Monday, November 29, 2010

Perception is the mask that hides the monster

"What you see is what you get."  How many of you believe in that old adage? Ever since Aaron Burr - America's first professional politician - put a lead ball into Alexander Hamilton, Americans have had to be more aware of what truly goes on behind the scenes in Washington, D.C.  In our time, we need be similarly concerned with the dark machinations within the minds of our contemporary professional politicians. I believe that if the average American was privy to the behind closed doors conversations and intrigues that occur daily "in our best interest", they would be appalled.  Maybe some folks would hang.

Let's consider the liberal socialists currently walking the hallowed halls of Congress today.  What is their goal?  How will they accomplish their agenda?  They certainly cannot openly discuss the beauty of a Marxist State in a conservative leaning, capitalist country like the United States of America without damning themselves to electoral oblivion for quite sometime. How can they argue for the European socialist model they so dearly love when many European socialists are watching their countries burn down around them due to their very own failed liberal socialist policies of multiculturalism, social justice, and mandated wealth redistribution? There are fundamental reasons communism has failed in every country where it's been implemented. The answer is that our domestic communists must adopt a strategy of camouflage and obfuscation if they are to survive and further their socialist agenda.  Satan often comes dressed in white.

The most effective lies are those that mingle some truth with the corruption. For example, there are some unfortunates within this country that legitimately need and would benefit from a government mandated health care system. However, those numbers would be shockingly small and easily managed through other means if an honest appraisal was made. These extreme cases, often cited by Ms. Pelosi and Mr. Reid, were the whitewash for the diabolical intent of the nationalization of the American Health Care industry

Since the goal of the liberal socialist is the incremental, yet complete control of all national wealth, they must magnify these needs and fears in order to foist their various programs on the people of this country. They will use the above model over and over again.  They effectively seized the U.S. banking industry last year by following that model. Next, a series of disasters like the gulf oil spill, will provide the cover for the nationalization of the petroleum industry. Much touted environmental concerns will circumvent private property ownership through environmental law. They are even floating trial balloons regarding the seizure of our private retirement accounts.  After all, retirement accounts are just too important to leave exposed to the ravages of an open market and private account managers.

A socialist paradigm does not work.  It is a giant ponzi scheme that is in constant need of fresh capital to maintain the appearance of vitality while sucking the life from its host.  Nancy and Harry need your wealth. Unfortunately, we are running short of the stuff. Recent turn of political events have given me some hope.  The real hope. Not the faux hope Mr. Obama cleverly used as a campaign slogan in yet another stroke of the whitewash brush. I am anxious to see what the new congress will do starting in January.  I've heard some rumor of a Repeal Amendment.  The purpose of which is to give the states an opportunity to repeal federal legislation with a two-thirds vote.  That will place power back with the states, where it belongs,and limit future federal encroachment on our freedoms.

Friday, November 12, 2010

The Five Pillars of Liberalism

During my consideration of contemporary politics, I have noticed five reoccurring themes regarding liberal socialist thought. The Five Pillars of Liberalism detailed below, seem to capture the prevailing position taken by most every liberal socialist to which I have had the pleasure of conversing.  I have put their collective thought into words, and organized them for your pleasure.

1)      Scorn - America is bad

In order for a world socialist workers utopia to have any chance at realization, the United States of America, as we know it, must cease to exist.  The reason all prior communist revolutions have failed is because the United States of America, a minority of the world population, consumes the clear majority of the world’s resources.  This consumption deprives non-Americans of their rightful portion of the world’s bounty, and keeps a majority of the world’s population in poverty.

2)      Diversity - Divide and conquer

American exceptionalism, and the American identity must be attacked and broken down in order to expedite the conversion of The United States of America to a Marxist paradigm.  Corruption of borders, mingling of language, and dilution of prevailing culture must be accomplished to these ends.

3)      Hauteur - Few are fit to lead

Expect the worst in people. People are stupid.  They are incapable of any degree of independent, or intellectual thought.  They must be told what to think.  Words must be defined so people will understand them within the socialist model.  Any political discussion must be limited to socialist themes.  Any deviance from a socialist theme, or consideration of unorthodox thought, is undesirable.  However, debate within any socialist theme should be as brisk as possible to further the movement (Chomsky).  Few have the requisite intelligence to define words as they pertain to the revolution.  Those who do will lead the masses, and their authority will be absolute.  Political strategy should be based on the assumption people are stupid and will respond to greed, lethargy, and racism.

