what? Calling someone "ignorant", like calling them a lot of other names says an awful lot more about the target of the name calling than  the name caller. What color is your jet smart guy columnist?

It’s not okay to discriminate against an entire religion based on a small percentage of its followers who have become terrorists by twisting the words of the religion to fit their crazy ideals.

Really? But it is OK to discriminate against the mass of gun owners because of a VERY tiny percentage of crazies? How about to pass business regulations to choke off whole industries because of a few bad apples in business? Pretty much every regulation penalizes masses of people in order to try to ferret out some tiny minority for something that government wants to sanction -- maybe just to pad their own pockets or those of their "friends".

Radical Islam is part of ISLAM. Gun owners generally have no trouble declaring the acts of their MUCH tinier minority to be abhorrent, but the mass of Islam seems to have a terrible problem calling the radical elements out as bad! I wonder how many tears the columnist has shed for gun owners, business or "bitter clingers"?

Trump’s supporters are angry, and anger is infectious. I can tell you as a non-supporter of Trump I am just as angry.

How about BLM? Hildebeast is embracing them at the convention. We have 7 cops shot down in just the past few weeks. We have marches with chants like "What do we want? DEAD COPS!", "Pigs in blankets, fry-em like bacon!" Seems like the author of the column wants to see a country with rule of law and SHARED ideals and morals, but that was America. That is gone, this Tribal BOistan. This violent tribe vs tribe with might being the only determinant of right.

If you’re not a racist, bigoted, misogynistic jerk, then voting for Trump simply because you don’t like Democrats is wrong.

My how friendly. So "wrong"? In a post truth, post religion, post law tribal BOistan, what the hell is "wrong"? The column author clearly means POWER -- what he seeks to do is FORCE those that he labels with whatever his label of the day is to act in accordance with his will, or to shut THE F UP!

In this country we FIGHT and DIE for freedom, for Truth and Justice. We fight for what’s right. And what Trump is doing and saying isn’t right.

Uh? Not in BOistan we don't. "Right"? We threw that out with decency, gender, prayer, God, ethics, etc. We fight for POWER, with tooth and claw -- because BOistan is the Hobbesian Jungle where life is increasingly "poor, nasty, brutish and short" -- especially if you are one of the 60 million slaughtered for convenience on the altar of abortion, or the 6K or so black lives that DON'T matter dying on the streets of our big Democrat controlled cities every year.

"Truth"? The Democrat Convention shows you how tired a concept that is -- rigged and ragged, with everyone convinced that THEIR "truth" is the one that counts. With no higher "ideals" than power and pleasure, concepts like "freedom, truth, justice, right, law, etc" disappear like the morning mist before the raucous chants and slogans of ME, ME, *** M - E ***, and POWER! POWER FOR ME!

BOistan is a hell hole where vermin like Hildebeast live completely above the law -- profiting to the tune of $200 million a year from the incestuous fascist relationship between big government and Wall Street.

The simplest reason to vote Trump is EASY -- FAR Better a Fascist with opposition!

America is gone, welcome to BOistan my fine liberal friend. May those with the sharpest claws and teeth prevail! We sold our souls to BO, now we struggle as tribes, devoid of any shared values, nor and values at all save power and pleasure.

'via Blog this'

Of Course #NeverTrump Is Supporting Hillary!

Ace of Spades HQ:

Barring some sort of completely unexpected happening between now and November 8th, either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump will be elected president. One or both of them could die, and other sundry unlikely things, but there is no way to predict those anyway.

Gary Johnson, or Bernie Sanders, etc is not going to be elected. There may be more votes for a 3rd party candidate than other "typical years", or there may not, but let's face it, Johnson isn't going to come CLOSE to what Ross Perot did in '92 with 20%, AND PEROT STILL LOST!

Yes, we live in intellectually unserious times when people "identify as". or "think that", or "imagine" an endless number of things like "your vote is a message".  No, your vote is a VOTE, for a candidate that either wins or loses. If they lose, then your vote is as worthless as that lottery ticket you bought that paid back NOTHING. You are "investing" a small amount of time and effort to go vote -- just like when you "invest"  in a lottery ticket. It pays off with a "win", or it doesn't,  and that is that.

