Saturday, October 31, 2015

The anti-Liberal Techniques: Part 3

I’m going to say something in this post that will seem outrageous and extreme. It will sound like something a tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy theorist would say. There will be people who will disagree with me about it. There will be people who will insult me and call me names because of it but I’m going to say it anyway, because it needs to be said.

As with all of my writings about the evils of liberalism I want it to be known that I’m not talking about the rank-and-file MSNBC watching type of liberal who is full of media created data that could not possibly be true. Those people, misinformed as they are, are victims of true liberalism. The ones I’m talking about are rabid ones who are the driving force behind all liberal policy.

I found this meme on Twitter a couple of days ago. It’s pretty good and pretty close to the truth. I wish I knew where it came from so I could credit them for it. But there is just one thing wrong with it, in that it does not go far enough. It’s not about control; although control is a necessary part of it, control is just a means to another end.

Sun Tzu wrote in “The Art of War” that, “All warfare is based on deception.” It’s not about greed. It’s not about helping anybody or being kind to them. It’s not about saving the children or charity or anything of that nature. It’s not about our personal safety or dignity or prosperity. Above all it is not about anybody’s human rights; in spite of their statements to the contrary.

Friday, October 23, 2015

The anti-Liberal Techniques: Part 2

I’ve got some questions for all of the people on the conservative side of the political aisle. Are you tired yet of being called racists? Are you tired of being told you’re part of some kind of war on women? Are you tired of being told you are a homophobe? Are you tired of the same old discourteous and rude attitudes and insults being directed at you by liberals who just can’t stand the fact that someone might view something a little bit differently than them?

Well I’m very sorry to say that it is never going to go away until liberalism is completely and totally defeated. I know, I know. That leading paragraph made it sound like I had some special way to just get rid of the problem but let’s face it; there are plenty of liberals around and quite frankly sometimes they are not very friendly people. That’s why they can’t restrain themselves from jumping to the kinds of insulting behavior they seem to take towards people who oppose them. And while I have no magic secret to make them go away so that the rest of us, the sane people, can just peacefully get on with our lives, I have to say “the hell with it!” if they are here and they are obnoxious, why not have some fun messing with them?

Now, there is something that has to be understood. For the purpose of this discussion there are two major kinds of liberals. There are the rank-and-file liberals and the rabid liberals.

The rank-and-file liberals are what some would call, “low information voters,” and things of that sort. For the most part they aren’t bad people. But for one reason or another—usually related to things like MSNBC—they’ve fallen into the leftist propaganda tricks. I know several people who used to belong to this category but after having certain things pointed out to them they changed their minds and started to view politics with some kind of rational sense. I, as a matter of fact, used to be one of those kinds of liberals. Rational people rather resent being lied to and as long as someone has the ability to think they can be brought to see the light.

Then there are the liberals who are the real driving force behind liberalism. They are the leaders. They are usually surrounded by rabid supporters who couldn’t generate a rational argument if their lives depended on it. They are all about emotions and force and never about thought. For many reasons I will not go into here, I consider them to be typically insane. Unfortunately they are also the people who are currently in power in Washington. The entire Democrat party and about half of the Republicans (establishment types) fall into this category, to a greater or lesser degree.

Saturday, October 17, 2015

The anti-Liberal Techniques: Part 1

This series of articles is for those who want to understand Liberalism at its "best" and techniques I've found helpful in fighting it.

Let’s take a step back from the immediate political crisis of the moment, put the wide angle lens on the camera, and take a look at why people buy into things.

The following is a list of some fairly famous government programs and speeches. Some of which most people have heard of. Some are kind of obscure.

Staring at number one on the list is a little thing that is called, “The Great Leap Forward.” Honestly, by the name alone who in their right mind wouldn’t want to take a great leap forward with their country? It sounds so hopeful, so optimistic. If you just sit and think about those words alone right now you would notice yourself beginning to feel an emotion which would be expressed as, “Wow, I want some of that! Sign me up.” And people who are against something like that? Lunatics.

How about, “The Cultural Revolution”? Man that sounds great to some people! You know the people living in the impoverished inner cities would really think this is a great thing. With broken down buildings falling apart all over the place, high crime rates, rampant drug abuse, violence, poverty, starvation, etc., who could deny that a little—or a lot—of revolution would be the proper order of the day; especially if it involves getting a little—or a lot—of culture spreading about the place? Again, this is an utterly fantastic idea!

Let’s throw in a leader who gives an inspiring speech with the appropriate title, “A New Beginning.” Oh my God! What could be better? We look around us and with all that is going on in the news of the world kind of tend to think that a new beginning is just what we need! Who in this life has never wished for a redo? So this New Beginning guy; that’s my man! A little bit of positive and inspirational talk in a leader never hurt anybody so I’m gonna vote for him!

