Webster

The Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions." --American Statesman Daniel Webster (1782-1852)


Showing posts with label rant. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rant. Show all posts

Saturday, July 11, 2015

The Confederate Flag flap, White privilege and the end game......



I have been busy with work and other stuff.  I was unable to post sooner.   This post took me three days to do, and for that reason it is a long post.  I will tie in several different subjects because my ADD works that way..All postings in black are done by me.  I used different fonts to show other peoples writings.  .. I have some opinions with the flag flap going on in with the Confederate flag, the specter of "White privilege" and what I believe is the end game.  I will start with the Confederate Battle  Flag.If you don't know what it looks like....lemme refresh your memory...

  I have an analogy for the Confederate Flag fiasco.   It has to do with "brand identity".  For example the makers of Band aid...you know this product...

Band-Aid is a brand name of American pharmaceutical and medical devices giant Johnson & Johnson's line of adhesive bandages and related products.
Despite common misconception, Band-Aid is a genericized trademark in the United States.
  Well the makers of "Band-aid" brand of bandages aggressively protect the identity of their product.  Even though the term "Band-aid" is an accepted term for any bandages related product...the makers of other products cannot use the name, the lawyers of Johnson & Johnson are very aggressive in protecting their copyrighted product...for example

the name "Band-aid" will not adorn the package of other brands....
   Same thing applies here....When the Army of Northern Virginia surrendered at Appomattox the confederates furled their battle flags the symbol of a noble cause, the symbol of rebellion against what they saw as "overreach" by the federal government.  Contrary to popular belief..the civil war as it is known to the North, or the "War between the States" as it is politely known in the south or as it is known in less educated area.."The battle against Yankee aggression." was not about slavery, it was the battle for states rights in this case the battle of the states to secede against the Federal system. The Southern veterans  then returned home to reconstruction...
     The south was punished during reconstruction at the behest of the radical republicans...Lincoln was assassinated by  John Wilkes Booth whom was a southern sympathizer right after the war ended.  Lincoln wanted to welcome the breakaway southern states back into the Union and not punish them.  Well he got assassinated and the anger of the North toward the south was palpable.  President Lincoln's Vice President whom became president upon Lincolns death.  President Johnson was the only president that was successfully impeached by the congress for trying to follow Lincoln's policies and treat the South gently.  The south was punished and this caused a lot of hatred, the term "carpetbagger"  was applied prejudicial to anybody that came down here from the north...even now, you will see that word applied, especially from the the people from the deep south.  The South during Reconstruction was under federal control, and the Freedman were giving rights to vote and were treated equally and were represented by the "Freedmans" bureau.  The freed slaves used their vote to elect black republicans to the various state offices...When the federal government pulled their troops out of the south and returned control back to the states in the 1870's, the southern states quickly made moves to put "the uppity blacks in their place."  The black legislators that were in positions were quickly voted out of office.


 During the Reconstruction period of 1865–1877, federal law provided civil rights protection in the U.S. South for freedmen, the blacks who had formerly been slaves, and former free blacks. In the 1870s, Democrats gradually regained power in the Southern legislatures, having used insurgent paramilitary groups, such as the White League and Red Shirts, to disrupt Republican organizing, run Republican officeholders out of town, and intimidate blacks to suppress their voting. Extensive voter fraud was also used. Gubernatorial elections were close and had been disputed in Louisiana for years, with increasing violence against blacks during campaigns from 1868 onward. In 1877, a national Democratic Party compromise to gain Southern support in the presidential election resulted in the government's withdrawing the last of the federal troops from the South. White Democrats had regained political power in every Southern state. These Southern, white, Democratic Redeemer governments legislated Jim Crow laws, officially segregating black people from the white population.
     Where I was going on this historical trip of the dirty laundry of the south is relating to the Confederate flag.  A lot of the groups that were used back in the day to oppress the freed blacks used the Stars and Bars A.K.A. "The Battle Flag" The people that say "Heritage not hate.." where were they at when the symbol of the noble sacrifice was usurped to represent the racism and segregationist policies of the Democrats..They kept silent and lost the right to defend their symbol and the battle flag was now tarred with the brush of "racism".  I know history and I know what the flag meant, but to many it represent "Racism".  It is a shame that this has come to this.   Well the SJW's have used the battle flag to wrap all their many causes from racism, gun control, white privilege, social inequality and have flogged what I call "White America" like a kettle drum.
     This comes to the second part of the post.
                    I pulled these off the "Urban Dictionary" website
    
 white privilege
The privilege of allowing tens of millions of non whites into your country and allowing them to whine and complain endlessly about 'White racism"

the privilege of often being targeted by these other groups for rape and other violent crimes.

