About Us

Name: CPT
Biography
Name:
Email: jeutaw@usa.net
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Freedom on Earth Day

As we do each year in honor of “Earth Day” today we ask you to participate.

Today is THE Day!!!

As your touchy feely emotion driven fact free leftist collectivist neighbors (if any) turn off their lights in honor of dear mother earth you can make a bold statement as we do.

At the appointed hour turn ON EVERYTHING you can.
I will:

  • Do laundry (timed so both washer and dryer are going)
  • Cook a fancy meal (involving four burners, oven, microwave and several kitchen appliances)
  • Play my stereos (on the same channels except one playing CD).
  • Run all my televisions sets.  Some with DVD players going others with just TV
  • Turn on all my lights inside and out.
  • Fill my tubs with hot water for a good scrub out.
  • All game consoles and computers/Pads/phones plugged in and on
  • Vacuum the house
  • Eat anti-earth day foods!

For those who can’t afford such usage, no worries.  This is simply a statement to all my fellow people arrogant enough to believe that they change the earth’s climate or impact it at all with useless symbolic gestures of sheople.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Reason for this Season

Bill O'reilly has a good take on this too. 

Reprinted Annually
===========================
Partially reprinted from 2006-2010
======================
Secularists, Culturalists, Diversity advocates and other ignorant or willfully dishonest folks will disagree.  Those of other faith traditions often celebrate it but not for its real reason which they are prohibited from believing.  Commercialists don't care about the real reason.  Politicians want to posture about it while avoiding or politicizing the real reason.  However the Christmas season HAS A REAL REASON.  One to benefit all mankind that have the eyes to see and the ears to hear.

Secularists hate it and fight and litigate against it.  The lost reject it and get defensive when we promote it.  The Atheist rejects it by means of their own religions of evolution and antitheist philosophy.  However most of them welcome it and "celebrate" it, look forward to it and partake in the frenzied materialist and secular parts of it.  They even will be caught saying things like "peace on earth" and "good will toward men" (excuse me, persons).

It is Christmas.  Regardless of the arguments that may distract people from the true reason for Christmas.  The reason is Jesus, the Christ Child, the prophesied Savior of humanity.  His birth, of a virgin in Bethlehem some 2000 years ago is the reason for the season.  Our Redeemer's birth the hope of mankind, the Way, the Truth and the Light.  God's gift to mankind (excuse me, humankind).

Businesses won't mention it, Schools and "Public" entities won't acknowledge it and antichristian attack the faith component of it.  Yet they all want it.  They all set aside time for sales, activities and diatribes about it.  Find the business that doesn't realize a large portion of revenue from it.  Find a public or private entity that doesn't give time off for it, have parties specifically timed to coincide with it and often exchange gifts or grant pecuniary compensation during it.  Find secular/humanist/atheist activists who don't use it to gain notoriety to their causes from it (prior to going home to some sort of "celebration" of it).  In the midst of denying it, obfuscating it or attacking it, nearly everyone acknowledges and celebrates it.

Christ, the King, born in Bethlehem that he might minister to this world before freely going to the Cross to die that our fallen human sins might be forgiven by God's grace.  Holding forth the promise of eternal life for those who believe in his undeniable Good News.  Foretold, fulfilled and granted to an undeserving humanity.  Reinforcement of the most powerful, compelling and impactful moral code ever presented to man for his betterment.  Realization of man's inability to comply with "Law", a loving gracious God sent his Son to this world to be born of Mary and live as a man shining in sinless perfection before sacrificing himself to our undeserving benefit of eternal life.

This IS the reason for the Season, regardless of trees, presents, turkeys and family reunions.  Jesus Christ, Son of God, glorious and warranting our praise, instilling joy to a world believing and unbelieving during this season celebrating the Christ Child's birth.

I wish you a Merry Christmas and a New Year filled with peace.  I invite you to see the Good News in Luke and Matthew.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Talking to Reasonable People

Don't waste your time applying these communications suggestions to ideologues, collectivists or emotional non-thinking people
This is an excellent presentation from Global Knowledge and applicable to political, cultural, religious and social discussions as well.  This portion presented under fair use standards.

1.Realize that a dialogue should not be about you, the opponent, the turf, or the superiority but about making the right decision. Accept the fact that you just might be wrong and treat the opposition with respect.

2.There are two parts to every argument: A position and a bunch of points that support it. Always separate them and be clear on them both. "I support solution A. The reasons for my recommendation are as follows." On the flip side, learn to identify and separate these two parts in your opponent's argument. If you can't do so reliably, ask for clarification.

3.Never accept an argument that you don't understand. Ask for clarification.

