Wednesday, December 29, 2010

Meet The Liberal Elite

As the video description says:
"A conservative encounters an elitist liberal. A pleasant conversation ensues. This is that conversation."

The flat delivery of xtranormal's animated characters makes it that much more fun. Enjoy!

Sunday, December 26, 2010

Damn Yankees

NY Post columnist Eric Torbenson recently published a column entitled "Deep in the heart of taxes". The main points of the column are this:

New York, I love you — but I can’t make the math work.

Like lots of media professionals (and fashion mavens, artists, musicians, et al.), I’ve penciled out the numbers for what it would mean to take a job in New York City. There’s barely enough room on the back of the envelope for subtracting the double-dose income tax hit from the city and state, and that’s before even adjusting for cost of living.

That’s one of the reasons I’m in Dallas. You know, Texas, the state that parlayed this year’s census data into four new House seats — pinching the two lost by the Empire State — because people actually want to live here.

Lots of Texas professionals love New York this way: fly in for $200 round trip, suck down the city’s beefy marrow of culture for a weekend and jet back to live cheap and pay no income tax. It’s all the pleasure and we keep our treasure.

This isn't really a surprise. Texas acts as a tax haven from socialist hellhole states like New York. State/city income tax is the reason why Rush Limbaugh left NY for Florida. But the problem comes at the end of that assessment by Torbenson. Torbenson's idea of "beefy marrow of culture" is the kind of narrow-mindedness that's very easily illustrated.

It's meant as a parody, but seriously, this is what they think.

He elaborates:

The state still has its issues. When you have no income tax, property and sales taxes have to make up the revenue gap, and they’re pretty steep. And try not to be poor down here because the Texas approach to a social safety net can be summed up as “Meh.” Texas spends less per capita on social services than virtually any state.

The income gap here makes Texas look more like Mexico in some ways than the rest of the country, though New York is no stranger to wealth excess contrasted with subsistence living. Texas has led the country in the percentage of people lacking health care, teenage pregnancy rates and drags the bottom on educational attainment. Political discourse here remains whether Democrats are socialists or simply traitors.

Here is where Torbenson illustrates that he doesn't understand Texas at all, and should go back to NYC where he belongs.

Sales tax is not steep. 6.25% is not steep. There is no sales tax on food. That makes it much, much easier to be poor. Plus, unlike his beloved NYC, we in Texas have grocery stores and supermarkets and local markets down here - you don't have to eat out just to eat, as in NYC. NYC's sales tax, by comparison, is 8.875%.

Property tax is higher in Texas than some places because... guess what? Wealthy folks own property. To be among the "landed classes" has for millenia been one of the striving forces of people, and an indication that one is well-to-do. And if you pay a little more to own the land, well, that's just how it is. You can afford a home. Suck it up.

No one who's making $20K a year is going to feel it anywhere near as much in their pocket, though it will be passed on slightly from the landlord. The landlord, meanwhile, benefits from low sales tax and no income tax... which is why an apartment in Texas rents for $500 instead of $5000.

As a counterpoint to Mr. Torbenson - if he can come up with a way to cut property taxes and still run the state, let him run for governor. Debra Medina ran on the idea of cutting property taxes. While she had faults that led to her failure in the governor's race, the idea of changing property taxes may have some merit. Of course, this would, by all definitions, be an explicit endorsement of the landed classes - and while it would benefit those who don't own land as well - it'd require a lot more than just a whining New Yorker complaining about his rates to change.

The next thing on Torbenson's litany of complaints about his new home state is the lack of social services. Being the daft New Yorker that he is, perhaps he needs a reminder of what "social services" means:

High per-capita spending means HANDOUTS. Handouts are best summed up by on of my favorite Democrats, Grover Cleveland.

"Federal aid in such cases encourages the expectation of paternal care on the part of the Government and weakens the sturdiness of our national character. . . . "

This applies at the state/local level, too. Give handouts, and you end up with professional recipients waiting in line to be given their "due" for being poor. And where does that money come from? Someone's "stash"? No, Mr. Torbenson, it comes from citizens. It comes from the higher taxes that you and your ilk are trying to run from. Vice President Joe "Foot-in-mouth" Biden says it's patriotic to pay taxes. He says those taxes are put back in the pockets of middle-class Americans.

Mr Torbenson, why are you running from your obligations to give money to middle class New Yorkers?

The income gap doesn't make Texas look like Mexico. Mexico looks like Mexico, where the rich live in walled enclaves. Texans enjoy a basic human right that Mexicans do not. Self-defense.

Do not underestimate this. There may be great wealth disparity in Texas, but so what? The vaquero riding a ranch in west Texas or the bubba slopping hogs in east Texas all share the same protection under the law, and are all afforded the ability to defend themselves against predation. Their basic security is ensured by Texas law. Their ability to earn and improve their lot is limited only by their own potential. Their right of self defense isn't limited by connections to the mayor or governor, as in New York.

Mr. Torbenson, you fail to understand the most basic elements of human living. People in Texas can be secure in their homes and their property moreso than any New Yorker.

Texas shares a border with a third world nation that's rapidly descending into anarchy, and plays host to a few sanctuary cities that invite in third world aliens. Austin is a major offender in this category. That by itself increases the teenage pregnancy rate and the rate of people in the state without health care.

Political discourse in Texas does often consist of whether Democrats are socialists or traitors because we look at what they do. When you live on the border, you see the criminal aliens that sneak across (or are caught) and you see the effects of illegal aliens invading the country.

You also see this:
“I have only one loyalty,” he says, “and that’s to the immigrant community.”
- Illinois Democrat Congressman Luis Gutierrez

Make no mistake - he's not talking about the legal immigrant community from India or Sweden or Laos or Japan or Bangladesh or Egypt. He's talking about illegal aliens, primarily from Mexico.