      4)  Hubris - Government is salvation

There is no God, but god.  There can be no authority above that of the government.  All vestiges and symbols of any higher authority must be purged from the public conscience.  Religious fervor and devotion are serious obstacles to the revolution.  Therefore, priestly functions must be infiltrated to add a revolutionary voice to the people’s communion to advance the liberal socialist agenda. Government is the final arbitrator, not God.

5)      Ambition - Ends justify the means

Those who dissent and resist do not understand the ultimate goal of the revolution.  If they did, they would welcome the end result.  Those voices must be overcome by any means necessary.  Once the objective of the world socialist worker’s utopia has been achieved, all will understand the beauty, and forgive any transgressions perceived along the way.  Any murder, theft, or lie may be forgiven by the grace offered through the victory of the masses.

Saturday, November 6, 2010

Election-day mistakes aren't random

As of late, I have been impressed with the number of electoral irregularities that have been reported during the past several election cycles.  By electoral irregularities, I mean all these lost-and-found ballot boxes and bags, miscalibrated voting machines, judicial interventions, etc.  Please understand, I am no mathematician or statistician, but I would think the very nature of any series of errors leading to those irregularities would be random, i.e. those errors would favor democrats and republicans equally.  In fact, a decent dictionary definition of the word random could be a process of selection in which each item of a set has an equal probability of being chosen. So, my argument would be it is mathematically impossible, over the long run, for either democrats or republicans to have a clear majority of electoral irregularities that benefit their candidate, unless someone's cheating.  Unfortunately, that appears to be the case.

I have conducted a non-scientific study of all the news reports I can find addressing voting irregularities since the Bush v. Gore Florida debacle.  I looked at reports from local, state, and national elections.  I am not including any of the reports listed on Fox's voter fraud report web page because anyone can call in a report for inclusion, substantiated or not.  I'm only including reports that turned out to be headline material.  I’ll admit, the sample data is flawed since I cannot guarantee I have found all relevant reports. With that said,  I have found fourteen reports of voting irregularities benefiting democratic candidates, and only two where republican candidates have been the beneficiaries.  Though I beleive the Bush vs. Gore Florida recount to have been caused by a democrat attempt to steal the presidencey, I’m including the Supreme Court ruling resulting in the Bush Presidency among the two republican scenarios since Bush benefited from the decision.  I am not including the Murkowski thing in Alaska.  I do not consider Murkowski to be a republican, nor can I count her as a democrat – yet.

I do not want to believe the democrats are manipulating the American electoral process as it seems they are.  Democrats are Americans too, aren’t they?  Tampering with the electoral process violates the law and the core beliefs most of America shares.  Why would someone cheat the nation by illegal manipulation of the sacred voting process?  So, can someone find and post any examples of voting irregularities benefiting republicans? I’ve already noted the Bush/Gore recount in Florida. Bring me something else.  I need at least twelve examples for the math to work out for me and make things right in my world.  I'm really into the whole seeking balance and order in the universe thing.

Thursday, November 4, 2010

Murkowski is a cheater, a traitor to her party, and shouldn’t be trusted - travels "Bridge to Nowhere"

In addition to potential theft of elected office I see in various parts of the country, the debacle in Alaska is turning my stomach.  Lisa Murkowski has shown she is unworthy of any serious consideration as an elected official.  Other than democrats, I’m actually shocked any appreciable number of Alaskans voted for her. She is the next self-promoting loser in the parade of blue-blood republicans willing to do whatever it takes to stay attached to the government teat.  It is behavior I expect in a liberal socialist, and disappointed to see in a republican.  Specter, Crist, and now Murkowski all put “self” above “service”. At least Crist had enough integrity to run as an independant.  Not Murky.  She knew she lacked the level of support she needed to beat Miller as an independant, so she turned the general election into a de facto second republican primary effectively opening the door for democrats to have a say in which of  the two candidates they prefered .  If establishment republicans, like Murkowski, adopt a continued strategy of running write-ins like this, i.e. running as a second republican , the TPM may be forced to become The Tea Party proper to protect their candidates.  How would the republicans like that?
Knowing their candidate couldn’t win, and preferring a RINO over a proven conservative, I believe a large number of democrats “crossed over” to support the Murkowski write-in candidacy.  That number may be large enough to keep Miller, the conservative candidate, out of the Senate.  A combination of the democrat cross-over vote, combined with the Ted Stevens republican vote may be enough to do the trick, though Ms. Murkowski’s ego is likely unable to accept the possibility any potential win was provided by such a twist.
I really can’t blame the democrats who crossed over to vote for Murky.  It was a smart move on their part.  I would do the same thing if the roles were reversed.  If the strategy proves to be successful, they will have eliminated a principled conservative in favor of a woman who has shown to be willing to place her own ambitions above anything else.  She has proven to be the type of practical politician that liberal socialists are comfortable working with in Washington, D.C.  And believe me, after hiking her skirt like that, the Dems will come courting.
If Ms. Murkowski is seated, I would say to Senate republicans – beware.  Though Ms. Murkowski says she will caucus with republicans, she has shown she cannot be trusted to stay within established practices and traditions.  I don’t believe it a far stretch to fear she is capable of switching parties if something pretty is dangled in front of her.  If she is successful in her write-in campaign, she will have cheated her party out of their candidate of choice and robbed Americans of a much needed conservative voice in Congress at a critical time.