the privilege of having your own children brainwashed by the schools funded by your tax dollars, and told that your people are evil, and that they should be ashamed of themselves and their ancestors.

the privilege of being systematically pushed down by Marxist affirmative action laws, in a supposed attempt to "level the playing field

the privilege of becoming a dwindling minority in the nations founded and built by your ancestors.

It is the privilege of being told that you must remain silent and accept your own genocide, because to do otherwise would mean you are a racist, and society has told us a racist is the worst kind of person, worse than even a rapist or thief

This one....
The Emperor's new clothes.

Essentially it's the claim that being White affords one access to universal, institutional or systemic advantages, used by anti-Whites (who use the code-word "anti-racist" to disguise their intentions) to justify overt racial discrimination against Whites, in the hopes of equalizing social and economic outcomes between races, whose disparities are better explained by hereditary differences in intelligence and temperament.

You cannot measure it, and it has no specific concrete definition to provide a basis for proof of its existence, it has not, and can never be proven to exist, but if you question it you're called "ignorant" (in reality you are a skeptic), and the fact that you questioned it in the first place is used as further proof that you have "White privilege".

As seen below the examples of so called "White privilege" are all either statistics presented without context, usually as part of an argumentum ad ignorantum, (disparities in callbacks/hiring is presumed to be racially discriminatory only because an alternative hypothesis is not considered. There is zero evidence for it.) or a meaningless generalisation like:

"-I am never asked to speak for all the people of my racial group."

Which is correct for 99.999% of all people everywhere, regardless of race.

Or:

"-I can if I wish arrange to be in the company of people of my race most of the time."

Which again is true for everyone, unless they have gone out of their way to move into a racially alien neighborhood.

Or even the following:

"-I can easily find academic courses and institutions which give attention only to people of my race."

Which is an out and out lie, as it is exactly the opposite of objective reality where affirmative action and quotas, and minority studies classes greatly disadvantage Whites in a way that is measurable, and where the causal relationship is clear to even the most casual observer. 
     or this one
    
The misconception that somehow whites have more benefits than other other races, which is used to guilt whites into feeling shame for things they are powerless to control.

In one of my college course my professor made me analyze this article on suppose white privilege. He never expected my reaction which was that by that definition both blacks and whites have privilege. You see it was stupid stuff you can find a bra to match your skin tone. You can find band aids to match your skin they do have black aid but now days most bandaids are clear lol. You can find toys for your children that match your race check out the barbies and cabbage patch kids and other dolls at the store they have black and white dolls but almost no dolls look Asian or Hispanic. You see this so called privilege is a joke. They say you won't discriminated against if you are white. So telling whites they can not participate. They say only whites are not kept back from activities but a high school just hosted a black lives matter ceremony and told white they could not attend. 
     This is being used by all SJW's out there to belittle and marginalize all white people....This blogpost almost makes me feel like I am writing an article for whatever website follows the White Pride movement, it is the social conditioning I suppose. 

5 reasons why 'white pride' is always racist


By Matt Rozsa

Follow
The Ku Klux Klan is currently sponsoring a Harrison, Ark., billboard that sends the following message: “It’s not racist to love your people. www.WhitePrideRadio.com.” The message is featured next to an adorable photo of a kitten and a puppy. On the White Pride Radio website, the group further clarifies their mission: "A lot of people recognize that there is an ongoing program of genocide against white people. There are websites, newsletters, videos, and radio shows, but too many talk about family without including the family. It has always been our mission to not just promote the white family, but to make them a part of this cause of white Christian revival."


Oddly enough, this isn't the first time that a Harrison billboard has gone viral. Following similar signs in Alabama and Eugene, Ore., a message went up that read: "Anti-racism is code for anti-white." If that doesn't clear it up for you, let's put it bluntly: White pride is always racism, always. Here's why.

