November 2017 M T W T F S S « May 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Who's Online1 visitors online now0 guests, 1 bots, 0 membersPowered by Visitor Maps
As it is turning out, keeping the status quo at any price is revealing a steep price tag. What created the Tea Party, and subsequently the Donald Trump candidacy, is going to cost both established parties every bit of their credibility capital built up since Watergate, some forty years ago. It also may end up showing them to the exit door of history.
It wasn’t the Democrats that finally nailed Nixon, it was his own party when they saw that he made the fatal political mistake of not being honest about what had been going on and setting things right. Nixon was faithful to his underlings, but he was faithless to the laws of the land.
Hillary is by any measure (except a Democrat partisan political party hack and the otherwise similarly possessed) is a crook who should have faced justice decades ago. She, and her husband, have proven themselves over the years to be only in it for themselves, and will run over any and everyone in any political party or private citizen that gets in their way.
Bill Clinton said it best when he told Monica that if she didn’t rat them out, then no one would truly know, and they couldn’t do a thing about it – “it” being him having her, a young intern with stars in her eyes, suck him off anytime he wanted it, in the Oval Office. He would have been joyfully and righteously crucified if he have happened under the same circumstances to have been just some unknown slub running a big corporation. But his party rallied around and saved him as the media shamed anyone who complained that they were prudes and this was none of anyone’s business but the two lovers. Monica was later to be known by the press via Hillary’s devising as the nutty slut. Bill was simply a victim of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy.
The Clintons have screwed over their own party so many times that they have nearly singlehandedly culled and/or run off all the honest old time Democrats. What remains is a corrupt criminal organization masquerading as a political party that is only about staying in and gaining more power in order to keep their fellow racketeers onboard and in the chips – the chips that will always flow back to the political mob bosses.
I live in one of the bluest areas of my purple state. To read the letters to the editors in the newspaper makes one wonder if the people who crayon them in are certifiably insane. These idiotic scrawls and screeds thoughtlessly parrot Democrat Party talking points, not to make a case for Hillary, but to demean in the craziest way Donald Trump. These cretins should be ashamed putting their names to the garbage they send in, but they are obviously blinded by a hatred that runs deep. It is disturbing even if taken as over-the-top political absurdity. They seem so dangerously delusional that one can picture them starting a terrorist type bombing campaign if their candidate loses the election.
The editorials show perfect examples of exactly how the Democrats peons are now the party of intolerant crazies and societal parasites and leeches. There are also thousands of examples of this kind of hand-wringing, teeth-gnashing, garment rending unhingement on many comment sections of websites. This election means so much to them that it is obvious to conclude that if someone other than their candidate wins the heavens will fall and life as everyone knows it (everyone they can conceive of or care about) will cease to be.
What drives adults to behave and think in this manner? It has to be some form of mental illness, but is this hysteria manufactured by PSYOP political sharpers or is it because there is something missing in the souls of these people? It’s both.
There is a reason that two parties naturally develop in democracies, it’s the nature of the beast. One party is always the so-called patricians, and the other are the so-called plebeians. But the definitions of the parties and who belongs in each are constantly shifting to where today’s wellborn may belong to the party of the so-called social justice underdogs, and the vulgar belong to the law-abiding individualists.
History has shown that most democracies are not united for long. The desire to divide up the spoils of the system are too great, and the greedy want more and more of the other’s pie. The worst kind of people tend to gravitate to the top positions in political careers until there is a cultural war which plays the stooges against one another, and then there is a civil war.
There has definitely been a cultural war going on over a hundred years now, but in times as recent as the election of Bush I, those representing the so-called haves and the have-nots in power had come to a gentlemen’s agreement. They would sell the influence of their offices to only certain parts of the electorate and be satisfied with their share after an election, leaving the other party to fleece their own.
The artless compromiser Bush II and his birds of a feather turned this into visibly shallow game, a zero sum game that repulsed the unwashed of the Right and the Left. Even the late reprobate Lion of the Senate for a time was suckered in, but then realized there was a bigger opportunity presenting itself. Why not play for the whole wad?
Being the weak leader Bush II was, the system was thrown into domestic and foreign policy chaos, allowing new breeds of politicians who saw their main chances of promoting unworkable social nonsense and making hay doing so. The resulting play ended with the most incompetent, ignorant and unprepared person imaginable in the White House, along with his minions of greedy one-track racist dolts he gathered around himself in his administration.
All will go down in history for their open criminality and shameless stupidity. Siding with thugs of color against the guardians of our civilization (AKA the police) became the new social justice issue, as well as that hugely important federal issue of who should be allowed to use which restroom. And less we forget, the Big O and his political cronies also have nearly ruined our country’s previously good health care on the pretense that a handful of uninsured voters was a compelling case for demanding the whole system be torn down. Hillary thinks that some tinkering will fix it, after she wrings more extortion money out of the insurance companies.
If Hillary wins the presidency it will be a sign – a glaring 100 foot high flashing neon sign – that the nation has corrupted itself in an irreparable manner. She should be facing public disgrace and hard time for her actions.
She is a textbook example of The Peter Principle in action. A small time chiseler is taught the ropes by a political carnie who grifts his way into jobs in a small state until he stumbles bass-ackwards into the presidency. She clings to his stained coat tails, defending him against all the women he abused along the way, until finally being given the plumb job of a large state senator, where by the way, she did absolutely nothing of consequence but peddle her office to the highest bidder. From there she was given the job as Secretary of State, where she was so busy grifting for her private foundation that she ended up getting a bunch of American diplomats killed, but then went on lying and lying about who and what was responsible to try to divert attention from her utter lack of competence to handle an important job.
The fact that most people who consider themselves properly educated and civically responsible would even have to deliberate a minute on her fitness for office is disturbing indeed. But, considering the news media that has been taken over by feckless partisans abetting her criminality, it’s understandable of how far we have fallen as a force for good in the world. They seemed to be constantly amused and supporting of our nation’s slide, either into anarchy or dictatorship … as long as the it’s a dictatorship of the Left.
Regardless of who wins, keep your power dry. Nothing will be solved after the votes are cast.
It might seem peculiar that some “leaders” in the Republican establishment won’t back their party’s nomination. Why is that? Why is it that they would rather see the “other” party win and their own lose? The reason is obviously not simple … unless one knows what the “other” party is and how the “other” party operates. Spoiler alert: Our two party system is a sham. There is one two-horned party that destroys any and all comers.
I’ve just finished reading an amusing little book titled: “Of All the Gin Joints” written by Mark Bailey and illustrated by Edward Hemingway. It’s basically a gossip and scandal book telling tales on some of the big name actors and actresses of Hollywood history. The most amazing part of these yarns (backed by fairly credible sources) is that these people actually managed to function at all. The booze they supposedly consumed (which was the theme of the book) should be taken with a spoon of salt, but in reading other histories on the subject it was obvious that the people the book discusses were indeed hopeless alcoholics of the first water, but also evangelical promoters of their lifestyle.
They also had such good looks and charisma, and some with great talent at what they did, which made everyone involved with them give them a golden pass for whatever else monsters they were.
What struck me immediately was the way these people were treated by their employers, the press media, and their fans. All easily forgave nearly any and all so-called sins they displayed proudly. But there was a reason that these three enablers allowed these otherwise obnoxious fools to get support.
The employers used them to their own advantage, but it took a while in the history of film production to realize how this had to work. The early film makers thought that they could use actors and actresses as interchangeable props. This would allow the early film makers to make all the money and use their hired help at their own pleasure (and for their own pleasure).
The toads that run all entertainment media, yesterday and today, mostly get into it for basically the same reason: They get to hang out and bang out the so-called beautiful people who are basically lazy and have other psychological problems. The so-called talent for the most part are simply nice looking prostitutes who do the job asked, but for the most part suffer horrible psychic pain that is plainly revealed in the feckless way they lead their off screen lives.