4.To each decision, there are objectives (what we want to achieve) and alternatives (how we can achieve it). Are you disagreeing on the objectives or on the alternatives? Make it clear and ask the opponent to clarify their position. This is very important as often there is a lengthy raging battle over easily reconcilable implementation preferences.

5.Not to belabor this, but.choose the language both you and your opponent understand.

6.When you make your point, nothing is as effective as the masterful command of the language and use of relevant examples and metaphors.

7.Often, your opponent will pass his beliefs and opinions for an unquestionable truth. So, be on guard for and readily reject ad hominem attacks (when your opponent targets your persona and not your argument). For example: "I don't see how this approach can ever work, coming from someone who can't control his weight, let alone an initiative of this importance!"

8.Watch out for arguments that say that something is right just because it is either new or old. These are known as ad novitam and ad antiquam arguments.

9.Don't fall for arguments that rely on wide acceptance and popularity. What's right for many is not necessarily right for you, even if the others are in the same industry, market, or building.

10.Beware of the straw man attacks, which happen when the opposition objects not to your position but to a similar but much weaker and sometimes ridiculous one. For instance, you say: "I am of the opinion that this application will not resolve the issue, because." Your opponent retorts, ignoring your argument: "Julie, of all people, I wouldn't expect to hear it from the CIO that high technology is not the way to go!"

11.Red herring anyone? Watch for arguments with little to no connection to the issue at stake, which are introduced to misdirect the attention of you and the rest of the audience. This also often happens inadvertently.

12.Sometimes you may lose on the basis of unobtainable perfection. Your way may be the best available but not perfect, while "perfect" is either out of the question or not viable, such as due to prohibitive costs. When you feel that the conversation has fallen into this rut, call a spade a spade, invite the other party to acknowledge that perfection is not possible, and talk about mitigation of the imperfections. You may still lose this battle, but you'll know you have done your best.
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Mom’s eyes, dad’s nose and Obama’s debt

The headline of this blog entry is a test run of a potential 2012 ad, and is based on one that was used to help sweep England’s conservative party (the Tories) to power in the recent parliamentary elections.  It also makes a nice segue into my topic — the meeting that the Southern California Tax Revolt Coalition’ [1]s team of co-founders had with a group of young European diplomatic/bureaucratic types.  It was a rather eye-opening experience, which lead to several interesting exchanges.

San Diego: [2]

Leslie Eastman is a founding member of the grassroots organization, Southern California Tax Revolt Coalition.

Dawn Wildman, Sarah Bond and I co-founded our citizen activist group in February 2009.  Recently, Mark Sullivan and Erika Ginsberg of the State Department-sponsored Citizen Diplomacy Council of San Diego set up a meeting  of “Young European Leaders” with us (representing the area’s very active Tea Party group).  It seems these 20-something future politicos (from Poland, Portugal, Ireland, Denmark, Germany, Lithuania, Italy, Austria, Hungary and Turkey) wanted to know all about this new American movement.

Wildman and Bond explained the history of Tea Parties, from their current inception as an expression of public discontent at the manner in which the House of Representatives and U.S. Senate ignored protests to rush through the Toxic Assent Relief Program (TARP) and “Stimulus Package.”  Wildman referred to the movement as an “awakening,” and highlighted the fact that citizens across the country are becoming more active in contacting their representatives and learning the facts about legislation for themselves.  Bond described the Tea Party’s leaderless structure and our group’s California activities.  I described the use of the Internet, Facebook, Twitter and forums for citizen networking, which is a key element of all the successes that Tea Party groups have had nationwide in the past year.

One of the best questions came from Anka Grzywacz of Poland’s Democratic Left Alliance.  Before the meeting, I was able to express sympathy for the loss of Polish President Lech Kaczynski and 96 other important officials in last month’s plane crash near Katyn.  She was touched, as her boss was among those killed in this tragedy.  She asked who was behind the Arizona BUY-cott [4] that our group is promoting; many in the audience seemed intrigued that citizens would use money as a means of supporting leaders and legislation we like.

More challenging was the insinuation of Pedro Nuno Santa, a Portuguese economist, that high taxes were absolutely no problem. He used as an example his country of Portugal, indicating he would rather be born a poor European than rich anywhere else.  What recommended Portugal most is the fact that there are “fine schools” and that there are “no homeless.”