At least in the case of the lottery ticket, you DO send a strong "message" that you don't understand statistics!

If you WANT there to be a viable third party, by ALL MEANS, get BUSY -- elect local candidates of that party, figure out what it's platform is. Build a base of supporters, funders, workers, messaging, etc, etc. When there are say "30" candidates from your desired party in Congress, THEN if you get a REALLY special, well known, etc candidate -- like a less crazy Ross Perot, THEN you have a legitimate chance of casting a ballot for that candidate and WINNING rather than just helping to elect Bill Clinton! I know ... I voted for BOTH Ross Perot and Jesse Ventura!

The whole linked column is worth reading -- if you have any fantasies about such foolishness. If not, it too is a waste of time -- time spent trying to make a case the earth is flat is wasted time.

All choices have consequences. By supporting Trump, I am responsible for the consequences of a Trump victory -- and those consequences could indeed be dire.
But a childish morally-unserious fantasy has infected the #NeverTrump not-so-intellgentsia, that they can agitate for Hillary Clinton -- by relentlessly disparaging Trump -- and somehow, they are not responsible for the consequences of the Hillary presidency they are bucking for.

Even the choice to CONSIDER the foolishness that you can be "against Trump", but somehow not helping Hillary has consequences. It means that at least in the case "#NeverTrump you are being intellectually sloppy and allowing yourself to behave in a childish fashion. We ALL do that sort of thing, but claiming that we can do it without consequence is seriously indefensible.

When you have a hangover in the AM and you don't believe that it is consequence of your poor choice the night before, you are in in a mentally bad place.

The fact that this discussion is even going on, sadly with some people that are MUCH smarter than that (Jonah Goldberg), is yet another sign we are inhabiting an unknown territory called BOistan where logic and meaning have no bearing!

'via Blog this'

Trump and The Johnson Amendment

When Trump says he wants to expand religious freedom, he doesn’t know what he’s talking about - The Washington Post:

I got to listen to Mr Trump a bit on NPR the other day, a RARE opportunity to hear anything other than the specific soundbite they have selected in their unbiased fashion to BEST represent him! You KNOW you can trust NPR, they are funded by taxes and they are a 501c3 organization, meaning that they NEVER either endorse or oppose anything political!

Trump discussed removing "The Johnson Amendment" which I had never heard of, so here it is:

"in order to keep its 501(c)(3) status, a charitable organization may "not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office."

Simple. Churches are under exactly the same rules as NPR which is not only a 501c3, but tax funded (so even more rigorously restricted!) Universities are under exactly the same rule -- the Sierra Club is a 501c3 which makes no endorsements -- only here is their web page endorsing Hillary Clinton

Here is some detail on the Johnson Amendment including why it is so good -- because it applies EQUALLY to those secular organizations and the religious ones.

... the Johnson Amendment applies equally to religious and non-religious organizations. Secular universities and animal shelters, no less than churches, will lose their special tax status if they specifically endorse or oppose political candidates.

Stalin stated the obvious relative to voting -- it is meaningless, what is important is the COUNTING, who counts the votes?

"The Party" (TP-D) understands this relative to "justice" and "the law" as well. "The Johnson Amendment" (TJA) applies to exactly whom TP decides it applies to! You holding your breath for the Sierra Club or NPR to be prosecuted? I hope not, it isn't going to happen! Did you pay any attention to how the laws of the land were applied to Hildebeast? The only "law" remaining in this land is TP save for the armed populace.

That was why our founders declared in the first amendment that congress SHALL NOT pass ANY law abridging the rights of religion and speech. The IRS is one big hammer for TP punish their enemies and reward their friends. Our founders realized that government was INHERENTLY corrupt, so they wanted to LIMIT it -- that is why you see things like NO LAW and SHALL NOT!

So we have exercises in insanity like this from the WaPo linked at the top.

... Article VI leaves no room for misunderstanding: “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.” Anyone who cannot abide that standard has no business swearing to “preserve, protect and defend” the Constitution itself (Article II).