His "one loyalty" isn't to his constituency. It isn't to his oath of office. It's to these guys:
Chinga tu madre, culo de perro.

Remember this... just last week?

Democrat Congressman Luis Gutierrez IS a traitor. And a socialist. Yes, a socialist.

Mr. Torbenson doesn't understand the concept of a social safety net, either. A social safety net, to a socialist leftist who lives in NYC (even if you write for the NY Post, you're probably more socialist/leftist than you are constitutionalist), means the government's gun is put up against your head and taxes are taken to be redistributed.

A social safety net, to folks in Texas, means that when your neighbor, friend, family member or fellow church parishoner or coworker or whoever needs some help - you have more of your own wealth to offer it. Culturally, you don't go begging for the government to shove a pistol in someone else's face and take their money for your "safety net". Your neighbor, or your friend, or your fellow parishoner or your relative helps you out. You aren't conditioned by the nanny state government to beg for handouts, so your social net knows when you need help, you need it. Or if you cry wolf, they ignore you, and you get nowhere - and you stop crying wolf and get a job.

In a more extreme example - in Boston, people seeing a cop being beaten walk by and don't help. New Yorkers are famous for closing their shades and ignoring a woman being murdered. In Texas, you don't even have to be home for your neighbors to defend you and your property.

Where do you feel safer? A state with a firm self defense mindset, where your physical safety is a priority to state representatives, and your financial and social safety is ensured by loving relatives, friends, coworkers, and the generous spirit of the people you know? Or a state where your "safety net" is doled out by some faceless bureaucrat, sick and tired of the incessant begging at their office?

If you're an illegal alien and burglar, feel free to relocate to New York. They have TVs there, handouts for you, and they won't shoot you - and if they did, they'd go to jail and you'd get to sue them.

Mr. Torbenson, in the Rockies, there's a term. It's called "aspenification".
Your town doesn't even have a gay lesbian bisexual transgender crystal-channeling health center, does it, Stan DARSH!?!

It's when a good town is overrun with aliens. Not the illegal alien kind. The kind of aliens that come from California. Usually they're running from something - high taxation due to idiotic social programs, crime caused by their social programs and gun control that disarmed all the non-criminals, that kind of thing. The town is taken over by rich people (typically from California) who are socially insulated by their position and their ability to just flit about from coast to coast. They don't understand what happens around them because they're wealthy enough to avoid any ramifications. So they simply move again, and ruin another small town.

In the Rockies, they typically come in and overtax the local government and drive out all the previous residents. Then they wonder why their city collapses on them in a rush of insane living expenses, taxes, and absurd laws and regulations. Basically, they bring their own big-city baggage with them and inflict it on the new town.

The newcomers don't want to assimilate into the small town. They resent the small town because it's prosperous. They want to change their new home into their old one - and they don't understand that the reasons the new town is BETTER than their old home is because of all the bullshit they inflict on it.

In Texas, there's a term for people who aren't from Texas. It's used elsewhere in the old South, though Texans strangely even use it to refer to folks from the old South. Yankees. It has to do with newcomers. Newcomers who come to stay are called Damn Yankees. Those who don't assimilate to Texas culture and understand that the things that Texas does are for a reason* earn the name - and it's no term of endearment. Also in the old South, they're referred to as Goddamn Yankees.**

Again I recall Thomas Sowell:
"For the anointed, traditions are likely to be seen as the dead hand of the past, relics of a less enlightened age, and not as the distilled experience of millions who faced similar human vicissitudes before."

*For example: I used to live in a state with huge tracts of Forest Service and BLM land. Quite often really nice for that state, but it doesn't work in Texas. And I wouldn't want it, nor push for it, in Texas. That's just not how it works in Texas.

**In the bible belt, that's no small curse, either, though it may be lost on the philistines who populate Gotham and use "f*** you!" as a greeting - the "New York hello".

Wednesday, December 22, 2010

What We Believe Part VII: American Exceptionalism

Bill Whittle's final Part VII of the What We Believe series, explaining Tea Party/conservative beliefs:

Whittle wraps up the series, and hopefully those who've watched it have gotten a little more insight - possibly into their own views and how to express them.

Picking nits:
Folks used to statistics will note that his comparison of "science units" is not done per capita, as the other nations listed are smaller. Were it done per capita (rounding to nearest million in both cases) it would look like this:

UK:______.29 science units/person (18 million science units/61 million population)
Canada:___.27 (9sci/33pop)
USA:_____.24 (75/307pop)
Germany:__.18 (15sci/81pop)
France:___.16 (10sci/62pop)
Italy:_____.11 (7mil/60mil pop)
Japan:____.09 (12sci/127pop)

Considering the VAST size of the US population, that's pretty darned decent. Couple it with the fact that the UK benefits from many very well established science centers, and that Canada has no small benefit from being a partner to both the US and UK, it's not too much of a surprise that per capita, the UK and Canada are doing very well. And good for them - but by no means is their prosperity an indictment of the fact that the US is the shining beacon of science by volume, and a very strong third per capita. That the US, with a vast population to offset in per capita comparison, still eclipses other nations is perhaps a greater support of Whittle's point of American exceptionalism in science endeavors.

Now, there are other reasons for this as well that Whittle hit on in earlier videos. One is the rule of law. Individuals who discover or invent something are probably going to have their patents, inventions, or ideas respected. Discovery and invention are generally rewarded through prosperity, and only rarely thwarted by intellectual theives or seizure by the state.

Consider Mikhael. He invented a product that's used worldwide, was adopted by his own government, and is so famous and iconic as to be recognized immediately. You probably know his last name already, and undoubtedly the initials his invention is known by.

His invention is so famous it's even on the flag of Mozambique.