Santa seemed stunned when I shot back that “a government big enough to give you what you want is one big enough to take all you have,” as has been demonstrated many times in countries with highly centralized, socialist governments.  Such a template does not recommend itself well to liberty-minded Americans.  And while a highly-educated bureaucrat such as Santa might find Portuguese life lush, I am thinking that a business owner in that country, or a young person with fewer privileges, might have real struggles.  A New York Times [5] piece on Portugal’s troubled economy shows that Portuguese businessmen are deeply concerned; Portugal’s debt is expected to rise to 85 percent of gross domestic product because of rising unemployment and government spending on infrastructure projects.

Frankly, after talking with these young European leaders, I am genuinely concerned about the extreme level of indoctrination and theory, and the limited exposure to real-life business experience they have received.  Many seemed surprise when I detailed how I was trimming my business expenditures and expansion plans to minimize my tax exposure — some obviously had failed to see that tax increases do not automatically translate to government revenue gains.

One of the more amusing moments came when Shane Kelly, of an Irish public affairs firm, waxed poetic about Ireland’s free college tuition.  I informed Kelly that the college isn’t free; rather, it is being borne by the blood, sweat and tears of Ireland’s producers.  And, quite frankly, I am finding that the highly bureaucratized and non-diverse environment of today’s university means that a college degree is worth much less today (despites its escalating cost) than in my parent’s generation and is no longer a guarantee of individual economic prosperity.

The Eastern European block and the charming Turkish representatives were nodding at our group’s capitalism and individual-oriented outlooks.  They asked many solid questions about the Tea Party movement, and were interested to note that we are not a Third Party, that we are not really interested in targeting President Obama, and that we number Democrats (such as myself) as well as Republicans in our number.  The most significant question we fielded was if we were “the average Tea Partier?”  Yes, it seems many Tea Party groups are lead by working mothers such our group of co-founders.

Mothers’ concerns for their children’s futures lead to a conservative win in England.  Equally worried American mothers and others will have a chance to change our country’s direction this November.  With unrest in Greece and debt-expanding spending tainting the sovereign currencies throughout Europe, it seems these young European leaders may eventually face Tea Parties in their countries as well.

Leslie Eastman runs an environmental health and safety consulting firm, Eastman Enterprises, and is a founding member of the grassroots organization, Southern California Tax Revolt Coalition.She can be reached at mutnodjmetlpe(a)gmail.com

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Truisms

You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.
 
What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
 
The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
 
When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is the beginning of the end of any nation.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Very Careful Indeed

Submitted by a contributor

"That is a Yang worship word!  You will not use it!"  Those words are Cloud William's to Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock when the latter speaks of their escaping a 'Com' prison and regaining their 'freedom.'  (See http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Cloud_William for a more detailed plot summary.)  Cloud William's people, the 'Yangs' (Yanks - Yankees) fought for words whose meaning they had lost, but which still carried symbolic value to them, as 'worship words.'  Captain Kirk set things aright (didn't he always?) by recognizing them for what they were - the Preamble to the Constitution, in one case - and explaining to them what it was that they ignorantly worshipped and fought for.
    The meaning of this parable to us could not be more obvious.  Most Americans, including Members of Congress, like Rep. Phil Hare (D-IL), are clueless about what the Constitution actually says.  (See this for Rep. Hare's telling a constituent that he didn't care much about the Constitution as regards the 'health care' bill:  http://qconline.com/archives/qco/display_mobile.php?id=486688.)  If the Constitution is 'the supreme law of the land,' then a working knowledge of it ought to be required of all high school graduates, and it ought to be something candidates for Federal office can pass a pop quiz on.  It also ought to be honored.  If it is not, then our de facto Constitution was written by Mao, not Madison, as the former said that 'all law proceeds from the barrel of a gun.'
     The war to save America was lost when Wall Street sacked the US Treasury.  The health care power grab seals it.  (The unlawful, undeclared war with Iraq and the so-called USA Patriot Act laid the groundwork, so the fall of our country has truly been a bipartisan affair.)  The war to regain America from the Coms in our midst begins when we can find Cloud Williams in our midst, whose hearts are in the right place, who honor the concepts they do not understand, and whose courage is teachable in the ways of what was lost and must be found again.
     We'll need all of James T. Kirk's pluck (and luck) to succeed.  As McCoy observed to Spock during Kirk's climatic duel with a renegade starship captain over the fate of the 'worship words,' "I've found that evil usually triumphs, unless good is very, very careful."
     Very careful, indeed.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

What a good idea

Imagine where we are compared to the founders' intent to even need this, very good, suggestion

28th Amendment proposal

    
For too long we have been too complacent about the workings of Congress.  Many citizens had no idea that Congress members could retire with the same pay after only one term, that they didn't pay into Social Security, that they specifically exempted themselves from many of the laws they have passed (such as being exempt from any fear of prosecution for sexual harassment) while ordinary citizens must live under those laws.  The latest is to exempt themselves from the Healthcare Reform that is being considered...in all of its forms.  Somehow, that doesn't seem logical.  We do not have an elite that is above the law.  I truly don't care if they are Democrat, Republican, Independent or whatever.  The self-serving must stop. This is a good way to do that. It is an idea whose time has come.
 