But the power of the producers/makers of films over the so-called stars was not to last. The fans wanted to see the same people on the screen over and over again. The fans developed an attachment to their celebrity favorites in a way that the film producers could not understand. The reason was that the film producers (for the most part) did not come out of a theater background. They either knew nothing of fan bases, or, they thought it wouldn’t make any difference to the audience. And perhaps it wouldn’t have until the “close up” was invented and wildly demanded by audiences.
Imagine the fans, they could never get that close to that kind of physical beauty, but the movies allowed it and even invited it. And then imagine viewing that beautiful person in various stages of emotion, and also in various stages of undress. That fat frigid prude at home didn’t matter so much any more when one could dream of such beauty and later pretend.
So, the balance of power was established. If a star could fill the seats, then they could make a lot of money for the producers and themselves. If they couldn’t, they were indeed interchangeable cogs of the industry’s wheels.
All of this explains why many “faces” in the entertainment industry (certainly not all) are such arrogant louts and bores. Those with the souls of lazy prostitutes then had clout and money to throw away. And they didn’t even have to please a bunch of Johns to get money, they only had to please a few gatekeepers of the industry. And it was all legal and mostly acceptable.
The ones with no acting talents or charisma, but are physically attractive, usually ended up having to take their clothes off and show their bods to make a living. The mediocre talents tend to suck up to the producers, saying the stupid political and social things that the producers think or rant about in private. The star talent either blows through their “dresser fees” on their lifestyles or become comfortably rich enough to stop working for a living, or even become a player on the same level as the producer.
The press’ role is easily understood. They make money (easy money) telling stories that the fan base wants to hear. And, it should be noted here, they are the true cogs in the wheel of an industry. They were and still are a dime a dozen no talents, except for those with the pretty faces like our movie stars. These news readers have actually developed a fan base of their own. The producers own the press, and since they also own the politicians, the only group they ever have to fret about is the people.
The fans … well … the fans as always are the dopes and stooges that allow all to happen. The fans have uninteresting and mostly hardscrabble lives, even in the middle class. They want to live out someone else’s life, and that fantasy becomes an important part of their own being. Much like those who have a “sound track” to their lives, bending music – especially the lyrics – into something profound that they can deeply relate to as part of their own experience. If you don’t think this is sad and even pathetic, then you are probably one of those I speak of.
Does any of this relate to our political system? I think it does because the motivations of the four groups we were discussing.
Who are the producers, but the “wise guys,” spinning gold out of our political system? They come in many sizes, but they all have the same intent, which is to tip the system in their own favor. And like buying any “good time,” money talks and bullshit walks. Anyone they can’t buy is either shoved out of the way or ignored until they go away.
Now, does it make a difference when one is in the business of making money outside of the political system? Most would say no. Does it make a difference when one is actually making money by working inside the political system? Absolutely; and it changes everything.
We are all a part of the political system and have to live with the consequences of others’ actions. When a crook buys influence and a politician sells it, it means that the government is corrupted, and is not working as originally intended. If our system was set up so that crooks buying and selling favors and influence should be the norm, it would mean that government services that everyone pays taxes for is merely a bidding opportunity to try and get the government to work the way they want. Any government that gets to that point deserves to be disbanded immediately. It is not a government for free men.
Politicians need money and connections to get to high office. Connections to a major political party has become the only way to get into the system. Connections with political parties have to do with getting people to give them money or otherwise support them. Getting money means having to either promise or outright sell the influence of your office. Those having money and wanting an outcome buy access, and gains bending the laws via their “donations and contributions.”
So, the producers, those wanting outcomes (ultimately financial gains) need star actors (politicians) to perform for them. The charismatic stars go on to high office. The medium performers, meh, we’ll use them if we have to. But no producer or king maker wants a naive honest bumpkin smucking things up. And he certainly doesn’t want anyone running things that he, the producer, can’t completely control.
You see the background producers influencing their political prostitutes every time you look for it. Why is a large portion of the GOP leadership anti-Trump? The answer is simple: it’s that Trump isn’t going to become their bagman or puppet. They can’t control him so they might be out of their usual swag, and maybe out of their cushy positions. But what they really fear is that everyone will see them for who and what they really are instead of who and what they pretend to be.
And once again, like it days of yore, the fans want what they want. The producers fight back to keep their power and profits. The prostitutes, the brought and paid off politicians and press media, are prodded to action. We must destroy the enemy of our profitable and comfortable system!
What we are witnessing is the cracking up of the producer establishment of both parties. Trump and Bernie are perfect examples of what the producers do to outsiders. The fake and manufactured differences in the two major parties show themselves to be just what they truly are: In it for themselves only.
Both parties’ producers have been trying to build a static system for years where they can both loot the suckers without anyone realizing what is going on. The destruction of the country’s moral background in any number of ways, including flooding the country with hostile aliens, is a good start, but the forcing of allegiance to PC multiculturalism is their real blueprint.
The electorate who aren’t suckers have noticed and are making their voices heard. They are fighting for their country, but the people in charge are pretending they’re misguided in doing so. But how this will end up is anyone’s guess.
How many of us are counting down the days, the hours and the minutes when the most self-aggrandizing, incompetent and arguably the most dishonest administration in American History leaves office?
The wreckage our dear leader and his party of immoral greed heads have done to the country may never be repaired. But that was the point, wasn’t it? To fundamentally change what used to be a half-way decent nation into a rubbish bin of stale statist Leftism.
The Book of Proverbs in 6:16-19 has a list of mentions that HE does not like to see in His people.
These six things doth the Lord hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:
17 A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,
18 An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief,
19 A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.
Obama, Hillary, the Democrat Party, and all the rest of the George Soros crowd of lunatics? Guilty! Guilty! Guilty! Guilty! Guilty! Guilty! Guilty!
A race war wasn’t good enough for them. Now they have to finish the disastrous tragedy they helped create, abet and fan the flames of in the Middle East by starting a war with Russia.
It’s no wonder this crowd hates the Trumpeteers. The Left, and most of the get-along-go-along Republicans, all couldn’t (as the old saying goes) carry this man’s jock strap. Although it is obvious they deeply enjoy sniffing it, especially back in the days when they offered themselves for sale to him.
Bad luck at Monday night’s debates you wicked witch of the Left. I hope America sees what you are really made of so they won’t be further confused by the Left Wing propaganda your media has been drowning us with. So, break a leg.
It’s finally starting to sink in that once Hillary was dragged out into the light to where even the politically apathetic couldn’t avoid her ethical problems, her partisan political press and media wouldn’t be able to airbrush her into anything other than she plainly is.
She is plainly no Evita, but she did ride her man’s shirttails into popularity. An Iron Lady in the vein of Thatcher? Not hardly; if anything, she’s the anti-Thatcher. Possibly a Catherine de’ Medici? Closer, perhaps, but perhaps only because of the lust similarities of Hill’s Bill and Catherine’s husband Henry II. Lucrezia Borgia? Naw. Lucrezia seemed by all reports to be a very desirable, real flesh woman who had an interesting and real life; she was used in a Machiavellian sense, she wasn’t one herself, it would have greatly devaluated her appeal.
Hillary’s Goldwater Girl transformation to Alinsky Disciple revealed a young woman with absolutely no moral compass. Goldwater and Alinsky were, indeed, moral and ethical opposites. Hillary’s 180 revealed something important about who she was and still is, but only she (if she was completely honest, which appears to be an impossibility for her) could convincingly explain that transformation.
Now, as alternative history, if she would have gone from the Alinsky style of socialist-envyist-win-at-any-cost-deceiver to the Goldwater style of believing and openly proclaiming the value of freedom, and the dignity of the citizen and his conscience to left alone if not putting himself upon others, she would have been admired by nearly everyone who believes in what America should be and why the nation was founded. But, alas, she chose the dark side. She threw in with a devil worshiper.