1) Whiteness is an artificial sociological construct which has been used throughout history to exclude certain groups of people from the rights guaranteed others and to justify bigoted attitudes.

As Nell Irvin Painter explains in The History of White People, the notion of “white culture” is a myth. “Our culture was founded in 1789 right about the same moment that Blumenbach was inventing Caucasians—this moment of racialization,” she told Salon in an interview from 2010. “Some people say race is in our national DNA so that we just can’t get away from it. I don’t know if we ever will.” 
While the institution of slavery made it difficult to keep accurate genealogical records for African-American families, the American slave trade sold into servitude West Africans from among the tribes of Sierra Leone, Senegambia, and the Gold Coast, as well as other areas along the coast. White Americans, however, are not a single ethnic group or a distinct number of ethnicities; they are an amalgamation of everyone who benefits from white privilege, and its boundaries are always shifting.


      You can read the rest of the Bilge Here.    The problem is that it is acceptable now in our culture to beat up white people from the "knockout game" to "Polar Bear Hunting"..   if the author of this prior article had written an article" Why Black Pride is Racist", the author would be pilloried and literally run out of a job.  There is a double standard in our society.   Check out Youtube and put in "White Privilege", the vitroil you see is believed by many in the SJW community.  They believe that the whites stole everything from government, to inventions to money and power.  They believe that it is their job to right the "rules of inequality" to make it "fair" for all the non-white people.  There is a show on MTV now that belittles white people, I don't know where all this will end.  I have my suspicion and I will touch on this on the 3rd part of this blog.   I don't know, I have never been a benefit of white privilege, I worked for everything I have, I have been discriminated against in job opportunities job placement, schools, ete,ete.  I am not bitter, it is the reality of the world I live in.  But it will be worse for my son, he will find the deck stacked against him from the institutional discrimination against a hetro white male, the only demographic that it is OK to insult and discriminate against.  From the government, schools, and society his road will be harder than mine.

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.

    I really wish people could get past all this "racism" stuff and focus on character and not group identities and rights.....

   Now to the 3rd part of my rant.  the EndGame....You have noticed the drumbeats of the SJW's against white people and this is by design...Most all of them have read the book by Saul Alinsky, The Rules for Radicals
     Most of the SJW's are schooled in Marxist thoughts and beliefs..this is by intent,

In Rules for Radicals, several themes persist throughout Alinsky’s lessons to future community organizers. The most notable is his use of symbol construction to strengthen the unity within an organization. Often, he would draw on loyalty to a particular church or religious affiliation to create a firmly structured organization with which to operate. The reason being that symbols by which communities could identify themselves created strongly structured organizations that were easier to mobilize in implementing direct action. Once the community was united behind a common symbol, Alinsky would find a common enemy for the community to be united against.
The use of common enemy against a community was done to promote another theme of Rules for Radicals, nonviolent conflict as a uniting element in communities. Alinsky would find an external antagonist to turn into a common enemy for the community within which he was operating. Often, this enemy would be a local politician or agency that had some involvement with activity that was causing detriment to the community. His goal was to unite a group through conflict with an external antagonist. Once the enemy was established, the community would come together in opposition of it.
     This management of conflict heightened awareness within the community as to the similarities its members shared as well as what differentiated them from those outside of their organization. The use of conflict also allowed for the goal of the group to be clearly defined. With an established external antagonist, the community’s goal would be to defeat that enemy, whether it be a politician, policy, or opposing agency.

     I have mentioned in the past that the modern SJW's are Marxist and they are doing what history taught them.  I will  make a historical point..remember the external antagonist that is required for the SJW's?

According to the political theory of Marxism–Leninism of the early 20th century, the kulaks were class enemies of the poorer peasants. Vladimir Ilyich Lenin described them as "bloodsuckers, vampires, plunderers of the people and profiteers, who fatten on famine.” Marxism–Leninism had intended a revolution to liberate poor peasants and farm laborers alongside the proletariat (urban and industrial workers). In addition, the planned economy of Soviet Bolshevism required the collectivisation of farms and land to allow industrialisation or conversion to large-scale agricultural production. In practice, government officials violently seized kulak farms and murdered resisters; others were deported to labor camps.