Did he earn anything from it the way an engineer in the US would have? He received a lot of medals, promotions, and state handouts, but nothing along the lines of what a US inventor would receive for such a prolific creation - with about 100 million units worldwide. If he were selling records, it'd be a decuple diamond album, topped only by another Michael. Except a record cost about thirty to fifty times less.

Tuesday, December 21, 2010

What We Believe Part VI: Immigration

Bill Whittle's Firewall Part VI of the explanation of Tea Party/conservative values:

There's a huge difference between legal and illegal immigration, and Whittle makes that pretty clear. For those concerned about the illegal immigration and criminal enterprises on the southern border, I suggest these internet news sites:
Borderland Beat

Both of these sites will keep you up to speed on what the bi-coastal leftist ruling class media doesn't bother to show. Be advised, both sites sometimes feature graphic material concerning the massacres, beheadings and murders that take place along the border and into Mexico.

For folks who live considerably north of the border, and whose interaction with illegal aliens is one of hiring a day laborer, or some other innocuous, seemingly innocent activity, consider that people whose backgrounds have never been looked into could be former child soldiers from the Salvadoran civil war. Your 40 year old gardener may have been the leader of a death squad for either the leftist guerillas or the Salvadoran government. The day laborer at your house may have left Mexico because he was running from the law in Mexico. The guy at the Chinese restaurant here illegally may have been sent across in a shipping container, and he's working until his sister's debt is paid off - while she works as a "masseuse"/prostitute and her papers are held by the smuggler.

ICE has been apprehending record numbers of criminal illegal aliens this year.

Criminal illegal aliens being given a pass within the US is more the rule than the exception. While anecdotal, the story of the feds releasing an illegal alien from Bolivia who killed a nun is standard operating procedure across much of the nation.

And that's not even getting into the illegal alien criminal gangs.
That's from 2005. Click the image and notice that there are a lot of arrests far north of the border.

One more anecdote: a mutual friend of JBH and mine recently was doing a ridealong with a state trooper in a north midwestern state. They were riding in an unmarked police vehicle, and another vehicle approached them, wanting to race. The state trooper told our friend that he'd wait until the racing vehicle hit a high enough speed to take him to jail to pull him over. When the speeds reached over 100 mph, the trooper turned on his lights and pulled over the racer. The racer was an illegal alien, and was released. Not arrested and released - just released - as in "Have a nice day, sir."

The reason? That northern midwestern state is a sanctuary state. Orders from the state capital to the state police tell them to leave illegal aliens alone.

Think it's an exaggeration? Remember Massachussetts state representative Democrat Mike Moran - being hit by an illegal alien?

It's commonplace. Illegal aliens can commit crimes with impunity. And that's not even getting into the effects of a massive influx of cheap labor that depletes the job pool available to US citizens.

The republicans want cheap labor, and the democrats want cheap labor and to give handouts and make a perpetual voting bloc based on ethnic identity. Republicans are simply cheap stupid opportunists, and democrats are conniving, slithering, racist opportunists.

Tea Partiers want the rule of law, not rule by the whims of whatever political power is in charge.

Sunday, December 19, 2010

What We Believe Part V: Gun Rights

Bill Whittle's Part V of the explanation of Tea Party/conservative beliefs:

We see natural law revisited here. If it's yours, it's yours - and your property is your right - and your right to defend. No legitimate government can take away the right to property. Indeed, original phrase used by the founders was "life, liberty and pursuit of property". If it's yours, it's yours - be it your home, your house, your car, your labor, your wealth or your body.
Photo by Oleg Volk.

Just today, I stumbled across this essay: Violence Is Golden. It's a very direct assessment of how society works, and how violence works. It's a more elaborate version of Robert Heinlein's explanation in Starship Troopers via Sgt Zim of the application of force.

Photo by Oleg Volk.

It's something that, like Whittle says, most conservative/Tea Party/traditionalist types instinctively understand. It's not something that needs to be elaborated on to be understood - but it's worth it to examine beliefs anyway. For most folks, Oleg Volk's posters are simply direct, visual statements of common sense. Through examining these beliefs, it makes it easier to convey them to those who don't understand - those who fear firearms and place their blind trust unwisely in the monopoly of force that the state controls.

Again, by Oleg Volk.
But for people who live in a bubble, it is not easy to understand. For rich city people who believe that the police are there in an instant, perhaps banning guns makes sense. They don't have to experience violence in their lives. They are never threatened by crime, animals, nor do they feel the boot of oppressive government - the police are invariably subservient, because the super-rich are connected to the county/city/state/federal government.

For the not-super-rich city dweller, the modest suburbanite, or the rural resident of whatever means, physical security is a real concern - even against tyrannical government.

For people who've been victimized on a massive scale - they know what gun control really means firsthand. It isn't a myth, it isn't a "can't happen here", and no amount of "we live in a good neighborhood" or "we have laws against that" means a damn thing. They know that violence exists - sometimes in the form of common thugs, but more often in the form of tyranny.

Volk's work again.

And that line of defense is just part of beauty of the Second Amendment. The Founders knew a way to prevent tyranny, oppression, and crime (which is just tyranny or oppression on the personal scale). And they knew that the more of it we exercise, the fewer rights we have trampled - the freer we are, and the safer we are. The greater that defense, the greater the deterrence against oppressors.

No freeman should ever be disbarred
the use of arms.
- Thomas Jefferson
An armed society is a polite society.
- Robert Heinlein

For those unconvinced, I suggest exploring Oleg Volk's site: A Human Right. It's also a good site to explore your own opinions on the Second Amendment, as well as something to show to others who may not have the frame of reference to understand.

Also, since it's fun and informative and persuasive, check out Penn & Teller skewering Gun Control.

She can resist tyranny, oppression, and crime. Sunburn, not so much.