The dark side of politics (as in war) has always been the same all through history. It can be summed up with the following: 1) There is no substitute for winning, no matter what one personally believes. A loser is never a winner and is always subject (as least in part) to the winner. 2) You should make the appearance of
being a “good” (as defined by whatever environment you’re in) person, but otherwise forget about adhering to anything about other people’s rules. There are no rules, only obstacles on one’s personal will to power. Honesty, ethics and morality are for losers only.
In modern times, socialist intent has become the nearly invincible armor that deflects all criticisms. Socialism has been substituted, and is now equal to, the meaning of social justice. Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Castro and other lesser commies around the world have donned this armor and used it successfully for their rides to power and glory. Hitler and Mussolini, were labeled fascists, but they ran and won on national socialism.
All over the world the siren call for robbing Peter to pay Paul works every time it’s tried. What people get so confused about (or disregard) is that coming by wealth legally and ethically is entirely different from getting it through stealing, or by connections and crony pay-for-play-buy-ins. Note how the Left always uses the latter for their own benefit. Honest people who despise corruption either have to enter that corruption or withdraw from play. And when they do, the corrupted win, and post even better gains in the future.
In the modern age (post Enlightenment) socialism has been the exclusive philosophy of those seeking power who are blocked by tradition, custom, morality, or even common sense. The basis of socialism is the economic equivalent of the old “us against them” fight.
One of the reasons America was relatively free of this kind of envy argument is that the free white citizenry considered themselves equally free to prosper in the right kind of political environment, that being honest and uncorrupted. But when the frontiers closed, the selfish and shortsighted crony-connected rich teamed up with those big city pols wanting new voters to put and keep them in power. The continued mass-importation of ignorant cheap labor and voters from overseas was simply increased, finally nailing down the coffin lid on Jeffersonian Democracy.
Practically none of the immigrants gave a rat’s behind about what kind of political system they were entering, they only knew it had to be better from where they came. Luckily, most of them willingly entered the melting pot and became Americans. But far too many of them brought their twisted and revisionist religions, their cramped politics of envy and social justice, and their sneering bigotry with them.
The politics of socialism has an interesting structure that is not well known. There are generally the Bumpkin group; the Rebels who find a Cause; and the Predators.
The Bumpkin group is basically your typical mediocrities and/or flunky class that exists in every society, and they make up the vast majority of who the world’s people actually are. The Bumpkins (even in democracies) decide nothing, create nothing (but more of themselves), and are the closest to our earth’s animal cohabitors. They live, die, and dutifully bury one another without having to be told or instructed by either secular or theological busybodies. They should not be gratuitously insulted for who they are because they are our species’ default. They are the great “we” of what it means to be human.
If the prevailing winds are blowing this way or that, those “we” will bend and be content in knowing that “they” are doing (or trying to do) the correct thing. And who knows? Maybe the “we’s” and “they’s” are actually trying to do the correct thing most of the time, and believing people are mostly good. If a crook gets into power there will be many others that are not crooked and will stop her … or him.
Anyway, for the Bumpkins, trying to fight the powers that be and the established customs is a life consuming and exhausting task for nearly all who take it on. Why not relax, take it easy, and go with the flow?
Going with the flow will not do for the Rebels with a Cause (sometimes confused with Knee Jerk Contrarians), who also are always in our midst. Have you ever commented on how beautiful blue the sky looks to you only to have someone start to explain to you on just why it appears blue but isn’t actually so, or that the sky you view is actually more of a light cyan that anything else, if you want to be precise about the thing? The comments and/or commentaries are an illustration of what pops into their heads after someone else makes their comment or declaration. They can’t help it, they were born that way.
Rebels with Causes need leaders, because they arise from the Bumpkin class and have that same intellectual heft. If you get into an argument with these Rebels you will get on their merry-go-round of chop-logic, ad absurdum stupidities, post hoc fallacies, and straw-man arguments. You will either get angry or amused before you realize the old saying that keeping an argument going with a fool makes you appear to be a fool, too.
The Rebels with Causes need leaders for the same reason you need a lawyer in court. You may know the law backwards and forwards, but what is needed is a guy who knows how the system works. He’s the guy who knows what kind of butter-headed underachiever the judge is and how to access hiz honor’s prejudices. In moving juries, he’s the guy who knows how to move the Bumpkins in the peer jury panel over to his client’s side.
So, we finally come to the Predator class. They definitely exist, so the question is: Are they on balance a good or bad for society?
As the arguments have gone for and against the Great Man Theory, the question to ask is: Is civilization, the world or humanity helped because Predators swoop and takeover or are they on balance just a bunch of selfish jerks who saw an opportunity and took it leaving everyone else turning their pockets inside out?
Going back a few paragraphs, persuading one’s peers one way or another is critical in making juries move, but also history. If you had in America circa 2016 a very highly placed, but entirely incompetent and deceitful politician, who had plainly broke the law, then only a Predator, or a party of Predators, could manage to get her off without significant repercussions. If we had an honest and law abiding government there would not only be not wiggle room, the perp would have been in jail by now.
We know what the Predator class is after, and that is the exact same thing they have always been after, which is wealth and power. Wealth and power bring every material bounty the earth can deliver. One doesn’t have to have a PhD in philosophy or economics to know that. So, for Predators to succeed they need to marshal and lead the Rebels with Causes (the Bumpkins will go along with anything that doesn’t rock their boat). And if the Rebels haven’t found their causes yet, it is of the essence for Predators to develop one for them. You can’t lead if you got no followers, right?
It should be obvious that the world has nearly always been ruled by Predators. In the past they have fought amongst themselves, but with the socialism winning ticket they decided it is better to combine globally to come out ahead. This has been the struggle since the so-called end of the Cold War – Predators versus those wanting liberty as defined by documents such as the Declaration of Independence and the originally interpreted freedoms of the U. S. Constitution. Global Predators and the Leftist Rebels with Causes absolutely detest both those enshrinements of liberty. It keeps them from obtaining more power over others.
Hillary has been a cheater – and the cheated upon – nearly all of her life. The reason appears clear; she either has no core or she has only fake confidence and false bravado to get her through life. Unlike her con man husband, she observed his sorcerer’s tricks for decades, but never managed to repeat or pull them off in an convincing manner. In her personal and professional life she has always been flat footed and out of tune.
Which I find sad. It may be difficult reading this to detect sympathy for the woman, but I do. I think all of us know someone, or know of someone, who no matter how hard you might try, that person is completely unlikeable and basically unknowable. That odor that always lingers and permeates everything they become involved in always smells of dishonesty, amorality, and otherwise completely unethical behavior. They may try to come off as nice, caring people, but the impression most get from them is they are always pretending, always acting, and doing a poor job of convincing anyone with an eye for that sort of thing.
I think if Hillary ever does write an honest biography of her life (which chances are zero, me thinks) it would have an eternal life in literature. Just the honest answer to the question as to why she stayed with Bill would be instructive to millions of unvalued and neglected professional woman. To try and pose as an enlightened Leftist and put up with what Bill has privately and publicly done to her is nothing short of baffling. But then again, if one remembers her transformation from Goldwater Girl to Devil’s Advocate, one might understand that she sees in Bill the same thing she idolized in Alinsky.
Hillary’s story is a cautionary tale about trying to make one’s way in the world without knowing who you really are. In one flash you’re basking in the applause of the smiling faces of the people you would really have like you; the next you can’t remember if you’re lying about something important or simply can’t recall the events of your own life. The future looks as empty and incoherent and the past and present have been.
She’s been a Bumpkin Rebel with a Cause (her own) all her life trying to become a Predator like all the people she has admired since after her Goldwater Girl days. She has one more chance to make the world think she is more than who she really is. For the sake of our country, and for her own soul’s sake, I hope she fails.
Anyone who has “experimented” with drugs knows either one or two things. One, that certain drugs lead to addiction, mind alteration and likely personal destruction; or Two, it is a personal choice that is one of mankind’s fundamental freedoms that we, as an enlightened society, should hold as constitutionally sacrosanct.