So deciding that Evangelical churches ACTUALLY ought to be treated like NPR, universities, the Sierra Club, Black Churches, etc, etc is a "religious test for qualification for office"??? Hello? See, TRUMP doesn't "know what he is talking about"! Why can't organizations be tax exempt merely because they are not PROFIT MAKING? It seems to be working pretty darned well for NPR, all the major universities and all the black churches who can say any damned thing they want as long as it passes the muster of TP!

Did you REALLY need to see Hildebeast "cleared" explicitly because she WAS Hildebeast to realize that there is no "blind lady justice with scales" in this country?  The Democratic Party (TP)  **IS** the "law", and things like TJA are how they enforce it upon who they wish and fail to enforce it where they don't

My fervent hope is that Trump will KEEP TALKING -- each and every day I realize more and more of just how TP managed to destroy America and create BOistan.

I have no idea if it is remotely possible to resurrect America, but let's at least put some lights on the walls and prison guards of BOistan!

Dilbert, Hypnosis, Trump

How to Un-Hypnotize a Rabid Anti-Trumper | Scott Adams Blog:

If you want to go through the linked column, I think it is worthy relative to understanding persuasion. I very much enjoy that Adams indicates that if a "rabid anti-Trumper" is concerned about "his potential SCOTUS nominees", they have likely given the matter some thought and it is reasonable to just "agree to disagree". It shows he believes that rational people can come to different conclusions that ARE "thought out".

Adams is observing Trump from the POV of a "technical nerd persuasion scientist", here is his disclaimer at the end:

Note: I endorsed Hillary Clinton for my personal safety, because I live in California. But my political views do not align with any of the candidates for president. 

Personally, I would do better under a Clinton presidency. If Clinton gets elected, no one will blame me for anything she does in office. But if Trump wins, my blogging about his persuasion skills will make it look like my fault every time he does something you don’t like. I don’t need that trouble. 

Also, as a top one-percenter, I’m winning under the current system. Trump is the only candidate who has the persuasion skills to increase tax rates on the rich, so #imwithher, for selfish reasons.

He is a top 1%er -- so he can get around the massive taxes that those of us in the 98-80th% percentiles have to pay. I applaud his honesty!

He  uses four specific objections that are "media brainwashing" ( being hypnotized in his lexicon. "heavy persuasion" )

1. Trump is a loose cannon that will offend other countries and may start nuclear war. 
2. Trump is terrible at business because he has had several bankruptcies 
3. Trump is a racist 
4. Trump is anti-woman  and anti-GBLT 

He goes through what is essentially the "reverse hypnotism" that the media has worked on people to persuade them of these 4 ... factual objections, asking questions, obvious fallacies (Mexico is a country, not a race), obvious truths ( "all humans are biased" ), you WANT a president that discriminates against non-citizens. The job is President of the US, not "World Citizen" like the current putz!

It's worth the read, but not critical -- just be aware (as everyone that reads this blog ought to be) that most of what the media drives into our heads day after day after ... is pure propaganda, sloppy thinking, or downright lies intended to persuade us to support what is best for the 1% -- who of course run the media on BOTH "sides". 

'via Blog this'

Due Process And Other Words That Don't Matter

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/436725/orlando-massacre-political-response?utm_source=NR&utm_medium=Facebook&utm_campaign=June17Goldberg

A post-American column worth reading. If Goldberg fully understood the words that even he is saying his cause would be #NeverHillary rather than #NeverTrump. His own column makes the case -- at least Trump would be opposed! 

In a world where there is no truth and no agreed principles, words indeed do not matter -- only POWER matters, which is what BO uses constantly. What he clearly means is that HIS words matter -- more than the Constitution, more than the Bible, and clearly FAR more than those who have been declared "persona non grata" by "The Party" (TP-D).

Let’s start at the top. President Obama once famously said (more than once, actually), “Don’t tell me words don’t matter.” Fast-forward to this week, when in a tantrum of biblical proportions, the furious president said . . . words don’t matter. Responding to complaints from Donald Trump and others that he won’t say the words “radical Islamic terrorism,” Obama huffed, “Calling a threat by a different name does not make it go away. This is a political distraction.”