And Oleg Volk has an awesome job.

Friday, December 17, 2010

What We Believe Part IV: Natural Law

Bill Whittle's Part IV of the explanation of Tea Party/conservative beliefs:

Natural law means the right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins.
Political law means that the "authorities" decide you need to be have your limbs fettered and bound because you might swing your fists.

John Locke wrote much about Natural Law in his Second Treatise of Government, and he starts by addressing man kind in a condition of nature - wherein man is free, and left to his own devices. There is no government to determine what an individual can or cannot do - his actions are subject only to the limitations of the individual's imagination and capability. In a state of perfect freedom, an individual is subject only to the triumphs and tragedies and vicissitudes of life. Government exists as a compact between indivuduals to provide for mutual safety and improvment.

Often times, once government has established itself as a power, be it the tribal chief, the invading warlord, or the gerrymandered-district eternal senator; the government as an institution is simply a tool of power for a tyrant - not a tool for groups of individuals to provide for their common defense and well-being.

Consider this:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.

Governments exist by the consent of the governed, and are rejected by those who are governed, but no longer wish to be. Contracts exist by consent of those involved, and are to be honored.

Government existing at the behest of the governors - the ruling class - is tyranny.

Thursday, December 16, 2010

What We Believe Part III: Wealth Creation

Bill Whittle's Part III of the explanation of Tea Party/conservative beliefs:

It's worth it to follow this up with Francisco D'Anconia's money speech from Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged. In part:

"If you ask me to name the proudest distinction of Americans, I would choose--because it contains all the others--the fact that they were the people who created the phrase 'to make money.' No other language or nation had ever used these words before; men had always thought of wealth as a static quantity--to be seized, begged, inherited, shared, looted or obtained as a favor. Americans were the first to understand that wealth has to be created. The words 'to make money' hold the essence of human morality."

Wednesday, December 15, 2010

Citizens Concepts: The Patriotapp

Here's the website.

SO, these folks have built themselves an iPhone called the patriotapp. Here's what they say about it:

"...the word's first iPhone application that empower citizens to assist government agencies in creating safer, cleaner, and more efficient communities.... This app was founded on the belief that citizens can provide the most sophisticated and broad network of eyes and ears necessary to prevent terrorism, crime, environmental negligence, or other malicious behavior."

This is downright scary, this application is capable of letting a person take photos and send those photos along with a write-up to various government agencies including FBI, EPA, GAO, and CDC. this sure smacks of the DHS's "If you see something, say something," campaign, which now is at your local Wal-Mart store.

The website states the applications several uses:
  • Enable citizens to record and communicate the following:
  • National Security
  • Suspicious Activities
  • Crime
  • Government Waste
  • Environmental Crime or possible violations
  • White Collar Crime
  • Workplace Harassment
  • Discrimination, or other violations
  • Public Health Concerns

This basically is another way for the government to build information on the citizens they are supposed to be protecting. The potential for this application to be misused is exponential. People will be turning the neighbors in for blocking each other's drive ways, playing their music too loud, or collecting information for the government, such as how many guns a guy sees his neighbor with. This app gives people the incentive to actually spy on their neighbors.

On the other hand, however, this touted as a new 911 service that can help the authorities respond even faster with better information. But at what cost? How many potential resources could be wasted when a neighbor gets upset at another and decides to send that message to the FBI or DHS? Is this app going to solve problems or cause new ones.

Lets not forget we have folks calling 911 to complain about their fast food.

Related articles

Enhanced by Zemanta

What We Believe Part II: The Problem With Elitism

Bill Whittle's Part 2 of the explanation of conservative/Tea Party beliefs:

A few minutes to gain valuable insight into the why. It may be a "why" that many of us already intuitively know, but to examine one's own beliefs is always worthwhile.

Thomas Sowell offers this quote about traditions from his book "The Vision of the Anointed":
"For the anointed, traditions are likely to be seen as the dead hand of the past, relics of a less enlightened age, and not as the distilled experience of millions who faced similar human vicissitudes before."

Sowell's statement, in conjunction with Whittle's explanations, is much of the reason why social and fiscal conservatism so often find themselves represented by the same individuals. The basis for much of the thinking - that individual experiences have given people decades, centuries, or millenia of good choices - remains the same, and to disregard either social conservatism (traditionalism) or fiscal conservatism without good cause, or because of elitist mandate, is foolish. It assumes that the financial or social engineer (whether to stricter or looser policies of society or finance) alone has a better idea - and the elitist engineer must therefore direct society.

The non-elitist who believes they have a better way puts forth his new ideas as an invention, which is adopted by society if it's good, and ignored or rejected by society if it is not.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. And if someone thinks they can do better - they can prove it themselves.

Tuesday, December 14, 2010

What We Believe Part I: Small Government and Free Enterprise

Part 1 of Bill Whittle's 7-part breakdown of modern conservatism and the fundamental beliefs of the Tea Party.

Tuesday, November 30, 2010

Lame Duck "Immigration Reform" - Amnesty

Michelle Malkin has the roundup here:

Short version from the People's Cube:
The interesting part is that even if it doesn't go through - since Democrats do have to appease the Unions - it may be pushed through by Republicans who want cheap labor for businesses and only pay lip service to US citizens next year. And while one can explain that the failure of the fedgov to enforce immigration laws has led to the ready availability of illegal or amnestied-legal unskilled labor depresses labor costs all around and causes employers to fire long-term, higher-paid workers due to their newfound lack of economic viability... the short version is this:

Which is why Democrats who were beholden to union votes weren't necessarily pro-illegal alien.