    According to the political theory of Marxism–Obamaism of the early 21th century, the white people were class enemies of the poorer peasants. Barack Obama described them as "bloodsuckers, vampires, bitter clingers, plunderers of the people and profiteers, who fatten on white privilege.” Marxism–Obamaism intended a revolution to liberate poor urban people and farm laborers alongside the cube dweller. In addition, the planned economy of Globalism Bolshevism required the collectivization of assets to allow  the future green economy or conversion to large-scale clean energy production. In practice, government officials violently seized white middle class assets and murdered resisters; others were deported to FEMA camps..

     It isn't much of a stretch, I see history replaying before me, I see the same thing that Lenin and later Stalin did to break the power of the kulaks whom were land owning peasants.  In the modern sense, they need to break what they call the political power of the middle class to guarantee their power.  If they can use social pressure to make a law to seize the assets of people that are considered "class enemies".  Remember the 401K's that millions of people have....most of them are middle class and white.  That is an example.  That is billions of dollars sitting in there where the government can't touch it....But the government can change the rules, then seize it....You doubt me?  look at Greece, Cyprus and other places.  The government seized assets for the "Common good".  See a parallel?  the outrage you see against whites is just an excuse for plunder on a wide scale.  The government in the name of social justice and equality can and will seize assets....They will use the social outrage, the same thing Lenin and Stalin used against the Kulaks to further the transforming of Russia into the Soviet Union.  The enemy of the political elites are the middle class, the SJW's are useful idiots being used to create a have and an have not society.  The middle class is a check on the power of the political elite.  The elitist would have a complete society that depended on them for sustenance..once you control their sustenance, you control them....then you can do whatever you wanted.  That is the Endgame.



   

   




 

Thursday, April 5, 2012

Rep Darrell Issa ramps up investigation on Union political spending

This goes along with a post that I did a couple of days ago, I knew about the Beck option and I used it, I also mentioned to the rank and file about the Beck option.  I was a Union Committeeman while I was there.  I got elected because I knew the contract backward and forward.  To work in a union shop there are a lot of contract issues that have to be adhered to by both sides.  I started reading the contract(3 thick books that explained the working relations of Ford and the UAW.  Most people didn't bother reading it because it was boring, dry reading and full of lawyerspeak.  I read it because I got tired of getting screwed by the older workers that used "past practices" and distortion to get the good work assignments and days off.  We had one committeeman when I started that wouldn't do anything for you unless you had tits and were willing to blow him in the parking lot.  Since he had the "reverend" handle on his name, a certain block of members always voted for him.  When I started correcting the older workers on their BS and the committeeman at the same time, I got people's attention, especially the younger workers that like me were tired of getting dicked over by the "old timers".  I understood having to "pay my dues" but it got really bad.
     Well I was nominated to run as an alternate committeeman and was elected.  Did 3 years and got elected for full time the following election.  All I can say about the my union experiences was that 5% of the workforce constituted 95% of my workload, they were the slackers, the deadwood that demanded for and felt that they were entitled to get the good wages but not work.  This in my mind and justifiably so made the union look bad to the rank and file that came in day after day and busted their asses on a assembly job.  Anybody that worked an assembly line knows what I talk about.   I started to raise hell about the union supporting all these leftist candidates that if they had their way, my industry would be legislated out of existence.  I had read Al Gore's book " Earth in the balance"    It is full of crap but he stated in his book that he wanted to get rid of the manufacturing industry and the union supported this?  I repeatedly told the leadership that we as a union are being used by the democrats.  They come in talk some platitudes about "worker rights" get their money and immediately suck up and try to work the environmental legislation for their pet groups.  I stated repeatedly " they view us as an ATM to get money, because we HAVE money then suck up to the far left groups.  We need to start vetting these politicians to support the ones that actually support us and our industry not the ones just because they have "D" on the end of their name."  
      That idea was popular with everybody that I mentioned it to.  I made use of the Beck option because I didn't like supporting people that I am diametrically opposed politically.  I also told anybody that complained about the support what they could do.  I figured that once the union realized how many people started using that option that it would get their attention and they would have to address our concerns..  But Ford had to close plants and we got shut down.  I didn't transfer to Kentucky because family is more important than the job.  I now work at a non-union job in the aviation industry.
      Funny how things work out.....