Thomas De Quincey, an Englishman who lived a fairly long life from the 18th Century well into the 19th, made his only writing of historical note the Confessions of an English Opium Eater. He took his readers along on his opium (laudanum) ride. He got addicted, wrote his tales, then flopped around till he died. He was probably the first of a long line of westerners seeking “enlightenment” in chemicals.
His affect on the Western Mind was far reaching, and propelled at least some in that period to leave their traditional Christian moorings, and seek escape their daily humdrum in a novel (non-alcohol) way. Without realizing it, he convinced many, including those in the Bohemian English establishment that it didn’t matter what they did or said, when they were chasing the dragon they were the brightest pennies in civilization’s pocket.
The 1960’s changed America forever. All the hypocrite hothouse commies who had wormed their way up into power positions in all the “easy” jobs like education, media and entertainment, brought forth the notion that there was only one answer to the world’s problems, and that was that everyone (except themselves and the political leaders who espoused this cause) should be equal to all others. For those who have been around heavy drug users, especially those that “can quit any time they want,” it is obvious that this view comes directly from the user’s shrinking brain brought on by addiction. Addiction distorts the brain and mind leading many times to a total personality alteration.
The upshot: a provable idiotic communist theory, combined with a “very hip and cool” drug culture, a sixties soundtrack directed at kids, and an anti-hero entertainment model, created the inane multicultural mess we find ourselves in today. The old Soviet Union propagandists couldn’t have done a better job of sabotaging and undermining the West if they had blue-printed it for decades, and who knows, maybe they helped the process along considerably.
Multiculturalism can be a wonderful concept when practiced on a personal level. Everyone should be content to know where they came from and how their “own story” mixes and melds with a sane functioning society. But is that what we have operating in America and the West now?
Were the inner cities, now choked with violent, angry criminal class of uneducated morons on the third generation of public welfare a product of multiculturalism, or a racist society, or a devised Leftist scheme to create a new plantation system for growing easily manipulated and wholly owned voters?
This question is where one of the obvious fault lines of Western Civilization can be observed. Why, in the most prosperous nation that the world has ever seen, does such a situation exist? We know it didn’t always exist in America. Inner cities were never a bed of roses, but they weren’t the hopeless hell holes they have become. So what happened?
What happened was that drug addled or addicted minds fantasized a solution to a problem that used to be a personal or character problem and turned it into a societal/cultural problem that demanded action in the form of giving money and welfare benefits to those “suffering” to make the lives of “the miserable” better.
Boy, did it not work. No really. When the women could hold their children hostage to the public welfare system, the boys and men would not work any longer. They retired to stud so the system could perpetuate itself. And boy, did it perpetuate itself.
In one generation places like inner city Detroit, which used to take its poor inhabitants and provide them jobs allowing them to actually enter the middle class, turned into a hopeless, crime ridden, drug infested slum. And, of course, Detroit is only one place in many that this was repeated.
If you are waiting for drug addled and/or addicted hothouse commies to admit their failures you might as well as stop waiting. They never will admit that their idiocies have created the very thing they thought capitalism would bring. Just the opposite happened. But the addled blind will not see.
Obama (for nearly two terms) and the new radical Democrats (since George McGovern) have had their way in writing and implementing social policy. And if you think that America doesn’t have a social policy and/or are asking how can anyone possibly blame Democrats when racism is so prevalent in the general society, you need to get into rehab as fast as you can, you may be approaching the point of no return.
America, even though it has been under the supposed back and forth control of both parties since Nixon, has been using the standard “liberal” (actually communist/socialist/Fabian) playbook since the mid 1960’s. And look what it has wrought.
There is a candidate for president that is running against this kind of status quo, and another candidate that wants only to double down on what has been a clearly epic failure.
But the odd part to many is why are so many that have been writing and saying the same things as Trump now speaks are so fearful that Trump is unfit for high office?
The answer is fairly simple. Trump, like most of us who are non-addled by drugs and the drug culture stretching back to De Quincey, can spot establishment careerist ass-kissers/job seekers tied to the status quo a mile away. They are like that dog along the highway, seeming intelligent in waiting for the cars to all pass before crossing, but then walking directly out in front of a car at the most inopportune time. They thought the could strangle Trump and his Trumpism in the cradle, but finding they were too weak to do so joined forces with the very people they had been telling us were the enemy. I hope they all enjoy carrying their resumes around shopping for another gig. I don’t think anyone is going to be hiring clowns in the near future.
Obama’s fundamental change for America program is moving into its last phase. With merely months to go, this not-so-closeted moslem sympathizer and intolerant communist ideologue is making his final push to change the nation into something different than how he found it. But the incompetent, no-skills community activist may end up not only undoing the damage he and Leftist comrades have caused. He might just be bringing forth the beginning of the end for the entire multicultural One World movement.
It should be obvious to all who are paying attention that Obama is part of a worldwide movement that is trying desperately now to upend traditional Western values. At this point if you don’t know what traditional Western values are, then you might just realize that traditional Western values is what has allowed dissenting voices such as Obama’s to be heard at all. Not knowing this, and especially not caring about what is going on, is a sign you just as well go back to chasing Pokémon, listening to cRap “music,” and ignorantly wearing your Che and Malcolm X t-shirts as your ideal of social justice. You are not just part of the problem, you are the problem.
So how is the this type of “common man” part of the problem?
In a complicated democratic republic, as is the United States, one must understand at least a little of history, economics and psychology.
Firstly, one does not have to be a history major to know the major points of America history, but if one doesn’t understand or appreciate why our nation came into being, then they will never understand that it is an American’s first duty to run their own country in such a manner where everyone (but criminals) are left alone to seek their own happiness and peace. Reliving the sins of the past is only to be living in a false reality which always leads to your own destruction.
The Marxist revolutionary ideals, when put into practice, have always produced the opposite results of what they supposedly intend. Commies believe in their heartless and soulless bodies that if the workers of the world became the masters of the world then utopia will surely follow. The problems are that the idiotic premises and the baseless conclusions are never examined or explained.
The premise that workers would be able to run the economic engines of the world are breathtakingly ignorant, stupid and would be laughable if not for the calamities they bring both to individuals and society. Of course, the “organizers” of the workers movement are the ones aiming for power, just as the organizers of religious and any political movements are. Marx’s works became a blueprint for those lusting after political power, and never helping anyone else.
Convincing the dupes in the world that a Utopia can come about by letting the workers run their own show is the overarching strategy for the ambitious schemers fooling those who don’t know their history.
It is amazing what barbarianism can be put into play when one is doing it all for the good of the people. What is purposefully hidden about history is that all modern totalitarian governments are a product of socialist ideas which guarantee more equal outcomes if only the people will give up their freedom to change back if they end up seeing socialism as just another power grab by ambitious men.
Second, economic illiteracy becomes the easiest way to convince others that the deck is stacked against them. Not understanding economics is the norm, and that ignorance plays against all common sense.
If a guy wants to sell his car to another guy, all economic theory is on display. We have a seller, a buyer, and will for both to reach a successful and satisfying conclusion. In a free and unintimidating situation, both get what they want without having to rely on a third party to referee their deal. Now, that is not to say that an “impartial” public official operating as umpire might not be needed in case of fraud on one of the participant’s parts. That happens, and it is understood in advance that if one party does fraud the other it will be up to the “authorities” to enforce the contact under the law. In this system everyone is free to choose.
The idea that any income or wealth should be spread from those who earn it to those who don’t earn it, but simply want a cut of it, is part and parcel to socialism game playing. That is not to say that a little sprinkling of socialism in the form of safety nets for those who cannot earn their daily bread should be ruled out, however, this could be done much more efficiently by private sector do-good organizations, especially Christian religious groups. Which brings up a point that is always missed in discussing “helping the poor,” and who really benefits from public charity.
One of the misbegotten contributions to our world was allowing the misuse of public monies to subsidize behaviors that are injurious to society, and further, our system of government. Massive subsidies were not needed before massive immigration was allowed to take place starting with the onset of the Industrial Revolution. Wave after wave of immigrants came to seek a better life, and actually most of them did get a better life than what they knew before. But by the American “standards” of living at the time, the immigrants were living poorly and needed help. The do-gooders knew that they would beggar themselves helping, so they did what most do-gooders do – they got someone else to pay for their compassion. And so we winded up with our crushing and demoralizing welfare state just a few generations later.