The rank & file working Democrat voter (the union guy) - is not pro-illegal alien. But the lame duck congress doesn't have to answer to him. Nor does it answer to the rest of the population that opposes granting citizenship to what amounts to underground invaders.*

Of course, if the current congressional leadership simply takes via taxes from Citizen A and Legal Resident Alien-Who-Worked-His-Ass-Off B and gives via handouts to Illegal Alien C, D, E, F, and G, then that congressman now has C, D, E, F, and G voting for him/his party in perpetuety... and as for Citizen A and Legal Resident Alien B? A bureaucrat with the swipe of a pen has told them that their country isn't theirs anymore - and they don't have the votes to change it anymore.

*I have no idea if that was a 50s sci-fi movie, but it should be.

Monday, November 8, 2010

Economics by Mike In East Texas

For those who live outside the range of the Texas State Network's 1080 KRLD and who aren't awake during the overnight hours, you're missing out on on hell of a show. Texas Overnight runs between midnight and 4 AM CST, and is one of the most engaging, intelligent talk radio shows around.

Every Monday, Texas Overnight host Charley Jones has a guest on who's only identified as "Mike in East Texas", a self-described "forensic economist". Despite his folksy accent, Mike is exceptionally wise when it comes to economics, and breaks down the economic situation pretty well. His identity is a fairly well-kept secret, but what he has revealed is that his economic acumen led him to a remarkably productive career. He retired at some point and now shares information with Charley Jones' listeners.

The following is a two-hour discussion between Mike in East Texas and Charley Jones from 11/8/10.
Edited because the darn thing started immediately playing at the site. Really obnoxious...

If you want some stunning insight on what's happened in the last few years, it's highly recommended. Give it a listen for a few minutes and you'll probably find yourself hooked.

(More Texas Overnight pieces with Mike can be found on the net, but if y'all would like, I'll dig them up every Monday that I can find them. Leave a note below.)

Saturday, November 6, 2010

The Extremists Are Coming

Saw this one over at Theo Spark's blog, which is not always 100% SFW, but has a lot of good news & politic info. And pinup girls.

Friday, November 5, 2010

Vanity Fair (Statist in Disguise)

In a recent article which can be found here, an editor of the Vanity Fair magazine tells the American electorate to "Man up" and stop acting like angry, hormonal teenagers. Here are a few points I would like to highlight about this piece of writing:

1. He believes the American electorate to be a bunch of self possessed teenagers who are acting out at their parents, i.e. the government. It has to be mentioned that this is a definite liberal sentiment, that "they" (statist, modern liberals, socialist etc.) know what is best for you, just like your parents did. They want "the best" for you but with that comes the erosion of your personal responsibility by the statist government. Some examples include New York state regulating your salt intake, and a general push in some states to not allow vending machines on school campuses for "the good of the children." It also includes determining if you should receive healthcare if your 65 years old or a new born infant because some government bureaucrat has decided he knows better the a physician does.

2. He also is still clinging to racism alledgedlly perpetrated upon President Obama by the American people especially those that love their guns and are just angry white folks. Look at Lt. Colonel Allen West in Florida, look at all the African American voters that stood within and with out the tea party this last election. This has nothing to do with race. It has everything to do with the Obama Regime's agenda and a congress that was owned lock, stock and barrel by statist and followed regime's whims. Even then the regime couldn't always do what it wanted. People forget about the statist super majority and the senate and healthcare almost failed anyhow.

The gentleman from Vanity Fair attempts to sound a moderate but it is evident he is not. He clings to the liberal argument that the majority of this country is racist and hates Obama when in reality its the Obama Agenda that is truly despised. He wants to get back to the days of "moderate" President Bill Clinton which he apparently forgets was forced to the center after the statist attempted to pass healtcare reform during his first term and was "shouted at" by us angry teenagers. He also points out that what makes this national "teenage backlash" worse is that us right wingers like our guns and that statement further implicates this gentleman as another statist that just doesn't get it.

Statist will never understand conservative principles of freedom, liberty, nor personal responsibility. They want to take care of us.... The only problem is "We The People" grew up between 2008 and 2010 and we want our government back.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Tuesday, November 2, 2010

The Vote

President George W. Bush delivers his State of...Image via Wikipedia
My fellow United States Citizens,

Today I have decided to change up our usual format due to today be November 2, 2010.

Today the midterm elections occur and this time around everyone regardless of the views you hold need to be heard, from both the left and right of the political spectrum.

Today is the day where each American needs to do his or her one most sacred duty:

That of heading to the polling place and casting your vote for your congressmen and various state post as well. If you have never served your country by being a military veteran and you wish you could have, by casting your vote today you will have done your country, your state, and your local areas a valuable service - that being your participation in the politcal machinery which our professors and other learned men call our democracy.

Are you fed up with out of control spending and fiscal idiocy in Washington D.C?

Go vote!

Are you tired of seeing congressmen and women trying to control your lives trough the implemetation of Obamacare?

Go Vote!

Do you feel as if Congress is slowly eroding our inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?

Go Vote!

Are you unhappy with the way the current administration in Washington D.C. presents the United States to the rest of the world?

Go Vote!

Keep in mind that even though your one vote may not seem that much in the political grand scheme of things, you couple that vote to your neighbors, your fellow townspeople, others that reside within your county and in your state, one can get a pretty clear picture of what,"WE THE PEOPLE," want.

So my fellow citizens, let your voices be heard today even if you support the current regime in Washington, its your right, and its granted to you by virtue of the United States Constitution, not the federal government.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Sunday, October 31, 2010

Rally To Celebrate Snarkiness

Hotair has a piece about Reason TV visiting the Steven Colbert/John Stewart "Rally To Restore Sanity/Fear" in DC.

Taking it on face value, these people are the antithesis of what they claim to want.

The woman says "no Hitler mustaches"... except for Bush. That's okay.