In recent weeks, Rep. Darrell Issa — chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform — has held hearings regarding unions forcing members to contribute to political causes which they do not support.
Today, Issa issued six letters — addressed to the Federal Election Commission, the National Labor Relations Board, the Alabama Education Association, the National Education Association, the Service Employees International Union, and the United Auto Workers — demanding to know why union members are denied a say in how their dues are spent on political campaigns.
In the letter to UAW, Issa recounts the story of Terry Bowman:
AdvertisementA “proud” UAW Local 898 member testified that he has “heard the stories of hundreds of union workers who are … tired and fed up with the political activities of their union.” Mr. Bowman is also the founder of Union Conservatives, a group that boasts over 1,000 members and exists to “provid[e] liberty to union members who have differing political views than their union leadership.” Indeed, a 2010 survey found that 69 percent of private and public union workers think that union leaders should stop spending union dues on politics, and 66 percent believe that it is unreasonable that such spending can occur without their consent.Per the Supreme Court decision Communications Workers v. Beck, dues-paying non-members — workers who have chosen not to join the union but must pay “agency fees” so that they are not “free riding” on the union’s collective bargaining — in effect pay union dues. However, as PJM reported recently, federal law prohibits the use of agency fees to support political candidates and causes to which the non-member objects. Further, the law requires the portion of their fees spent on the political support to be refunded upon demand.However, workers with Beck rights claim getting this refund is a near-impossible task. In the letter to the NEA, Issa notes the case of teacher Claire WaitesWaites, an eighth grade science teacher and a “member in good standing” of the Alabama Education Association (AEA), testified that she was forced to make contributions to the union’s political action committees (PACs). As a delegate to the National Education Association (NEA) Convention, Ms. Waites explained that in 2004 she was told by local Baldwin County leadership that a contribution to the NEA’s “Children’s Fund” was “nonnegotiable,” and at the 2008 NEA Convention, a contribution was allegedly made in her name with travel money. After Ms. Waites learned about the 2008 contribution to the “Children’s Fund,” and that it was a PAC, she strongly objected to it. She attempted to retrieve the travel funds that had gone to the “Children’s Fund” from AEA leadership, but was informed that was not possible. Ms. Waites also testified that the AEA automatically deducted funds from her paycheck to support AEA’s “A VOTE” PAC without her permission. It was not until she inquired about the deduction that she learned that the “fine print” of the AEA application instructs that she must opt-out, in writing, to stop the deduction.Issa is demanding documents from the NLRB and the FEC, and is requesting written answers to several questions from the UAW, SEIU, NEA, and AEA. He wants to know how the unions notifiy workers of their Beck rights, why the UAW requires that Beck objections be renewed each year, and if the workers have complained about the annual renewals.Additionally, Issa wants to know if unions take steps to help ensure that union workers who exercise their Beck rights do not face ridicule and harassment. Issa also asks if the unions notify workers about how much money is spent on non-representational activities, how the unions determine what expenditures are non-representational and therefore should be excluded from the agency fee, and what activities they consider non-representational.Further, Issa asks if the unions account for differences in non-representational spending in election years versus non-election years.Issa specifically questions union spending on clear left-wing causes — such as the One Nation Working Together rally on October 2, 2010, in Washington, D.C., or spending supporting the Occupy movement — and how those expenditures qualify as representational activity.Issa is also demanding that unions answer whether or not they allow all union workers to object to non-representational activities, or if only agency fee-payers are permitted to object. If the objections are limited, Issa asks if the unions support extending the right to object to all members.He further requested information on Beck complaints from the NLRB and information about an investigation of Waite’s complaints by FEC.Issa also announced the launch of a “crowdsourcing” website — ProtectingOurWorkers.com – to seek more stories of union abuse regarding political campaigns.