Wednesday, November 3, 2010

O'Donnell and Angle will be the only tea party candidates mentioned by MSM

Oooh! That’s going to leave a mark! Well, it’s official: the tea party movement has left its mark on the face of the American Body Politic.  Both democrats and republicans have felt the effects of the TPM, and the slap may smart for quite some time.  A slap across an otherwise stuporous face is precisely what the republicans needed, while democrats will attempt to call it anything other than what it was – a sizeable rejection of their liberal socialist agenda.

As I stayed up late on election night watching results pour in from across the nation, many thoughts crossed my mind. I was impressed by the rarity of what I was witnessing.  In less than two short years, a unique grassroots political movement sprouted from the on-air rant of an American business reporter and grew to a fearsome stature.  Also interesting was the ever-present ramblings of political commentators.  Some were socialists, some were conservative, and some were clueless.

It seemed liberal socialist commentary fixated upon the O’Donnell and Angle races like they were deciding the fate of the universe.  Perhaps, in the pundit’s minds they were.  Smugly calling the two women “tea party candidates”, liberal after liberal proclaimed a rejection of tea party extremism while they downplayed other tea party backed candidates who were successful elsewhere in the country.  I’m sure the MSM will spend the next several days in detailed analysis determining exactly how badly tea party credibility was hurt by the losses in Nevada and Delaware, and what it means to the future of the failing TPM movement.

Some so called conservative commentators failed to do much better.  Many republicans rued the candidacies of O’Donnell and Angle.  Apparently, if the two women had not been backed by the TPM, and not won their primary contests, better candidates would have emerged enabling the republicans to win the ten seats necessary for a Senate majority.  They blamed the intransient “ideological purity” of the tea partiers for the trouble, which got me to thinking…what benefit does intransient ideological purity bring to the fight? Several benefits come to mind, but space will allow for only a brief exploration. 

To begin with, I see a rejection of the idea of a practical politician: a man or woman who lacks any core beliefs, or integrity.  Washington is already full of elected officials who seek to further their ambitions and protect personal viability at the expense of what’s best for the people they represent.  How’s that good for the future of our country?  But, does that explain why the tea party would support candidates opposing RINOs in their local primaries even if the tea party candidate appears to be the weaker of the two in the general?  Why are they willing to sacrifice a candidacy to the “greater good”?  I believe the answer is not that elusive.  It has immediate positive effects on republicans, and long term negative effects for democrats.

As for how the democrats are affected, the DNC viewed the Nevada contest as a battle between Obama and the tea party.  Period: end of story.  Perception is paramount to the liberal socialist. Perception is the mask that hides the monster.  They couldn’t allow Mr. Reid, the face of Obama’s policies, to be defeated by a neobarb (new barbarian) “tea party candidate”.  I can’t imagine the amount of money and personnel hours spent in Nevada saving Reid.  That’s money and time pulled from a dozen democrat candidates across the country.  Many of those candidates risked their jobs in supporting the Obama agenda.  In fact, pulling cash from those candidates made the news cycle recently.  They were sacrificed on Obama's alter to save a single figurehead.  Saving Reid was practical politics at its worst.  The final landscape of this election is much different because of the Angle candidacy alone.  The ripples of that action will damn the democrats for years to come.  No democrat candidate will trust the national party with any verve, and any democrat elected to Congress will be less likely to support a party line vote on a return promise because of it. 

Republicans have learned, through their primary experience, they must refrain from practicing practical politics.  No playing the ear mark game, or reaching across the aisle like Bennett (R-Utah) so loved to do.  The lesson there: you probably won’t survive your state’s primary.  O’Donnell helped to teach the republicans that lesson.  The TPM caused all republicans to take a hard look at themselves, and to take stock in their core principles.  They will be better for it.

To both women, I say thank you for your service.  It is a rare thing for a person to be willing to endure what those two have in the service of others.