The old man admits democrats have been in charge for two years, yet says "republicans blocked them". A supermajority in the senate for a year and change meant there was no blocking by the republicans. The old man probably even knows he's wrong, but needs his scapegoat.

The kids at the end argue that the way to get out of debt is to get out of more debt, much to the amusement of the Reason TV interviewer. The poor schmucks can't even come up with a way to make going further into debt to get out of debt sound good... because they're forced to think about it. Sanity may be restored there for a moment as they had to ponder exactly how to get out of debt - and how the entire rally is its own antithesis.

The folks at the rally sponsored by vapid clowns have their own positions shot down in a heartbeat in a matter of a couple simple questions. There's no easy answer out of it, there's not even a politician answer, there's no "context" to it, either.

To their credit, those folks at the rally who Reason talked to often try to respond honestly, but then find that their own positions are completely devoid of substance and logic.

Sanity is insanity. Logic is illogical. Ignorance is strength.

This is typical of the left. First use language to hide who/what you are, then use it as a weapon. Call yourself "reasonable" when you are anything but, and then ridicule the other side until they "compromise" which really means acquiescing to your demands... because, after all, you're the "reasonable" one.

5. "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage."
- Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals

No matter what the liberal elitist with the "liberal elitist" shirt believes, her own positions are centered in ridicule. They call themselves "reasonable", when they are anything but, and ridicule those who are not like them - and therefore "unreasonable". It has nothing to do with being a "rational, reality-based, fact-finding, science-believing, correct-spelling, tolerant, peaceful, intelligent thinker." Someone who really is all of those things understands that more debt does not equal less debt.*

Someone who is elitist is by definition intolerant of others. They twist words to their opposites, and ridicule and shame the other side into believing they should conform. After all, the liberal elite knows what's best for you.

To quote Thomas Sowell from "The Vision of the Anointed":
"In their haste to be wiser and nobler than others, the anointed have misconceived two basic issues. They seem to assume (1) that they have more knowledge than the average member of the benighted and (2) that this is the relevant comparison. The real comparison, however, is not between the knowledge possessed by the average member of the educated elite versus the average member of the general public, but rather the total direct knowledge brought to bear though social processes (the competition of the marketplace, social sorting, etc.), involving millions of people, versus the secondhand knowledge of generalities possessed by a smaller elite group."

Or in musical form, back before BR got all lefty & silly:

Update: An Outsider's View of the Colbert/Stewart rally.
Very much worth reading to see a first-hand look a the rally and one person's experiences.

*Unless the party says it does. Then more debt equals less debt and then 2+2=5.

Saturday, October 16, 2010

Beltway Adventure

Blogger Iowahawk offers a text-based adventure version of the events in DC from the last couple years, with characteristic wit.

I've included a short continuation of my own, were ADVENTURER to keep playing:






















Sunday, October 10, 2010

Klavan's Guide To The Elections

Andrew Klavan's "Klavan on Culture" presents some interesting points for the upcoming elections to consider in these first two parts of what may become a short series:

Part 1: The Economy

Part 2: War!

As someone who generally identifies more with the Tea Party and Libertarians and Constitutionalists...

I'm going to have to make sure I'm hydrated and well-rested for pelting day.

Wednesday, October 6, 2010

More Eco-Daleks

Every time you drive your SUV, Manbearpig kills a little girl.

Via Hotair.

More here.

While this is plainly misanthropic, and clearly falls into the usual eco-dalek theme, is it really a surprise?

Of course, Manbearpig is all about people who are made to feel guilty by buying into this bullshit being convinced to buy carbon indulgences to make the prophets and bishops of global warming/climate change rich while making them feel good. It's all about redistributing wealth from the global rich to the global poor because the "overconsumption" of the global rich is killing the global poor.

Global rich here ends up meaning the lower, middle, and upper class of the West (not the upper-upper class, though) having to sacrifice the wealth and prosperity they've created and enjoy - from high-calorie, low cost foods that make it so the US is one of the few nations where poor people are fat (unlike the rest of the world throughout history). Global poor here means the dictators who go along with the scheme and keep convincing the anthropogenic global warming useful idiots to give them money. The dictators will keep their people poor while blaming the rest of the world for their woes, because without the scapegoat, the people would overthrow the dictator and get freedom or at least a less-bad dictator for themselves.

Note the careful choice of the Manbearpig cultists' choice of victim. They cry about how the third world is suffering because you drive an SUV and have kids who need to eat - and often point to the suffering in Africa. (Why is Africa suffering? Dictators and Western aid propping up dictators regimes... but I digress.) Why is the child not a dusky-colored urchin from the third world? Because that'd be rightfully viewed as horrifically racist and most importantly misanthropic.

So why is it a western-looking white child? Kids of the globally "priviledged" probably won't suffer from the effects of you driving an SUV - in fact they'll benefit from the quality of life improved by having a car to get them to soccer practice rather than being told to walk across town (and because Manbearpig is bullshit).

The point is to elicit an emotional response. Terrorizing children is their MO, as we saw with 10:10. This white western girl is clearly a beneficiary of the destruction wreaked by Manbearpig (in the eco-dalek ideology), so terrorizing her is a righteous act. She also represents the offspring of the target audience - Westerners who will abandon their reason in order to abandon the lives that they've built in order to give it to Manbearpig cultists who've done nothing but peddle an ideology.

It also belies a fundamental disconnect from what makes one group of people prosperous and another not so prosperous. Often the weaker nation is still developing - and needs a market to sell products to - the greater nation. Often the weaker nation is weaker because its development is stymied by its own self-destructive dictators/government. The leftist Manbearpig cultists and ecodaleks don't understand this. They can't understand this due to their ideology. They also can't understand that environmental stewardship is usually a luxury afforded to those who are wealthy. But I'm digressing...