As great as the so far listed programs and speeches are concerned, none of them compare to, “The Wellspring of Life.” This one just makes people kind of sit back in their chair and go, “oooooohhhhhaaa!” I know I just did. It’s almost, but not quite, orgasmic. Think about that. A government program called, “The Wellspring of Life.” That ought to be worth quite a bit of tax money to fund considering the value of life to some people. Life springs as if from a well, from the government! I can see people in line just to sign up for it. 

Saturday, October 10, 2015

Why Socialism will Never Work, EVER!


Bernie Sanders annoys me. If you know me, that’s to be expected. The thing that annoys me more than Bernie Sanders is when people support him, thinking that somehow he would be a good president. That as well, is to be expected. What is unexpected is the number of seemingly intelligent people who support him.

It’s easy to see how this could be. I mean hell; he wants to give everybody everything they want. You want more pay, ask Bernie. You want more benefits, ask Bernie. You want more money to go to the support of veterans, ask Bernie. You want equality with the wealthy; Bernie is the man to go to. He’s like Santa Claus on steroids; without the red suit, reindeer, flying sleigh, and most importantly, a work shop full of magic elves at the North Pole to provide everything everybody wants for free.

As fundamentally flawed as the little drawback of, “just where the hell does the money come from to pay for all of these omnipotent and omnipresent programs of a cradle to grave federal government,” and how annoying it is to try and get that through a liberal mind, the impossibility of Socialism from the fiscal standpoint is not what I want to write about. Yes, yes, yes, it is impossible to pay for. History has demonstrated it over and over again. It always looks good to start with because the People are only looking at what they are being promised. They think there are plenty of filthy rich people to pay for it. But in the end the rich don’t have enough money to pay for everybody so rationing begins, the system collapses, everybody riots, the revolution comes, people die, blah, blah, blah, blah.

Thursday, October 8, 2015

Why Term Limits Won’t Work and What We Should be Doing Instead: Part 2

In my last blog post (Why Term Limits Won't Work and What We Should be Doing Instead) I pointed out the rather obvious fact that, “If a tiger’s fangs chewing on your throat is bothering you it does no good to replace them with another set of fangs. It’s still a tiger chewing on your throat.” In this post I will get to what I think we should do about it.

The idea of term limits is a good hearted attempt to fix things in Washington. Many, many people who I hold in the highest esteem and honor are for term limits. I understand the intent but I can’t find any place where term limits have ever fixed anything. The real organizations that hold the power are still there no matter who they appoint to wield it. And as long as the electorate remains ignorant of the true functions of the federal government there is no chance of redemption.

There are dozens of examples I could name where term limits have given us a worse president than we had—like the loss of Reagan to term limits—but those arguments tend to rely on hypothetical alternate realities rather than verifiable facts. Since I can’t verify that in some alternate reality Spock has a beard, I choose to set the arguments based on alternate realities aside. For verifiable facts there are plenty of places we could go to do our research. Many states have term limits for governors and their own legislators. Many cities have term limits on their mayors and city councils. Detroit has term limits. How’s that working? Every several years they vote for a new Democrat to replace the old one and every several years they sink further into the mud. We have term limits on the president and there can be no denying that the country is also sinking into the mud. After all, it may be fact that we have Obama because his predecessor was term limited out of office.

The American people, in this highly colorful analogy, have a very powerful tiger chewing at their throats. The Founding Fathers very emphatically did not intend to create a tiger who wields the power of big government. So how do we turn the tiger back into the government that was designed for us?

As I previously mentioned, “The Constitution was amended to give undue power to the federal government that the Founders never intended them to have.” To set up my support of this supposition I quote Thomas Jefferson, “Our country is too large to have all its affairs directed by a single government. Public servants at such a distance, and from under the eye of their constituents, must, from the circumstance of distance, be unable to administer and overlook all the details necessary for the good government of the citizens; and the same circumstance, by rendering detection impossible to their constituents, will invite public agents to corruption, plunder and waste.” Now I ask the reader, does that last part sound at all familiar to you?

Wednesday, October 7, 2015

Why Term Limits Won’t Work and What We Should be Doing Instead: Part 1

The subject of term limits as a topic is not new. It was debated at the Constitutional Convention and rejected by the Founding Fathers for what I personally consider, after a careful evaluation, to be good reasons. But to shorten the research for other people so they don’t have to go through the agony I did in getting to where I am, I’m going to put the end of my reasoning here. This topic is also found in the Federalist Papers and various other writings of the Founding Fathers. Some of them were for term limits, no doubt, but in the end they were, I think, correctly rejected.