"Due Process" which means that there must be a known and "fair" process before a citizen can be deprived of their rights under what used to be the American Constitution. Now Senators care nothing for those words that don't matter in the face of raw power.

Sen. Joe Manchin (D., W.Va.) thinks the constitutional requirement for due process is “killing us.”

When words don't matter, there is no truth but that which power demands be given service. "Due Process", that which was the basis for any right of free men needs to be done away with. Who is at fault for this latest killing"? According to TPs paper of record, the NY Times, "Christians and Republicans".

“While the precise motivation for the rampage remains unclear,” the New York Times editorialized, “it is evident that Mr. Mateen was driven by hatred toward gays and lesbians.” “Hate crimes don’t happen in a vacuum,” added the Gray Lady (I’m referring to the Times, not Clinton). 

“They occur where bigotry is allowed to fester, where minorities are vilified and where people are scapegoated for political gain. Tragically, this is the state of American politics, driven too often by Republican politicians who see prejudice as something to exploit, not extinguish.”  

The killer was a registered Democrat. The source of his hatred was not the Christian Coalition but radical Islamism. He stated this motivation clearly during the shooting and for months prior. He reportedly also considered attacking that notorious gay hangout Disney World. Would we be hearing about the pernicious, right-wing, anti-cartoon-character climate if he’d opted for that target?

When territory is ruled by a single party, the ONLY thing that matters is THE WORD OF THE PARTY! The fact that the killer was Islamic and trumpted his allegiance to ISIS **DURING** the killing does not fit the TP narrative, so it is discounted -- "Republicans, Christians, guns" ... those are the problem, and if you do not buy that, you need to get your mind right! 

La Raza Vs The Boy Scouts

Judges Can Belong To La Raza But Not The Boy Scouts | The Daily Caller:

It is extremely easy to see how at least millions of Americans will pull the lever for Trump on no other basis than they are completely fed up with the lying manipulation of our "elites".

The article points out that the judge Trump has criticized is a member of La Raza -- a pro-illegal immigration and anti-white / America group. But even supposedly "conservative" Republicans don't take the time to point that out.

OTOH, when the Scouts prohibited gay leaders, judges could not associate with them in California.

We have no laws, no borders and no country -- it is increasingly hard to even read the news, let alone care about it.

'via Blog this'

Hillary Bubble Boy

http://www.dailywire.com/news/5830/media-have-unintentionally-destroyed-hillary-ben-shapiro#.Vz0U6TLxW6c.twitter

The thesis is that the media have propped up the poor Hildebast for years, but head to head with Trump they can't help her. She would need to stand on her own tentacles.

As a candidate, Clinton is like the Bubble Boy: She's been placed inside the warm cocoon of an all-embracing leftist establishment, never exposed to the normal viruses of everyday politics. The minute she exits that protective bubble, she's hit with those viruses -- and she has no immune system to help her fight them.

 It's short and worth the read.

The media subsidized Clinton into a position of power. She's now so vulnerable that a 74-year-old charisma-free socialist nearly took her down. Now she's got a worse virus: a case of the Trumps. Her immune system has been so compromised that she may be politically terminal.

Hillary Endorses Trump, Melts

Hillary Clinton's evisceration of Donald Trump - CNNPolitics.com:

The iron clad rule of the viruses that identify as "Clintons" is that if their lips are a flappin, you can be certain the lies are a spewin ... wholesale!

When Slick wags his finger and says looking right at the camera that he "Did not have sex with that woman ...", Well, he did! (surprise, surprise)  If he ever tells the truth it is an accident.

Likewise, when Hildebeast screeches on some topic, like "Benghazi was caused by in incendiary internet movie!", you can rest assured, it wasn't, it was terrorism just like everyone knew it was.

We can rely pretty much on the opposite of what the hag says -- no secrets on that server? Well, of course there are -- "mislabeled". Indeed.

So, in my book she just declared Trump to be a great guy with fantastic temperament to be president. Now could she just melt?