Just remember though, there are people, ambitious people, who benefit greatly by using other people’s money to further their own goals to power. When the idea of public charity becomes an entitlement, then basically the sky’s the limit. There is a leveling that “must” take place, otherwise we do not live in a fair and equal society of justice for all. This is the poisonous mentality exhibited by Obama and his string pullers in the Democratic Party and so-called One Worlders.
Which brings us lastly as to why any socialist has a chance convincing anyone to help them into power.
The worldwide leaders of the socialist, multicultural One World movement are a combination of the world’s super rich elites and those who do not think that the free interchange of goods and services can result in economic justice. If one only asks the question as to why the super rich cannot just take out their wallets and pay for the charity they insist upon, one understands the game being played.
The super rich got to be super rich not by outworking and outservicing other businesses, but by using the laws (they paid for via bribes to elected leaders and government officials) to squash their competition. The super rich are figuratively and literally in bed with governments around the world. They are protecting and enhancing their fortunes for themselves and their posterity. They game-play the ignorant of the world into financing their social obligations to “help the poor.”
The poor and ignorant who have abandoned the “old morality” of traditional religion now see the state as their idol. They pray to it, celebrate it, and have become convinced it is their savior. What they never seem to realize is that their situation only gets worse. Their poverty is tied to public welfare, and they are at the mercy of elected officials who enrich themselves by the using the system to get money for the poor.
How much is a Jesse Jackson worth? How did he amass such wealth being a champion of the poor? How did he amass such wealth working via social and justice non-profits that restrict what those running them can make? Why doesn’t anyone know about the Jesse Jacksons of the world? The answer is that it takes an organized group committed to fraud to cover it up and dismiss it from the halls of the law.
It is no accident that our nation is unraveling before our eyes at this given moment. The militant racist and riot playbook of the 1960’s is back in vogue. It fizzled with Occupy Wall Street basically because white middle class kids were scared to death of ending up in jails with real criminals. But now, the street thugs financed by the super rich are revising the racism and scare tactics of the days of the dawn of the drugs, rock and roll, and sex era.
We see blacks shooting and intimidating police forces all over the country. We see heavily armed black men showing off their weapons without a finger being raised by the government to at least investigate them as domestic terrorists. But what should worry everyone is that these domestic terrorists have been linking up with foreign terrorists. Soon we will have massive carnage in American cities matching those in Europe.
And this time, our smart commander in chief won’t be able to call for a beer summit. And that is that, one, psychopaths seeking power are usually teetotalers, and two, moslems mostly do not drink, especially when on assignment from their god.
For decades now presidential election years have been called the water shed mark in history. In truth, they have been. We, as a nation, have been slipping into a just another unexceptional socialist basket case, massively in debt and confused as to who we are or what we are doing. Thanks, Democrats! You have successfully transformed your image from the slave owning/Jim Crow apologists to full monty advocates of communism.
However, times have slightly changed. The worthless opposition party, AKA Republicans, are having a major shake up. There are some important Republican seats up for reelection. Image if those seats actually went to those wanting to oppose the Democrats and not play ball with them?
Obama has shown the way here. An activist president doesn’t need to abide by the law, he (or she) can just make it up as they go along. The new Republican Party can discard those Republicans that always side with the Democrats, but if these clowns do retain their seat, they can be ignored. And if there is still a blockage of common sense legislation to fix the disasters Obama and the Democrat socialists have foisted upon the country, then don’t support any Republican who counsels compromise. Let the seats go Democrat for a term. A Republican president can simply follow the community organizer’s brand of politics and write executive orders, thereby flipping off any who disagree with him. Image the outrage and howls on the Left if that happens. Their own tactics used against them.
There is an adage that you can’t fix stupid. True, but you can fix ignorant. But you can’t fix ignorant with a culture of dummies hooked on playing video games, watching Youtube, listening to shitty jungle boogie and pop love ditties, checking their social media pages 30 times an hour, and especially getting high in an effort to numb themselves to what they are doing to their futures. The older kids and adults should be made to understand that while they may not have created their own sewer, they can climb out of it. And the way out of it is to disengage with the poisonous culture and try to get back to a productive way of life where they can support themselves in the world and not be dependent on public charity.
Part of this effort to convince the older kids and young adults to not only to save themselves, but to provide role models for the younger kids who look up to them.
To a younger kid, those men who come around and “play” with mommy are seen as their role models. Those worthless criminal types aren’t seen for who they are, and are given pass after pass to reenter their society, culture and neighborhoods to keep damaging them.
Why is this allowed to happen? For the very same reason the poverty industry is allowed to flourish when the catastrophic tragedies are so obvious – there are people getting rich and powerful by it.
This coming election may be the last chance to get it right, and that doesn’t mean becoming a Right Wing version of the Left. It would mean going back to the basics of freedom to choose and gaining or suffering the consequences for making those choices.
This is something the Left cannot permit and hold onto their precarious positions of political, economic and social power.
Let’s hope the good prevails and the bad gets their just deserts.
Washington’s Farewell Address 1796
Friends and Citizens:
The period for a new election of a citizen to administer the executive government of the United States being not far distant, and the time actually arrived when your thoughts must be employed in designating the person who is to be clothed with that important trust, it appears to me proper, especially as it may conduce to a more distinct expression of the public voice, that I should now apprise you of the resolution I have formed, to decline being considered among the number of those out of whom a choice is to be made.
I beg you, at the same time, to do me the justice to be assured that this resolution has not been taken without a strict regard to all the considerations appertaining to the relation which binds a dutiful citizen to his country; and that in withdrawing the tender of service, which silence in my situation might imply, I am influenced by no diminution of zeal for your future interest, no deficiency of grateful respect for your past kindness, but am supported by a full conviction that the step is compatible with both.
The acceptance of, and continuance hitherto in, the office to which your suffrages have twice called me have been a uniform sacrifice of inclination to the opinion of duty and to a deference for what appeared to be your desire. I constantly hoped that it would have been much earlier in my power, consistently with motives which I was not at liberty to disregard, to return to that retirement from which I had been reluctantly drawn. The strength of my inclination to do this, previous to the last election, had even led to the preparation of an address to declare it to you; but mature reflection on the then perplexed and critical posture of our affairs with foreign nations, and the unanimous advice of persons entitled to my confidence, impelled me to abandon the idea.
I rejoice that the state of your concerns, external as well as internal, no longer renders the pursuit of inclination incompatible with the sentiment of duty or propriety, and am persuaded, whatever partiality may be retained for my services, that, in the present circumstances of our country, you will not disapprove my determination to retire.
The impressions with which I first undertook the arduous trust were explained on the proper occasion. In the discharge of this trust, I will only say that I have, with good intentions, contributed towards the organization and administration of the government the best exertions of which a very fallible judgment was capable. Not unconscious in the outset of the inferiority of my qualifications, experience in my own eyes, perhaps still more in the eyes of others, has strengthened the motives to diffidence of myself; and every day the increasing weight of years admonishes me more and more that the shade of retirement is as necessary to me as it will be welcome. Satisfied that if any circumstances have given peculiar value to my services, they were temporary, I have the consolation to believe that, while choice and prudence invite me to quit the political scene, patriotism does not forbid it.