            Proposed 28th Amendment to the United States  Constitution:
  
        
 "Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators and Representatives; and, Congress shall make no law that applies  to the Senators and Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States."


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

They'll say ANYTHING

From a comment thread on this Townhall commentary

Northern Patriot commented:
  Health Care Reality Check # 1

Top 10 facts to know about health care reform
By Angie Drobnic Holan
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2010/mar/18 /top-10-facts-know-about-health-care-reform/

1. The plan is not a government takeover of health care like in Canada or Britain.
2. Insurance companies will be regulated more heavily. They will be told the minimum services they must cover, including preventive care.
3. Everyone will have to have health insurance or pay a fine, a requirement known as the individual mandate.
4. Employers will not be required to buy insurance for their employees.
5. The vast majority of people will not see significant declines in premiums.
6. The plan might or might not bend the curve on health spending.
7. The government-run Medicare program will keep paying medical bills for seniors.
8. Medicaid, a joint federal-state program for the poor, will cover all of the poor, instead of just a few groups the way it currently does.
9. The government won't pay for elective abortions.
10. No one is proposing new benefits for illegal immigrants.

Northern Patriot

Your list is interesting.
1. Number one is literally true but not its outcome
2. Belies number 1.  If you can dictate its operation it is effective control
3. Is grossly and patently unconstitutional
4. And many will drop insurance as a benefit due to enormous cost increases
5. Most will see significant increases.  Large demand increase, supply same or much less.
6. Government caps/controls invariably increase costs and/or decrease supply
7. Or not. You can't "keep paying" when you reduce the funds to do so.
8. Poor being a subjective value arbitrarily imposed by collectivists.  You mean it will fail to pay for more than it fails to pay for now.  Medicaid pays for nothing, taxpayers do.
9. No, the government will subsidize health plans that DO pay for elective killing of the unborn.  Oh! That means the government will pay for elective abortions.
10. Right, they are just implementing the new benefit of paying for their health care.

See part two on the American Freedom Network

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Stop the Threat to American Freedom

It is easier to stop bad statist legislation that it is to repeal it.  This is a political war between those who believe in American Freedom and those who believe in onerous government.

Write to YOUR representative and to EVERY congress person who will or may vote for this giant assault on liberty and prosperity
Something like this:

Send something similar to all Demoncrat congress-critters…

Act now for American Freedom!

Dear (insert congress-critter honorific here)

I write to encourage you to oppose the current health care legislation pending a vote in the House of Representatives.

This legislation will result in lost health insurance, increased premiums, lost jobs and the flight of medical professionals from the field.  This act will also not do anything to improve or address the current recession.

I hope that you fight against any health care legislation that increases the role of Federal government or adds to the size of same.  

I’ll be looking to see how you vote this March. I will donate money, time and activism against all legislators who vote for this extremely harmful legislation.