Aside from being a visual agitation meant to say "do this or we'll kill your kids", it's also kinda funny. Perhaps because it's almost to the point of self parody, and looks a lot like this internet meme:

Friday, October 1, 2010


I'm coining a new term today:

For those unfamiliar with Dr. Who, a Dalek is one of these:
Wikipedia entry here:

They're slow-moving, nigh-invulnerable aliens with one goal. To EXTERMINATE pretty much everything that isn't them. (They're also low-budget monsters with plungers for death rays, but they've got cultural staying power and some good story arcs.)

So what exactly is an Eco-Dalek? An environmentalist-ecoterrorist that believes in extermination of mankind for the sake of the planet.

(Alternately, they can be Enviro-Daleks.)

The bad guys in Tom Clancy's Rainbow 6 novel were representative of that. Obama's Science & Technology Czar, John Holdren, holds this view. He believes in forced abortions and mass sterilization by poisoning drinking water to exterminate the population in order to "save the planet". The concept of overpopulation by people overpopulation and consumption overpopulation also results in this view - where if there are too many poor, or rich who use too many resources, they must be exterminated.

In fact, most Malthusians think this way. Some educated idiots simply compare humans to bacteria while their projected malthusian catastrophes never happen. They know what's best for the planet, and the planet is the most important thing. So humanity has to start dying.

Of course, they believe that they are the chosen ones who should live since they're the best stewards of the land and know how to preserve and protect the planet. Everyone else must die, they must live, since they are perfect. It almost parallels Marxist doctrine of class enemies, but here the class enemies are based on piety to adherence to the doctrines of environmental mania and their leaders whether through advancement of the AGW cause or at least buying carbon indulgences. This is why Al Gore, with a mansion and jetsetting around the world as the prophet of Manbearpig, can be an absolute hypocrite (though he buys carbon credits from his own company). Al Gore, while he is the prophet of Manbearpig, doesn't seem to be an eco-dalek yet. He hasn't actually said "you should die". (Yet.)

Al Gore's brand is more of an enviro-statist. He's all for the government regulating your life until you're a subsistence farmer who doesn't harm the earth at all, or until you're simply hooked up to pods like in Matrix and fed bonemeal slurry Soylent Green from dead people so we don't even have to farm anymore.

This is his world:

A world where you submit to the eco-state. The state, of course, does whatever it likes. And of course, those who consume more are evil, those who consume less are good, so it's also a bit of watermelon environmentalism. Green on the outside, red on the inside. A dictatorial authoritiarian government will rule your life, for your own good. Alternately: Enviro-nazis.

The eco-dalek is something else.

Consider the following ad from the land that brought you 1984, Dr. Who and blood pudding:

This is a real ad. No, this is not a spoof by the Onion.

The UK Guardian has part of the story here. It's part of the 10:10 project, telling people they must reduce their carbon emissions by 10% in 2010.

Hotair has a good roundup of critical responses here.

You don't do what they "nudge", then they will EXTERMINATE!

For your own good, of course.

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their consciences.
- C.S. Lewis

Al Gore merely wants to tell you how to live for your own good. He'll dictate how your life shall be, and you'll live as he tells you to. The eco-dalek tells you you should not live. He'll dictate that you must die for your own good.


Wednesday, September 29, 2010

Did Obama Fail Driver's Ed?

Obama is one of those elites who must never drive.

He's got this metaphor he's been using on his permanent-campaign-mode speeches about a car.

“Somebody pointed out to me that when you're in a car and you want to go forward, you put it in ‘D,’” he said. “You want to go back in the ditch, you put it in ‘R.’ So I just want everybody to think about that.”

That doesn't make sense, does it. Those of us who are part of the country class know what cars are, and know how they work.

Democrat economic policy in one photo.

So there's this metaphor, where the economy and general state of the government is because someone drove it into the ditch. If you weren't aware of the CRA that caused the mortgage crisis or the democrats who resisted regulation of Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac or the democratic congress that's been in charge since 2006 and wrote the bailouts (signed by fiscally irresponsible Bush who "abandoned free market principles"), you might just be willing to think that his metaphor makes sense. There are several more examples over at American Thinker, where they noticed the car metaphor sucks as well.

But, see, the people who drove us into the ditch were, in fact, the democrats.

We're at 9% unemployment, possibly as much as 17% real unemployment (which covers those who are unemployed but no longer looking for work) - we're in no way, shape or form "out of the ditch". Keynesian stimulus, like Japan's Lost Decade, never works - and it isn't working now. More "D" isn't going to help.

It's Uncle Sam charging more deficit spending on the credit card the Chinese gave to us. Democrat are using spending on credit to buy us bread and circuses right up until there's no more credit to spend. In no way, shape or form are we out of the ditch.

But Obama doesn't drive, and probably hasn't in a long time. I shall break it down further.
Pictures make everything better.
See, when you're in the ditch, and D got you there (because it almost always does), you probably want to try some R. More D is not going to get you out of the ditch.

Just in case, take a look at what a car in the ditch always looks like. R rarely gets you in the ditch.

Now, if he wanted a metaphor, he could've said "if you keep turning right, you'll end up in the ditch". It's an absurd metaphor, given democrat policies being the root of our current woes, but it at least is somewhat consistent with how cars work. Of course, the rebuttal, that when you turn left, you get hit by a truck, is also true.


To continue the car metaphor, though, the people riding in the car are seeing a lot of warning signs. The guys in D just keep going past them.

Because Obama knows nothing about economics, and neither did Bush and the 2006 Dem Congress, or the Arlen Specter RINOs.

The rest of the country is yelling "STOP THE CAR!!!" Hundreds of thousands to a million plus marched on DC in a Tea Party that the ruling class pres decided to ignore. Another few hundred thousand showed up to the "Restoring Honor 8/28" rally. All these folks are shouting "STOP THE CAR!" And the ruling class isn't listening. And those bought off by the ruling class aren't listening because the guy in "D" is paying them off.