There comes a time when in the observation of human nature, particularly when it is in the raw area of politics, that you can spot when people are having a knee-jerk reaction. I don’t like Orrin Hatch, Thad Cochran, Charles Grassley, Mitch McConnell, John McCain, Patrick Leahy, Harry Reid, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara Boxer, Nancy Pelosi or pretty much most of the chuckle heads that get into Congress and seem to stay there forever. Having the Libertarian leanings that I do I would, in fact, say that my political dislike for them far, far exceeds that of most of the people.

I completely understand the frustration of the People with the government but intending no offense to anybody, I think that would be a knee-jerk reaction. “I don’t like something so I’m going to have the government make a law to limit it,” is not exactly a good argument for smaller and more limited government. In fact, what it is is a restriction on the rights of voters to elect who they want to have serve them.

I’m going to draw an appropriate analogy here. People catch colds. Their nose gets stuffy, which causes discomfort, so they blow it. The act of blowing one’s nose is not a cure for the disease of having a cold. It is just a crude treatment of the symptoms. In order to cure the cold you have to destroy the virus that drives it then the symptoms go away of their own accord. There can be no doubt that the symptom of a runny and stuffed up nose is what bothers the sufferer of a cold. There can also be no doubt that blowing one’s nose makes him feel better for a little bit until the symptoms return. So, having a cold and getting it to go away requires a handling that addresses the cause. Crank up the intake of vitamin C. Get some rest. Eat some chicken soup. Stay warm. Build up your body’s immunity system so it can do its thing and fight the virus.

Tuesday, October 6, 2015

Liberals, Insanity and Gun Control

I can’t help but noticing that there is a lot more attention being paid to the issues of mental health after mass shootings than there used to be. I think it is time to start laying the ground for the next level of argument.

To the leftists in the world conservatives are just plain mean. That is the single starting point of their logic.

Now when we say we’d rather start looking at the mental health of the shooters involved and start naming them as mentally ill, as they clearly are, the left is going to respond by saying conservatives just hate the mentally ill. They won’t respond in a rational way by applying what we are saying only to the shooters on a case by case basis. They will respond by saying we are claiming all mentally ill people to be mass shooters rather than all mass shooters are mentally ill.

There is a difference. It would be like saying all Fords are cars but not all cars are Fords.

Their propaganda machines will deliberately get it wrong every single time to try and invalidate our point and take the current level of attention to the mental illness aspects of the cases and put it back on gun control and how hateful and unsympathetic conservatives are to the insane.

I know this is true because it just happened to me. By specifically saying the most recent shooter was insane I am unmercifully and unfairly labeling all people, with all mental illnesses, of all types, everywhere, and as it was just put to me, “giving them a bad rap.” We are obviously doing it because of hatred for everybody who isn't like us.

So I’m guessing that not too far around the bend there are going to be all kinds of liberal “defend the mentally ill from evil and mean conservatives” groups popping up all over the place.

Sanity is the ability to distinguish differences. For example, if a person couldn’t distinguish the difference between a car and a tomato, and tried to drive a tomato to work, you would think him insane. Right?

Well, what if a group of people couldn’t tell the difference between a group of people and an individual? Then because of that assigned the actions of an entire group of people with the actions of only one of them? That would be insane wouldn’t it?

That is going to be the next insane argument from liberals about gun control. It’s already started. And here's an early instance of this insanity at work ...





What it is Like to be Liberal


I think that just a little bit of humor at the expense of liberals is in order this morning. Not that this morning is any different than any other morning because generally speaking liberals are very funny people...genocidal tendencies notwithstanding of course.

Did you ever wonder what it's like to be a liberal? I've given this some serious (really, very serious) thought. It has been said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over while expecting different results. When I see the news of the day come across my computer I can't help but to notice that the liberal news agencies keep doing the same thing over and over. It's all alarmist. We are all going to die for some reason or another. And the same things are pushed over and over and over again, always as if nobody has ever heard of such a thing before.

I get the idea that if they could learn from experience and apply enough attention span to the issues they wouldn't keep getting caught up in these little loops. On the part of the Main Stream Media it's just the rules of propaganda at work. Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth.

But can you imagine what must go on inside the heads of the rank and file audience who buys into everything they say? I can. And I think it's rather funny.