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

An Era Ends

Authored by Lloyd Conway

    The Era of Big Everything is over.  Michigan, having advanced the farthest in the oil-age era of American industrial pre-eminence, has experienced the end of that era's effects earlier and more deeply than have other states.  The wealth, unparalleled in history, which poured into the working class peopling Michigan's auto plants, is largely gone.  some jobs remain, but the survivors will not see their ranks filled with unskilled laborers making middle-class wages.  as the old-timers leave, the new economic reality will have a face - their 414.00/hour replacements.
     The era of Reuther was also the era of "Engine Charlie" Wilson, Ike's Secretary of Defense, who coined the phrase, "What's good for America is good for General Motors, and vice versa."  Time's Man of the Year was once a GM CEO.  The wealth that Henry Ford found sleeping in Detroit - the use of de-skilled labor on assembly-line principles, using interchangeable parts (a concept borrowed from the firearms industry) and paying a wage twice his competitors - $5.00 a day - enriched first Mr. Ford and his investors (before he bought them out in 1911), then his workers, his competitors, a whole region, supplier industries, and eventually America.  It depended on cheap oil, free trade (when America was an export-driven creditor nation), technological dominance, and the destruction of rivals' economies in two world wars.
     The era really ended in 1973, the year of the first oil shock, courtesy of our ally, the Shah of Iran, when oil prices quadrupled.  (The Shah may have been responding to President Nixon's closing of the gold window, ending the Bretton Woods system, resulting in a floating dollar.)  Economies of scale, built on assumptions of ever-expanding markets and profit margins, had allowed GM to afford gold-plated UAW contracts; indeed, they liked them, since their could better afford them than Ford or Chrysler, and the UAW insisted on 'pattern bargaining,' which meant the imposition of what GM could afford on their less affluent cross-town rivals.
    Michigan, as a state, super-sized.  Big state government delivering a wide array of services, big universities, exploding suburbs where life without cars (two per family, usually) would be unthinkable, and all the trappings of 'the good life,' cabins 'Up North,' motorcycles, boats, fifth wheels and so on became status symbols of the American blue-collar aristocracy.
     Black Lake was typical, not exceptional, when it became the crown jewel in the UAW's tiara.  It's being for sale now mirrored both employers busily unloading Saab, shuttering Saturn, and wringing debts out in in bankruptcy and members selling those cabins that dot the countryside around Black Lake.  Michigan's universities are feeling the pinch, too, and the Education Bubble will eventually burst, forcing an agonizing reappraisal (to borrow from Engine Charlie's Cabinet-mate, John Foster Dulles) of every program and position.  Michigan's government is shrinking, too:  The latest sign is UAW ally Gov. Granholm proposing a de facto forced early retirement that will take 46,000 teachers and other school employees, plus 7,000 state workers, off the public payroll.  (State workers will, eventually, be replaced by two for every three who retire; the new hires will have less-generous benefits.)
    This is, as a friend of mine calls it, "The Era of Broken Promises."  retirees are seeing their defined-benefit pensions shrink and medical benefits erode.  Those still working know that their retirements will come later, and that nothing is guaranteed.
     Black Lake is a symbol, but it's sale, like its' acquisition, is a symptom.  The real story is how America's success blinded it to a changing world, and how stubbornly the generation now in power clings to the past.  The reality of what Strauss and Howe call 'a fourth turning,' when a civilization passes through a great gate in history, will force the agonizing reappraisal of all things by all Americans that Michigan is merely the first to experience.

-Lloyd A. Conway
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Rule of Law(yers)

One of the most insidious assaults on American Freedom is cast as the "Rule of Law".

Real, just, rule of law IS important to a civilized society and necessary for order in a Republic.  The problem is that statists, elitists of the left and right (and center) have taken a simple concept, valuable to the people and corrupted it for their own aggrandizement of power.

No matter should be so complex that a regular citizen can not understand or participate in discussion of it.  Laws are written by lawyers, to be interpreted by lawyers, litigated by lawyers and decided by lawyers.  Even when the citizenry is engaged to decide, they can only do so with careful "instructions" and "interpretations" provided by lawyers.  It is a self-perpetuating racket that doesn't better society nor benefit the citizenry.  Any law that requires 2000 pages to elaborate while filled with arcane jargon is ridiculous.  Any law that can't be understood by the average citizen shouldn't be considered, let alone passed.

"Ignorance of the law is no excuse".  This would be considered axiomatic by many.  However it is fallacious when laws are written in such a way as to be only understood by lawyers.  This isn't rule of law, it is rule of lawyers.

Who opposes tort reform?  Lawyers do.  Individually and by industry lobby.  Just judgments would make good real losses of property to plaintiffs held to be aggrieved.  They wouldn't be padded by "punitive" awards justified and defined by lawyers who coincidentally get an enormous percentage of any such "punishment".

Court decisions are another travesty of the supposed "rule of law".  Judges and lawyers constantly trumpet "precedent".  "Stare Decisis"  A latin term that means standing by a decision.  This can be good so long as the decision doesn't fly in the face of established actual law.  Particularly the penultimate law of the land, the U.S. ConstitutionBen Shapiro notes that even lawyers can realize that bad precedent shouldn't be upheld just because it is precedent.

The Constitution was written in rather formal, yet simple English.  It is easily understood by anyone with average intelligence and an 8th grade reading level.  The decisions made to "interpret" it in the 20th and 21st centuries are most often based on stare decisis rather than the simple content of the document itself.  This is because lawyers invariably want to make the simple, complex.  Because statists and elitists who don't like the simple constraints of the foundational law want to manipulate to mean what they want rather than what is SAYS.

This isn't an "anti-lawyer" rant.  There are many fine people who are lawyers and many who mean well.  As with all human endeavor though, there are many who simply want to use "law" to get what they want.  Power, money and influence.  It is the legal system as currently constituted that is broken.  There are too many lawyers.  Laws aren't written for simple and singular purposes of justice.  People are sued, not for justice but for riches.