And there's one passenger who's looking between the rest and starting to see that the train never stops, is always on schedule, no matter what the guy in "D" says, and won't make an exception - and is beginning to see that there's no way to miss the train - especially by driving between the cars. The undecided passenger is starting to see that they guy going "slow down" is good, and the guy going "STOP!!!" has the best plan, even if it doesn't sound very... moderate.

Economic reality is always on time. It just doesn't care what time you think it is.

But the ideologue leftists and the leftist ruling class think if you just apply a little more D we'll make it past. Socialism works every time it's tried - just ask Cambodia, Russia, North Korea, China, Ukraine, Belarussia, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Poland...

And just like how socialism always works, more D always works. Just ask Dirty Mary & Crazy Larry.

For those who require refreshers on Economics, try here. Driver's Safety, try here.

Mr. President, please watch them. Please stop the car. Please listen to us.

Please listen to Thomas Sowell:
"For the anointed, traditions are likely to be seen as the dead hand of the past, relics of a less enlightened age, and not as the distilled experience of millions who faced similar human vicissitudes before."

We've seen Dirty Mary & Crazy Larry. We've watched Last Clear Chance and the Incredible Bread Machine. We know how this ends.Italic

Tuesday, September 21, 2010

Dropping the Red Kool-Aid for a Spot of Tea

From the New York Post:

President Obama came out yesterday and was attempting to align himself with the Tea Party movement.

Oh yes, a definte laugh, or should this be a sign of concern for the mental state of our leader? This is the same man who TRIPLED the deficit of his not so popular republican predecessor. This is also the man that has spent more money than ALL OTHER presidential administrations combined. This is the man who has done everything he can with the support of the most liberal congress ever to centralize power in the hands of the federal government. The Healthcare bill fiasco, the 2nd stimulus, tripling the size of Americorps, attempting to shackle the populace with cap and trade all belong under this man's name. He now expects you all to believe that he is a fiscally responsible conservative president, that favors limited government and that the populace being wary of the government is a good thing? One word will some that up:


Now he says that the Tea Party has misdirected itself. It should be angry with the republicans still in office. Guess what Mr. President.... We are. We are mad at both sides of this mess because it took both for us to be in the situation we are in. But right now YOU and YOUR party have exclusive control of the federal government. You and your party are spending out of control, yes we do know that the occasional RINO votes along with you, they are being revealed and being marked for replacement in the coming November election as well. You and your ilk, Mr. President, think the citizens of this country are stupid and cannot keep up with politics nor understand the arguments. The Tea Party itself, made up of both democrats and republicans sees right through you, your party and your lies.

Mr. President, the nation is very disappointed with you, even your misguided followers, who think you are not doing even to "fundamentally transform" these United States. Now it is the citizen's turn, Mr. President, on 2 November we intend to fundamentally transform Washington D.C.

A protester's sign at the April 15, 2009, Hart...
Image via Wikipedia

Enhanced by Zemanta

Friday, September 17, 2010

Indoctrination? Creating Rights? Wealth Redistribution? The Same Ole' Progressive Agenda

From the Blaze:

This is everything that Barack Obama and the left preach. They attempt to indoctrinate people, seems they like to focus on children. Speaking of which I know several schools across the country got their "education" video whose return address comes from the Department of Education via 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

They also attempt to create rights to shore up their voting base. Seriously folks? High speed internet isn't a right, for a list of rights try reading the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence. Is high speed internet a nice tool? You're darn right it is. Does it warrant a government subsidy so those who can't afford it or it isnt available in an area can get it? Absolutely not. "Chairman Julius" Genachowski, and former FCC chairman Michael Copps need to keep their "collective" hands off the constitution and focus on monitoring radio stations for curse words. However, Copps seems to want to do otherwise by stating very clearly:

"You will need and you are entitled to have these tools and services available to you. I think it is a civil right."

Guess what "Chairman" Copp, try heading to a public library. Most of them today have high speed internet and that type of technology in place. We don't need to spend any more money that we do not have on goods or services that the left feels is a "right" so that they can get re-elected. We have already done that with Americorps to increase the number of government subsidized volunteers, and we are about to reap the "so called benefits" of a government option healthcare system. America was already the world leader in "private interest" volunteerism and "had" the worlds' best healthcare system. There was no need to spend the money on two of these issues.

Most importantly Leftist want to redistribute wealth to low income families or if you prefer take money away from those who have worked their rear ends off to get what they have. This can also cause those lower income families to vote for whomever "shows them the money." However, that money has to come from somewhere, and its the taxpayer, or worse yet it gets borrowed from China or Japan. The leftists' believe that even if you have whatever it is they are subsidizing that they will just go ahead and give it to you any way because the extra income is "useful." Really? Useful to get you reelected? Useful to help that low income family? Will that low income family use that money wisely? Will that money have oversight to determine if it is being used for it's intended purposes?

Clear examples of leftist ideology, and clear examples of why the leftist way never works. It is impossible to oversee and fund a subsidy in our current economic state without the raising or creation of taxes (another leftist pillar). You can't create rights out of thin air. If you do you asking for the destruction of a nation due to the populace losing all its iniative and its will to work or produce anything of economic value. You can't indoctrinate people either, if you do, today you risk completely alienating the popualce due to the internet and the growing number of citizens that are "doing their civic homework."

One can clearly see all these elements of the leftist plan at work and the good news is that people are now seeing it for what it truly is and people are throwing it back in the leftist "collective" faces.

2 November is approaching, please be sure to register to vote and discuss the issues with family and friends.

Enhanced by Zemanta