In looking forward to the moment which is intended to terminate the career of my public life, my feelings do not permit me to suspend the deep acknowledgment of that debt of gratitude which I owe to my beloved country for the many honors it has conferred upon me; still more for the steadfast confidence with which it has supported me; and for the opportunities I have thence enjoyed of manifesting my inviolable attachment, by services faithful and persevering, though in usefulness unequal to my zeal. If benefits have resulted to our country from these services, let it always be remembered to your praise, and as an instructive example in our annals, that under circumstances in which the passions, agitated in every direction, were liable to mislead, amidst appearances sometimes dubious, vicissitudes of fortune often discouraging, in situations in which not unfrequently want of success has countenanced the spirit of criticism, the constancy of your support was the essential prop of the efforts, and a guarantee of the plans by which they were effected. Profoundly penetrated with this idea, I shall carry it with me to my grave, as a strong incitement to unceasing vows that heaven may continue to you the choicest tokens of its beneficence; that your union and brotherly affection may be perpetual; that the free Constitution, which is the work of your hands, may be sacredly maintained; that its administration in every department may be stamped with wisdom and virtue; that, in fine, the happiness of the people of these States, under the auspices of liberty, may be made complete by so careful a preservation and so prudent a use of this blessing as will acquire to them the glory of recommending it to the applause, the affection, and adoption of every nation which is yet a stranger to it.
Here, perhaps, I ought to stop. But a solicitude for your welfare, which cannot end but with my life, and the apprehension of danger, natural to that solicitude, urge me, on an occasion like the present, to offer to your solemn contemplation, and to recommend to your frequent review, some sentiments which are the result of much reflection, of no inconsiderable observation, and which appear to me all-important to the permanency of your felicity as a people. These will be offered to you with the more freedom, as you can only see in them the disinterested warnings of a parting friend, who can possibly have no personal motive to bias his counsel. Nor can I forget, as an encouragement to it, your indulgent reception of my sentiments on a former and not dissimilar occasion.
Interwoven as is the love of liberty with every ligament of your hearts, no recommendation of mine is necessary to fortify or confirm the attachment.
The unity of government which constitutes you one people is also now dear to you. It is justly so, for it is a main pillar in the edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquility at home, your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity; of that very liberty which you so highly prize. But as it is easy to foresee that, from different causes and from different quarters, much pains will be taken, many artifices employed to weaken in your minds the conviction of this truth; as this is the point in your political fortress against which the batteries of internal and external enemies will be most constantly and actively (though often covertly and insidiously) directed, it is of infinite moment that you should properly estimate the immense value of your national union to your collective and individual happiness; that you should cherish a cordial, habitual, and immovable attachment to it; accustoming yourselves to think and speak of it as of the palladium of your political safety and prosperity; watching for its preservation with jealous anxiety; discountenancing whatever may suggest even a suspicion that it can in any event be abandoned; and indignantly frowning upon the first dawning of every attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest, or to enfeeble the sacred ties which now link together the various parts.
For this you have every inducement of sympathy and interest. Citizens, by birth or choice, of a common country, that country has a right to concentrate your affections. The name of American, which belongs to you in your national capacity, must always exalt the just pride of patriotism more than any appellation derived from local discriminations. With slight shades of difference, you have the same religion, manners, habits, and political principles. You have in a common cause fought and triumphed together; the independence and liberty you possess are the work of joint counsels, and joint efforts of common dangers, sufferings, and successes.
But these considerations, however powerfully they address themselves to your sensibility, are greatly outweighed by those which apply more immediately to your interest. Here every portion of our country finds the most commanding motives for carefully guarding and preserving the union of the whole.
The North, in an unrestrained intercourse with the South, protected by the equal laws of a common government, finds in the productions of the latter great additional resources of maritime and commercial enterprise and precious materials of manufacturing industry. The South, in the same intercourse, benefiting by the agency of the North, sees its agriculture grow and its commerce expand. Turning partly into its own channels the seamen of the North, it finds its particular navigation invigorated; and, while it contributes, in different ways, to nourish and increase the general mass of the national navigation, it looks forward to the protection of a maritime strength, to which itself is unequally adapted. The East, in a like intercourse with the West, already finds, and in the progressive improvement of interior communications by land and water, will more and more find a valuable vent for the commodities which it brings from abroad, or manufactures at home. The West derives from the East supplies requisite to its growth and comfort, and, what is perhaps of still greater consequence, it must of necessity owe the secure enjoyment of indispensable outlets for its own productions to the weight, influence, and the future maritime strength of the Atlantic side of the Union, directed by an indissoluble community of interest as one nation. Any other tenure by which the West can hold this essential advantage, whether derived from its own separate strength, or from an apostate and unnatural connection with any foreign power, must be intrinsically precarious.
While, then, every part of our country thus feels an immediate and particular interest in union, all the parts combined cannot fail to find in the united mass of means and efforts greater strength, greater resource, proportionably greater security from external danger, a less frequent interruption of their peace by foreign nations; and, what is of inestimable value, they must derive from union an exemption from those broils and wars between themselves, which so frequently afflict neighboring countries not tied together by the same governments, which their own rival ships alone would be sufficient to produce, but which opposite foreign alliances, attachments, and intrigues would stimulate and embitter. Hence, likewise, they will avoid the necessity of those overgrown military establishments which, under any form of government, are inauspicious to liberty, and which are to be regarded as particularly hostile to republican liberty. In this sense it is that your union ought to be considered as a main prop of your liberty, and that the love of the one ought to endear to you the preservation of the other.
These considerations speak a persuasive language to every reflecting and virtuous mind, and exhibit the continuance of the Union as a primary object of patriotic desire. Is there a doubt whether a common government can embrace so large a sphere? Let experience solve it. To listen to mere speculation in such a case were criminal. We are authorized to hope that a proper organization of the whole with the auxiliary agency of governments for the respective subdivisions, will afford a happy issue to the experiment. It is well worth a fair and full experiment. With such powerful and obvious motives to union, affecting all parts of our country, while experience shall not have demonstrated its impracticability, there will always be reason to distrust the patriotism of those who in any quarter may endeavor to weaken its bands.
In contemplating the causes which may disturb our Union, it occurs as matter of serious concern that any ground should have been furnished for characterizing parties by geographical discriminations, Northern and Southern, Atlantic and Western; whence designing men may endeavor to excite a belief that there is a real difference of local interests and views. One of the expedients of party to acquire influence within particular districts is to misrepresent the opinions and aims of other districts. You cannot shield yourselves too much against the jealousies and heartburnings which spring from these misrepresentations; they tend to render alien to each other those who ought to be bound together by fraternal affection. The inhabitants of our Western country have lately had a useful lesson on this head; they have seen, in the negotiation by the Executive, and in the unanimous ratification by the Senate, of the treaty with Spain, and in the universal satisfaction at that event, throughout the United States, a decisive proof how unfounded were the suspicions propagated among them of a policy in the General Government and in the Atlantic States unfriendly to their interests in regard to the Mississippi; they have been witnesses to the formation of two treaties, that with Great Britain, and that with Spain, which secure to them everything they could desire, in respect to our foreign relations, towards confirming their prosperity. Will it not be their wisdom to rely for the preservation of these advantages on the Union by which they were procured ? Will they not henceforth be deaf to those advisers, if such there are, who would sever them from their brethren and connect them with aliens?
To the efficacy and permanency of your Union, a government for the whole is indispensable. No alliance, however strict, between the parts can be an adequate substitute; they must inevitably experience the infractions and interruptions which all alliances in all times have experienced. Sensible of this momentous truth, you have improved upon your first essay, by the adoption of a constitution of government better calculated than your former for an intimate union, and for the efficacious management of your common concerns. This government, the offspring of our own choice, uninfluenced and unawed, adopted upon full investigation and mature deliberation, completely free in its principles, in the distribution of its powers, uniting security with energy, and containing within itself a provision for its own amendment, has a just claim to your confidence and your support. Respect for its authority, compliance with its laws, acquiescence in its measures, are duties enjoined by the fundamental maxims of true liberty. The basis of our political systems is the right of the people to make and to alter their constitutions of government. But the Constitution which at any time exists, till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole people, is sacredly obligatory upon all. The very idea of the power and the right of the people to establish government presupposes the duty of every individual to obey the established government.
All obstructions to the execution of the laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle, and of fatal tendency. They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels and modified by mutual interests.
However combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.