Strongly consider finding others than lawyers to run for political office.  Find lawyers who actually wish to simplify the law so that it is a tool for free citizens rather than an arcane science full of twisted jargon and dead language phrases.  One of the main and major factors threatening American Freedom is our current system of overly complex law.  You won't see this covered in the media.  You won't hear many politicians make issue of this.  Why?  Lawyers.  They are lawyers or are influenced by them.  Since lawyers control the system of law and legislation real reform is a tremendously difficult challenge.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Racial Blindness

Everyone with an ounce of sense would agree with the sentiment expressed by Dr. King about the content of people's character mattering more than inconsequential skin coloration.  Given that assumption, I'm astounded by people's continual fixation on imagining racism and racist motivation for no other reason than they firmly wish to believe it.

I was listening to a local talk show host this morning and his caller "Carmen" was unbelievable.  She was complaining about the host's frequent criticisms of President Obama.  Given that the host, Richard Randall, is a conservative it isn't surprising.  Carmen claimed that the host should support "unity" rather than criticizing the President.  Unity at the expense of liberty is a ridiculous proposition but that is beside her point.

Carmen then claimed that Randall had "unstated reasons" for opposing Obama.  He pressed her to speak freely and she stated her belief that the opposition was really due to the President's "skin color".  She proceeded to state and imply that the host is a "coward" and a "racist" because of this.  The truly ironic part was, that as she wound down, she repeatedly made reference to "white america" and "white americans" intermixed with her undefined calls for "unity".

So presented with a woman who calls someone racist, with no proof or justification we see her determination that racism motivates a "white person" she disagrees with.  She was unwilling to discuss her own "skin color" when asked.  To support her irrational belief she rants in a patently racist fashion.  While demanding "unity" she segregates according to race.

A typical liberal action is calling others that which they themselves are.  From this woman's rants about "white america" (where's the "unity" there honey?) to Senator Reid's bald and bold inference that Americans make their political judgements based on skin tone and racial "dialects" liberal hypocrisy and racism are on display.

Americans who love freedom, see Americans.  We don't see hyphenated Americans or colors of Americans.  Just Americans.  Despite the living daily proof of this ignorant people in the U.S. cling to their irrational belief in a racist victim ideology.  If everyone were free perhaps this would be less pervasive.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Real Reason for the Season

No, not presents.  Not made up holidays.  Not Turducken.

Reprinted Annually
===========================
Partially reprinted from 2006
======================
Secularists, Culturalists, Diversity advocates and other ignorant or willfully dishonest folks will disagree.  Those of other faith traditions often celebrate it but not for its real reason which they are prohibited from believing.  Commercialists don't care about the real reason.  Politicians want to posture about it while avoiding or politicizing the real reason.  However the Christmas season HAS A REAL REASON.  One to benefit all mankind that have the eyes to see and the ears to hear.

Secularists hate it and fight and litigate against it.  The lost reject it and get defensive when we promote it.  The Atheist rejects it by means of their own religions of evolution and antitheist philosophy.  However most of them welcome it and "celebrate" it, look forward to it and partake in the frenzied materialist and secular parts of it.  They even will be caught saying things like "peace on earth" and "good will toward men" (excuse me, persons).

It is Christmas.  Regardless of the
arguments that may distract people from the true reason for Christmas.  The reason is Jesus, the Christ Child, the prophesied Savior of humanity.  His birth, of a virgin in Bethlehem some 2000 years ago is the reason for the season.  Our Redeemer's birth the hope of mankind, the Way, the Truth and the Light.  God's gift to mankind (excuse me, humankind).

Businesses won't mention it, Schools and "Public" entities won't acknowledge it and antichristian attack the faith component of it.  Yet they all want it.  They all set aside time for sales, activities and diatribes about it.  Find the business that doesn't realize a large portion of revenue from it.  Find a public or private entity that doesn't give time off for it, have parties specifically timed to coincide with it and often exchange gifts or grant pecuniary compensation during it.  Find secular/humanist/atheist activists who don't use it to gain notoriety to their causes from it (prior to going home to some sort of "celebration" of it).  In the midst of denying it, obfuscating it or attacking it, nearly everyone acknowledges and celebrates it.

Christ, the King, born in Bethlehem that he might minister to this world before freely going to the Cross to die that our fallen human sins might be forgiven by God's grace.  Holding forth the promise of eternal life for those who believe in his undeniable Good News.  Foretold, fulfilled and granted to an undeserving humanity.  Reinforcement of the most powerful, compelling and impactful moral code ever presented to man for his betterment.  Realization of man's inability to comply with "Law", a loving gracious God sent his Son to this world to be born of Mary and live as a man shining in sinless perfection before sacrificing himself to our undeserving benefit of eternal life.