We REALLY need a Hildebeast filter that makes sure that we don't have to listen to that harpy screech or the demonic cackle! When I hear her, this is what I see in my mind.

I'm thinking that Trump looks a bit like the Wizard -- a lot of smoke and bluster, but maybe in the end he can find some answers for our sad sorry Lion of a military, Straw-man of an economy and Tin Woodsman of a culture which the ravages of BO have left us with.

Indeed, if we all realized that "We had the power to go back to Kansas all along!" (that making the nation great again isn't about "Witches and Wizards", but rather about us getting back to the real world, putting on our work boots rather than our "Ruby Red Slippers" and GETTING BUSY!

Is this her theme theme music?

I'm guessing that even her Secret Service protection would be glad to see this scene -- it must be hard for them to insure that she never gets wet!

'via Blog this'

"I Don't Care" vs "What Difference Does it Make?"

Donald Trump perfectly summed up his life philosophy in just 6 words - The Washington Post:

The WaPo feels that Trump's life philosophy is summed up by "Why antagonize? I don't care."

The same WaPo had this to say about one of Hildebeast's summaries in Oct of 2015 ...

When she last testified before, I think, a Senate committee, she got exasperated. At one point, "What difference does it make?" came out. [Ed. note: The exact quote is "What difference, at this point, does it make?] I felt right there and then, that’s not the right answer. People died, let’s not forget, so that has to be treated with a good deal of sensitivity.

Here the same WaPo is cheering on the gay / bisexual / transgender movement.

But all of these factors — the increased acceptance, the increased behavior and the trend toward sexual fluidity — make Twenge think she knows the real driving force behind this cultural shift: We care more about ourselves. She believes this comes from an increased sense of individualism.

As I've often argued, BO, Hildebeast, and Trump are all perfectly representative of a "culture" dedicated to "whatever I think is what counts"! One of the other nicknames for Hildebeast is "Herself" -- as with BO, EVERYTHING always comes back to her (or in BO's case, him). Trump, Hildebeast and BO definitely DO CARE -- about themselves. As do the WaPo writers and what they see as "all reasonable Americans".

The WaPo believes that thousands of years of culture can be thrown out the window so individuals care only about their own pleasures, peccadillos and personal views on everything from metaphysics to politics. They naturally find this to be abhorrent when they see it in Trump, have some mild concerns when they see it in Hillary, and are completely blind relative to BO or themselves.

"Some thinkers have made the case that individualism has been increasing in Western culture since the Renaissance, but that this change accelerated beginning around 1965 or 1970," she explained. As societies become more comfortable in terms of resource availability, one doesn't need to worry as much about fitting in to the rules and expectations of the larger group.

A historian might look at this and say that "nothing fails like success". When MATERIAL needs ("resource availability") is assumed to be guaranteed, as a "right" -- like gravity, or your next breath, the normal human, absent any "higher ideals", will revert to looking out for the pleasures and assumed happiness that such pleasures will bring for them personally -- and "not care". Because, "What difference, at this point, does it make"?

God must always have a little chuckle -- the person they quote in the gay cheerleading study is named "Twenge", painfully close to "twinge", which is a feeling that it is clear that they have started to have as they have watched the rise of Trump. Absent any truth that transcends mere physical information, the only arbiter is power -- so they have had 2nd thoughts about democracy and have advocated using the Electoral College to overturn the election.

This is BOistan -- this is what we have created, and now we live here. It's every person for themselves and the nastiest tribe "wins"!

Thankfully, the life of a place like this is "Solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short"  .... the context from Hobbes is here -- I believe he was commenting on the current state of BOistan.

"During the time men live without a common power to keep them all in awe, they are in that conditions called war; and such a war, as if of every man, against every man. 

"To this war of every man against every man, this also in consequent; that nothing can be unjust. The notions of right and wrong, justice and injustice have there no place. Where there is no common power, there is no law, where no law, no injustice. Force, and fraud, are in war the cardinal virtues.

"No arts; no letters; no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear, and danger of violent death: and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short."

'via Blog this'