"One time I was on the beach in North Carolina and all of a sudden there was this water rushing up the beach at me. “OH MY GOD! AT THIS RATE THE EARTH WILL BE COVERED IN WATER IN JUST A MATTER OF WEEKS! HEAD FOR THE HILLS!!!!” Fortunately it stopped. But then all of a sudden the water all at once started rushing out to sea. OH MY GOD! AT THIS RATE THE WATER WILL SOON ALL BE GONE AND THE ENTIRE EARTH WILL BE A DESERT! WE’RE ALL GONNA DIE!!!! And then all of a sudden there was this water rushing up the beach at me. “OH MY GOD! AT THIS RATE THE EARTH WILL BE COVERED IN WATER IN JUST A MATTER OF WEEKS! HEAD FOR THE HILLS!!!!” Fortunately it stopped. But then all of a sudden the water all at once started rushing out to sea. OH MY GOD! AT THIS RATE THE WATER WILL SOON ALL BE GONE AND THE ENTIRE EARTH WILL BE A DESERT! WE’RE ALL GONNA DIE!!!! And then all of a sudden..."

Monday, October 5, 2015

The Budget, the National Debt and my Radical Wife

I see there is another round of budget debates going on in DC and can't help thinking that it kind of reminds me of some events going on in my life that are a little bit closer to home.

My wife and I have been having a bit of financial trouble lately and she seems rather pissed off that I’ve been spending 40% more than we make. We’ve racked up so much debt the credit agencies are going to downgrade our credit ratings. But we negotiated a deal between us that will certainly fix everything. Instead of me spending 40% more than we take in I’m going to spend 39.999975% more than we take in over the rest of this year and over the next ten years I’ll work that number all the way down to 38.6% more than we take in. I'm sure it will work and make us look good with the credit agencies because of our serious efforts to reduce our deficit.


Now what she wanted was to do some irresponsible and radical thing like balance our budget so that I would be spending less than we take in and actually use the difference to pay down our huge debt. But that was just too radical and besides, it's for the children!

Now I'd like to write more about it but I'm far to busy filling out the applications for these new credit cards that I need to use to pay our bills.

Saturday, October 3, 2015

Lincoln's First Inaugural Address: A Masterpiece of Political Shysterism

First to set the table a bit. My commentary will be red. Sometimes I write as if I'm talking directly to Lincoln. Sometimes not. I've tried to limit out of my comments things that happen after the point in time where he gave this speech. So issues like Fort Sumter, for example, don't get mentioned. I'm trying to view it as I would have viewed it then, as if it were just happening. The general purpose behind this analysis is that I'm writing a book which deals with political issues and politicians who are masters of spin. This one seems to me to be a prime example. History has recorded well enough what he actually did. Please keep in mind that these are only my notes and are not intended to be a formally written commentary.

People who know me and have read other posts of mine about Lincoln know that I really don't like him. I have a uniform standard for rating presidents based on if the follow the Constitution or not. Based on that, and taking all excuses off the table, I think he's the worst president we've ever had and the country is still suffering from what he did.

While this will not be viewed by most as being directly related to current issues it is a fine example of the deceptive techniques still used in modern times. Obama could have given this speech.

As of 1860, two thirds of the federal revenue came from taxes taken from the South through protectionist tariffs, which benefited the North's internal improvements programs, while doing little for the South. Other resources back this opinion and I leave it to the honest researcher to do his own homework. I'd advise the reader to seek the opinions of economists on this point rather than historians. Lincoln, by his own frequently expressed testimony and history, was for high protectionist tariffs and internal improvements (modernly known as corporate welfare) programs. He made his own personal fortune through being the legal representation for big railroad companies who benefited from such policies. While the term "lobbyist" hadn't been coined yet, for all intents and purposes that's what he was for the railroad companies of the day.

A magician, same as a crafty politician, has a principle of operation he uses in creating his magic. While continuously drawing the audience's attention to his right hand he works behind the scenes to create his illusions with his left hand which he very carefully doesn't call your attention to. This tactic is also use quite frequently in politics. In this address Lincoln mentioned slavery 16 times in various forms and discussed it at some length. Taxes (as duties and imposts) were only mentioned briefly once. State's Rights (modernly called Social Issues) were mentioned twice. It becomes obvious, given the principle that the best policy is to attack where the enemy is weak, where Lincoln wanted the public's attention to be as well as where he didn't want it to be. I'll call this the "look over here" principle.

It is also a well known propaganda tactic that if you tell a lie surrounded by truths, that through twisted logic related to the truths, the lie will be accepted as if it were true. Then by repeating that lie over and over again it tends to be viewed as if it were the truth of its own accord. Then by framing other lies surrounded by the first as if it were true, other lies can be accepted based on the first. Gradually an entire framework can be built and believed, based on lies. The public, not being aware of the lies as such, acts on them as if true. This method of political discourse is as old as time.

With the above points explained and assumed we then proceed to Lincoln's First Inaugural Address.

Fellow-Citizens of the United States:
In compliance with a custom as old as the Government itself, I appear before you to address you briefly and to take in your presence the oath prescribed by the Constitution of the United States to be taken by the President "before he enters on the execution of this office."