Towards the preservation of your government, and the permanency of your present happy state, it is requisite, not only that you steadily discountenance irregular oppositions to its acknowledged authority, but also that you resist with care the spirit of innovation upon its principles, however specious the pretexts. One method of assault may be to effect, in the forms of the Constitution, alterations which will impair the energy of the system, and thus to undermine what cannot be directly overthrown. In all the changes to which you may be invited, remember that time and habit are at least as necessary to fix the true character of governments as of other human institutions; that experience is the surest standard by which to test the real tendency of the existing constitution of a country; that facility in changes, upon the credit of mere hypothesis and opinion, exposes to perpetual change, from the endless variety of hypothesis and opinion; and remember, especially, that for the efficient management of your common interests, in a country so extensive as ours, a government of as much vigor as is consistent with the perfect security of liberty is indispensable. Liberty itself will find in such a government, with powers properly distributed and adjusted, its surest guardian. It is, indeed, little else than a name, where the government is too feeble to withstand the enterprises of faction, to confine each member of the society within the limits prescribed by the laws, and to maintain all in the secure and tranquil enjoyment of the rights of person and property.
I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.
This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.
The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.
Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.
It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.
There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the government and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in governments of a monarchical cast, patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.
It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a free country should inspire caution in those entrusted with its administration, to confine themselves within their respective constitutional spheres, avoiding in the exercise of the powers of one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism. A just estimate of that love of power, and proneness to abuse it, which predominates in the human heart, is sufficient to satisfy us of the truth of this position. The necessity of reciprocal checks in the exercise of political power, by dividing and distributing it into different depositaries, and constituting each the guardian of the public weal against invasions by the others, has been evinced by experiments ancient and modern; some of them in our country and under our own eyes. To preserve them must be as necessary as to institute them. If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transient benefit, which the use can at any time yield.
Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.
It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere friend to it can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?
Promote then, as an object of primary importance, institutions for the general diffusion of knowledge. In proportion as the structure of a government gives force to public opinion, it is essential that public opinion should be enlightened.
As a very important source of strength and security, cherish public credit. One method of preserving it is to use it as sparingly as possible, avoiding occasions of expense by cultivating peace, but remembering also that timely disbursements to prepare for danger frequently prevent much greater disbursements to repel it, avoiding likewise the accumulation of debt, not only by shunning occasions of expense, but by vigorous exertion in time of peace to discharge the debts which unavoidable wars may have occasioned, not ungenerously throwing upon posterity the burden which we ourselves ought to bear. The execution of these maxims belongs to your representatives, but it is necessary that public opinion should co-operate. To facilitate to them the performance of their duty, it is essential that you should practically bear in mind that towards the payment of debts there must be revenue; that to have revenue there must be taxes; that no taxes can be devised which are not more or less inconvenient and unpleasant; that the intrinsic embarrassment, inseparable from the selection of the proper objects (which is always a choice of difficulties), ought to be a decisive motive for a candid construction of the conduct of the government in making it, and for a spirit of acquiescence in the measures for obtaining revenue, which the public exigencies may at any time dictate.
Observe good faith and justice towards all nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all. Religion and morality enjoin this conduct; and can it be, that good policy does not equally enjoin it – It will be worthy of a free, enlightened, and at no distant period, a great nation, to give to mankind the magnanimous and too novel example of a people always guided by an exalted justice and benevolence. Who can doubt that, in the course of time and things, the fruits of such a plan would richly repay any temporary advantages which might be lost by a steady adherence to it ? Can it be that Providence has not connected the permanent felicity of a nation with its virtue ? The experiment, at least, is recommended by every sentiment which ennobles human nature. Alas! is it rendered impossible by its vices?
In the execution of such a plan, nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded; and that, in place of them, just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated. The nation which indulges towards another a habitual hatred or a habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. Antipathy in one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and intractable, when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur. Hence, frequent collisions, obstinate, envenomed, and bloody contests. The nation, prompted by ill-will and resentment, sometimes impels to war the government, contrary to the best calculations of policy. The government sometimes participates in the national propensity, and adopts through passion what reason would reject; at other times it makes the animosity of the nation subservient to projects of hostility instigated by pride, ambition, and other sinister and pernicious motives. The peace often, sometimes perhaps the liberty, of nations, has been the victim.
So likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation), facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.
As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the public councils. Such an attachment of a small or weak towards a great and powerful nation dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter.
Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government. But that jealousy to be useful must be impartial; else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defense against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests.
The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop. Europe has a set of primary interests which to us have none; or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves by artificial ties in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities.
Our detached and distant situation invites and enables us to pursue a different course. If we remain one people under an efficient government. the period is not far off when we may defy material injury from external annoyance; when we may take such an attitude as will cause the neutrality we may at any time resolve upon to be scrupulously respected; when belligerent nations, under the impossibility of making acquisitions upon us, will not lightly hazard the giving us provocation; when we may choose peace or war, as our interest, guided by justice, shall counsel.
Why forego the advantages of so peculiar a situation? Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor or caprice?
It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world; so far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it; for let me not be understood as capable of patronizing infidelity to existing engagements. I hold the maxim no less applicable to public than to private affairs, that honesty is always the best policy. I repeat it, therefore, let those engagements be observed in their genuine sense. But, in my opinion, it is unnecessary and would be unwise to extend them.
Taking care always to keep ourselves by suitable establishments on a respectable defensive posture, we may safely trust to temporary alliances for extraordinary emergencies.
Harmony, liberal intercourse with all nations, are recommended by policy, humanity, and interest. But even our commercial policy should hold an equal and impartial hand; neither seeking nor granting exclusive favors or preferences; consulting the natural course of things; diffusing and diversifying by gentle means the streams of commerce, but forcing nothing; establishing (with powers so disposed, in order to give trade a stable course, to define the rights of our merchants, and to enable the government to support them) conventional rules of intercourse, the best that present circumstances and mutual opinion will permit, but temporary, and liable to be from time to time abandoned or varied, as experience and circumstances shall dictate; constantly keeping in view that it is folly in one nation to look for disinterested favors from another; that it must pay with a portion of its independence for whatever it may accept under that character; that, by such acceptance, it may place itself in the condition of having given equivalents for nominal favors, and yet of being reproached with ingratitude for not giving more. There can be no greater error than to expect or calculate upon real favors from nation to nation. It is an illusion, which experience must cure, which a just pride ought to discard.
In offering to you, my countrymen, these counsels of an old and affectionate friend, I dare not hope they will make the strong and lasting impression I could wish; that they will control the usual current of the passions, or prevent our nation from running the course which has hitherto marked the destiny of nations. But, if I may even flatter myself that they may be productive of some partial benefit, some occasional good; that they may now and then recur to moderate the fury of party spirit, to warn against the mischiefs of foreign intrigue, to guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism; this hope will be a full recompense for the solicitude for your welfare, by which they have been dictated.
How far in the discharge of my official duties I have been guided by the principles which have been delineated, the public records and other evidences of my conduct must witness to you and to the world. To myself, the assurance of my own conscience is, that I have at least believed myself to be guided by them.
In relation to the still subsisting war in Europe, my proclamation of the twenty-second of April, I793, is the index of my plan. Sanctioned by your approving voice, and by that of your representatives in both houses of Congress, the spirit of that measure has continually governed me, uninfluenced by any attempts to deter or divert me from it.
After deliberate examination, with the aid of the best lights I could obtain, I was well satisfied that our country, under all the circumstances of the case, had a right to take, and was bound in duty and interest to take, a neutral position. Having taken it, I determined, as far as should depend upon me, to maintain it, with moderation, perseverance, and firmness.
The considerations which respect the right to hold this conduct, it is not necessary on this occasion to detail. I will only observe that, according to my understanding of the matter, that right, so far from being denied by any of the belligerent powers, has been virtually admitted by all.
The duty of holding a neutral conduct may be inferred, without anything more, from the obligation which justice and humanity impose on every nation, in cases in which it is free to act, to maintain inviolate the relations of peace and amity towards other nations.