This IS the reason for the Season, regardless of trees, presents, turkeys and family reunions.  Jesus Christ, Son of God, glorious and warranting our praise, instilling joy to a world believing and unbelieving during this season celebrating the Christ Child's birth.

I wish you a Merry Christmas and a New Year filled with peace.  I invite you to see the Good News in
Luke and Matthew.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

This week...Russian Global Cooling Plots

Sent by a contributor.  Sean Gabb is an excellent libertarian voice for the crown subjects of Great Britain.  Here is a take he has on Putin and Global Warming.  We had to change a word to "pop" from "pr1ck" because of the bizarre automated language checker on Townhall.  Add a context algorithm Townhall people!!
==================================================
Are the Russians Coming?
Brief Thoughts on the Climate Change Scandal
By Sean Gabb


Like many other people in our movement, I have been delighted by the publication of that computer archive from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia. I have spent most of my life denouncing every excuse for state activism as a pack of lies. I have never yet had the joy of seeing the projectors of those lies revealed as little more than pantomime villains – twirling their moustaches while confessing their villainy in whispered asides. Compared with this, the “weapons of mass destruction” lies were misunderstanding in good faith.

But the question uppermost in my mind at present is what all this will mean for the climate change cult. Will this be a more complete moral and intellectual collapse than Communism ever suffered? To begin my answer, I will discuss the subsidiary questions of who and why.

In short, I believe the Russians are behind this. It may be that all those megabytes of data were stolen by a computer hacker. There may be any number of people who are up to such hacking in the technical sense. But this seems to have been an integrated operation. Having the technical skills to get access to a computer archive is not the same as knowing where to look in that archive and what to look for. Nor is it the same as knowing what to do with it.

But the Russians had means and opportunity to do the job. Perhaps their security services are no longer as efficient and as well-funded as in Soviet times. But they are still there. Their mission is no longer to win the Cold War. But making life easier for Mr Putin and his friends is a large mission in itself. They no longer have an active network in British universities. But there must be any number of senior managers there whose activities back in the 1980s would merit an outing in The Daily Mail, and who therefore are open to blackmail.

And the Russians had the best motive imaginable. Anthropogenic global warming is, as said, a pack of lies. But there is huge money behind it.  And it is conceivable that Western scientific ingenuity will find a “carbon free” energy source that both works and is economically viable.  Now, where would that leave Russia? Without its exports of oil and gas, the place is little more than a bankrupt post-Soviet slagheap. I believe the Russian state budget only balances on a minimum oil price of $40 a barrel. Knock the bottom out of the market in fossil fuels, and Russia can say goodbye to what progress it has made since 1991.

This is only a conspiracy theory. But it is interesting that the stolen data surfaced on a Russian server. Of course, Russia is beyond the reach of the British courts. But it is an interesting fact even so. I think this operation has gone so smoothly that only an efficient security service can be behind it. We can discount the Arabs and Iranians as not being up to the job. We can also discount the big oil companies – like the tobacco companies, they have been deterred from this sort of operation because of all those transparency laws. That leaves us with the Russians. They got the information. They packaged it. They have delivered it to maximum effect.

So what will be that effect? I cannot believe that it will be to pop the whole climate change bubble. There is too much corporate money and too much government activity now resting on the assumption that we must “do something” if sea levels are not to rise ten foot by next Tuesday.  The cult leaders will not hang their heads and behave like the villain at the end of a Scooby Doo cartoon. When power and money on this scale are involved, things like that surely do not happen.

But will they be able to live this down? I have no doubt they will try.  There will be an inquiry. Individual heads will roll. There will be the pretence of breast beating. But the lies will continue pouring out. The default response will be to turn up the volume of the lies to try and drown out the truth. After a few years, the embarrassment may have been forgotten, and discussion will have turned to how many units individuals should be given for their “carbon passports.”

And I shall be interested to see how well this can work. How powerful is the ideological state apparatus at imposing proven lies on the public mind? On the one hand, the propaganda streams out of every school and university and from every television screen in the civilised world. The message is nearly as uniform as in Soviet Russia. On the other hand, the weakness of the cult is that it has no message of hope and grants no indulgence to the masses. Christianity and Islam – regardless of their truth or falsehood – both offer an infinity of bliss for doing little more than good sense requires. Christians have to be a little more continent than nature seems to allow. Moslems have to keep off the bottle. There is no good news for believers in anthropogenic global warming. We are told to accept the rolling back of the industrial revolution simply to avoid catastrophe that hardly anyone dares tell us
will strike within the reasonable future.