The inducements of interest for observing that conduct will best be referred to your own reflections and experience. With me a predominant motive has been to endeavor to gain time to our country to settle and mature its yet recent institutions, and to progress without interruption to that degree of strength and consistency which is necessary to give it, humanly speaking, the command of its own fortunes.
Though, in reviewing the incidents of my administration, I am unconscious of intentional error, I am nevertheless too sensible of my defects not to think it probable that I may have committed many errors. Whatever they may be, I fervently beseech the Almighty to avert or mitigate the evils to which they may tend. I shall also carry with me the hope that my country will never cease to view them with indulgence; and that, after forty five years of my life dedicated to its service with an upright zeal, the faults of incompetent abilities will be consigned to oblivion, as myself must soon be to the mansions of rest.
Relying on its kindness in this as in other things, and actuated by that fervent love towards it, which is so natural to a man who views in it the native soil of himself and his progenitors for several generations, I anticipate with pleasing expectation that retreat in which I promise myself to realize, without alloy, the sweet enjoyment of partaking, in the midst of my fellow-citizens, the benign influence of good laws under a free government, the ever-favorite object of my heart, and the happy reward, as I trust, of our mutual cares, labors, and dangers.
Guilty as Hell, Free as a Bird or Seven and a Half Years of Struggle against Lies, Stupidity, and Cowardice – Part II
I finally managed to get through Hitler’s Mein Kampf. It was a tough read. Not because his ideas were unclear or too dense to follow, but because he showed himself to be a boring writer of propaganda that, while it might have been sizzling at that time to a certain audience, historically it is nearly (but not quite) as boring as reading Marx.
But with that said, his points would have hit the mark better if he hadn’t laced every problem he had with Marxism with his paranoid dementedness concerning Jews. True, there were men who were Jews and who were leaders both of communist vanguard and international finance that were obviously working hand-in-glove together to take over the German government at that time. But the problem wasn’t that they were Jews, it was that they were bad people trying to gain power against the will of the vast majority of population. They made the fatal mistake of insulting the common volk on a daily basis. When Hitler successfully pinned the sins of these people on the entire Jewish population, once he came to power it would be obvious that there would be a price of blood guilt paid by who he considered their race. We all know what happened next.
One of those questions of history is always, what would have happened if … Sometimes these questions are a waste of intellectual time, but sometimes not.
Hitler was apparently enraged at the Jewish people as a race, which was as false a proposition as the German race being a separate and distinct kind of people. But it seems that the true root of his anger was that he viewed the media at that time to be controlled by the Jewish interests that were not only in direct conflict of what he thought were German interests and ideals.
A crazy man is impossible to logically understand, because the definition of insanity is that while it may have logic of its own, there is nothing to connect it with what is traditionally considered logic as in a process of reasoning in which a conclusion follows from premises. Hitler, in this sense, was not crazy.
Terrorism, to most, is an illogical pursuit or means to a calculated outcome. But it is logical if one is talking about a recognized common or joint cause. An aggressive panhandler is a micro terrorist, but there is no common cause, only his own. A guy terrorizing for a religious cause or his race is doing it for his perceived greater good.
Is common or joint-cause terrorism a successful way of getting one’s political, social or religious way? Of course it is, a simple browsing of history shows this, but it is nearly impossible to detect unless one has his bunk detector in good working order.
All revolutions are terrorist in nature. The threat against the establishment is there; sometimes velvet, sometimes cutting off heads. The terrorist threat is that the powers that be must abnegate their title to governing and let the terrorists now be in charge. Or else. And I am not saying that terrorism should be ruled out of any just cause against an overbearing oppressor. The key phrase is “just.” But the understanding of “just” is always open to interpretation. Usually the winners do the interpreting and the losers do the whining.
For a terrorist bending minority to come to power it must demoralize the majority by making them shut themselves up. PC has been in their playbook since the days of Marx. It takes awhile for this to work, because it must be reinforced by other voices such as the media, entertainment, and especially the educational establishment. As children are taught, so will they act. At least most of them.
Institutionalized PC culture must define victims and oppressors. There is no need to rehash that here, everyone knows who the good guys and the bad guys are, don’t we? The media, entertainment and educational establishment working in concert with the Left’s political party has pounded that home for at least two generations now.
When a cop shoots a black person who is violently resisting arrest all the lights and alarms of the PC establishment go on. When there is still another drive-by gangster shooting in a lawless black neighborhood where an innocent black victim is killed by a black thug it’s cue the crickets. If it is commented upon at all it is simply another plea for gun control.
Not criminal control, but control of his weapons, which, by the way, are nearly always gotten illegally or because the “checks and balances” the Left demanded didn’t work.
This is illogical, and is pointed out as stupidity by some, but it serves the cause of the Left in fundamentally changing the government they are a minority in. Trying to take guns away from honest American citizens would cause the end to the United States government. There would be no going back. The Left knows this, and the guys with the brains know this has to be a very long term strategy to enslave the population. The Leftist guys with no brains are allowed to shoot off their mouths because the smart guys know they need this diversion.
It is obvious that at this time in our nation’s life that the majority of the electorate has lost control of their government. The minority rules. It owns the political establishment. Sure, there is a pretended push back by the so-called political opposition which is supposed to be the majority party, but the party of the Left moves their game ball a little bit closer to their goal posts. This furthers the demoralization of the majority of the electorate.
Some of the majority understands the ways of the Left. They know that the Leftist revolution to bring about fundamental change in the nation can only work when the government has been compromised into not only doing the bidding of the Left, but in protecting the Left’s leaders at all costs.
Guilty as hell, free as a bird.
Is there anything good that comes out of Chicago?
That city has been and is so corrupted by machine politics that it operates its own little banana republic dictatorship without fear of ever losing power. With absolute power the city as become absolutely corrupted. How you know a city or nation is absolutely corrupted is that the people all know it, and know they can’t do anything about it. The National Socialists are in power and they will brook no opposition. They are a gangster mob doing whatever they want whenever they want. Al Capone would have envied them. If he would have just gotten into politics more deeply he would have never had to face justice.
Of course, in Leftist controlled places like Chicago, the politicians do have one fear, and that is that the federal government will be taken over by non-Leftists.
A non-Leftist Executive in Chief would be a big problem for the Left. An outspoken and fearless non-Lefty could actually bring their divide and conquer game to an end.
The recent cop shootings in Dallas reminds us all that there are evil, psychopathic racists in the world, and they are not what the PC establishment has identified as an oppressor group. Here we saw one of the PC Leftist’s victims group going completely and openly terrorist.
Whoops. That isn’t supposed to happen … yet. Everything isn’t in place yet. In fact, this couldn’t be a worse possible time considering the walking political abortion they intend to run for president. They have to be worried and thinking:
How are we going to spin this? How can we connect this black terrorist group to our political enemies? How about Trump caused it? Naw, not even our best liars can half convincingly make that case. Think, dummy, think! Back to the gun control crap? Naw, that isn’t working, either, in fact, its actually backfiring on us. How about the police are all racist? Okay, a lot of police are minorities, so how about they are controlled by racists? No, there are too many minorities in the top cop position to pull that off. The economy? Our friends in the media have lied about since before our great black hope came to power. But crap, we will be lucky if the roof doesn’t cave in before the election. And, sigh, we may not be able to commit the kind of massive election fraud with illegal voters we were depending on. What are we going to do?
They haven’t got that figured out yet. But the public is figuring them out pretty good right now. Even I didn’t realize to what extent our government was corrupted until the head of our federal law enforcement bureau basically kneeled before his political masters. They must have had something pretty big on this guy, or he was just a political hack all along and the press hid it well.
I think every logical person now knows that we need a drastic change in our nation’s direction. And that change isn’t taking another left. We’ve had 7 ½ of a lying demagogue who is openly contemptuous of our country. We can’t stand another one. If that happens Hillary will be presiding over the end of the United States. What comes next is anyone’s guess.