We know that the most notable preachers of this message have no intention of cutting back on their own living standards. Look at the Prince of Wales and his private jets. Look at Al Gore and his inflated utility bills. Add to this that the cult is not formally based on an extra-rational revelation, but on alleged scientific evidence – and the knowledge that this evidence has been fakes must count for something.

What I predict will happen is that the propaganda will continue for the next few years. But it will be gradually be replaced by a new set of justificatory lies. Global warming itself was the replacement for acid rain pollution, ozone holes, and even global cooling. In the absence of some new environmental claims, I suggest that we shall hear much more for now on about “peak oil” – the notion that fossil fuels exist in limited supplies and that they will run out within the next few generations.

This has the advantage of being arguably true. I know that people have been predicting the exhaustion of oil reserves for at least a century.  But the world economy is growing fast at the moment, and may grow still faster. There must be some physical limit to how much oil and gas and coal can be economically extracted. Otherwise, there is the problem that the cheapest supplies are in unstable parts of the world. Doubtless, the specific claims made will be lies. But they will not require the same barefaced dishonesty as ignoring the historical and geological facts about temperatures and carbon dioxide levels, and ignoring all considerations of solar activity and other natural phenomena.

The other advantage, however, is that the peak oil hypothesis can be used to justify every tax and regulation so far made in the name of fighting climate change. Wind turbine construction, energy efficiency laws, the war on private motoring, bleats about “food miles”, and the like – all work just as well on the assumption that fossil fuels must be conserved.

This is a depressing prediction, so far as it allows the same caravan of liars to roll forward if on different wheels. But I am not sure if the transition will be as smooth as may be hoped. Liars who have been so visibly caught out in one set of claims may not find it easy to switch to another and maintain their full credibility. Until a few weeks ago, I saw the anthropogenic global warming claims as a new legitimising ideology for despotism as powerful in modern circumstances as state socialism had once been. Perhaps it has now been revealed as a fairly short-lived rescue hypothesis. It may not have anything like the long term appeal of state socialism. Whatever replaces it may be weaker still.

If this is the case, I for one will give thanks to Mr Putin. In the old days, he was a KGB officer. Nothing he may now have done can bring back all the people he helped murder. But repentance is always to be welcomed – especially when attended by so many good works.
--
Sean Gabb
Director, The Libertarian Alliance (Carbon Positive since 1979)
sean@libertarian.co.uk  Tel: 07956 472 199
Skype Username: seangabb

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Cancerous Beliefs

Reading the headline "White House Still Believes Global Warming is Happening" illustrates primary drivers for those who's convictions lead them to push for great collectivism of society.

One need not assume nefarious intent, although there are those with such.  I think that the left is predominantly made up of those who's intent is "good" as they define it.  The problem is that they seek such good for emotional satisfaction in themselves.  They want to *feel* as if THEY are "good" and "caring" and "compassionate".  To achieve these feelings they are willing to set aside positive values and factual data.

Positive values such as individual liberty.  Such as personal accountability.  Family, Church and community caring for their own freely and not from artificial coercion of those who "think its right".  These things aren't positive good values to many leftists.  While wailing that "all people are basically good" they demand that what they think is right should be imposed upon others.  This certainly belies any belief in inherent goodness of others.

Instead, in pursuit of feeling good, liberals *believe* in things regardless of fact or sense.  They believe government can fix social ills despite the long history of failure.  They believe in global warming (or global climate change) despite no conclusive evidence (and what evidence so far put forth is fraudulent).  They believe that peace can be achieved without war despite the history of Hitler, Khan, Tamerlane, Louis XIV, Stalin, Mao etc.

Such intellectual constructs of believing something to maintain your own emotional satisfaction is cancerous to society, community and liberty.  It allows you to justify the abrogation of others freedoms by coercion.  It empowers those who seek power by giving them a (false) rationale to "legislate" or decree law that degrades the Constitution and imperils the citizenry's unalienable rights.  No one, ethically and morally, has the right to abridge an individuals liberties that do not interfere with the freedoms of others.  Life, liberty and property are the cornerstones.  Every law, regulation or other external control to the life, liberty and property of others is wrong as long as the same rights are protected from others.  There are no "rights" that impose a burden on others.  None whatsoever.  No matter how that makes you "feel".

Cancers must be treated or cut out.  The chemo and radiation for cancerous beliefs are education of the lost collectivist mind.  The surgeon's knife is political action to take back the government and return it to its Constitutional bounds.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous123456789101516Next »