Wednesday, July 13, 2011

Nasa

I am somewhat bummed out.  NASA launched the last shuttle, after it lands we will have no more manned space program
NASA is part of our American exceptionalism, the stuff that obummer doesn't believe in since he wasn't raised in it.  All of his teachers and parents and other influances were from the "I hate America" the ones that believe that we are no different than anybody else.
      NASA the ones that guided our race to the moon, After our first missteps, public, embarrassing photos while the Soviets launched Sputnik through theSoviet Space Program  the soviets got into space first with Sputnik, they also got the first man into space with Yuri Gegarian,  We caught up then passed the Soviets, who had viewed the race to space as a means of proving the superiority of the soviet system over capitalism and the west.
     Now the program is going away, especially since obummer stated earlier in his administration that NASA's main job was to outreach to the muslim world.  Obummer is clueless about American Exceptionalism and NASA is part of it.  I am afraid that this is a further symptom of our decline as a nation.  We are turning our back on our leadership and basically letting the chinese have it, and to a lesser extent Russia.
      I want NASA to come back, we have to get rid of that amateur in the whitehouse and get somebody in there that believes in America.

Tuesday, July 5, 2011

The Re-Creation of the New American Man

I got this from Confederate Yankee, the link is here

The Re-Creation of the New American Man

July 4, 2011 is a day of celebration, and so it will be for most Americans. They will celebrate independence, the independence of the former colonies from Great Britain, the establishment of America as an independent nation, the one exceptional and indispensable nation among all nations. But most of all, they will celebrate the independence of the American spirit, for the creation of America was, in a very real sense, the creation of a new man. Marxists and Socialists are obsessed with creating the new man. Americans—as Americans tend to do—simply ignored government and did it themselves. We need to do it again.
The new American owed allegiance to a voluntary confederation of fellow Americans. He honored no king, no all-powerful nanny state. He expected to prosper on the strength of his own character and the fruits of his own labor. The truth was important to him, and the nation was built on the strength of each man’s word and sealed by handshakes. He indulged in no juvenile cults of personality and chose his leaders—men such as George Washington—based on their character and accomplishments, character and accomplishments that were well known and demonstrated and renewed day by day, just as his character and accomplishments were demonstrated and renewed day by day.
The new American—and many generations to come—lived by simple, basic principles: hard work, honesty, doing what was right, living within their means while working to increase not only their means, but the means of their children. He understood deferring pleasure to a better, more secure day and he understood self-sacrifice. He was willing to help his neighbors because he knew that they lived their lives as he did, and that they were willing to help him for the same reasons. For him, laziness and a lack of industry were debilitating character flaws, not victimhood to be embraced and rewarded.
America was born an exceptional nation by virtue of her people and their creation: The Constitution. They understood all too well what we seem to have forgotten. When we turned our backs on self-sufficiency and hard work, when we became victims instead of doers, when we began to believe that character didn’t really matter, when we came to see the truth as nothing more than slippery rhetoric in the service of individual, selfish agendas, when we stopped being willing to pay our fair share and expected instead to be given our living by others, America started on the road to becoming just another failed socialist state.
And so we elected Barack Obama to atone for the sins of our ancestors, to demonstrate enlightened, contemporary civic virtue. We elected a man who believes that America is exceptional just as the citizens of other nations believe themselves to be exceptional. As he once said, “words, just words,” for if everyone is exceptional, in truth, no one is exceptional. If everyone is above average, average has no meaning. If all are equally worthy, equality has no meaning. The Founders understood that to be equal meant to be created by God, equal in humanity, in intrinsic human worth and dignity, and deserving of equal, unbiased treatment under the law. Mr. Obama and his supporters would have us believe that equality has to do with taking from some and giving to favored others. They buy the juvenile notion that apparent equality of outcome is far more important than equality of opportunity. This is the basis of Marxism, socialism and its fellow travelers.
The causes of our downward spiral are familiar to anyone who has been paying attention. Too many of us have abandoned the principals that make us great, that make us Americans. An instructive example is home ownership.
I am tempted to say that when Democrats in the 1970s began to say that every American should have their own home, they did this with the best of intentions, but the results of this bit of rhetoric surely say otherwise. Every American should own their home. It’s a lovely--if simple-mindedly emotional--sentiment, and that’s where it should have stopped, but socialists see sentiments—emotions—as reality, and they tried to manifest an emotion.
The problem goes back to our founding, to self-sufficiency, to the notion that we must live within our means, individually and as a nation. To the simple principle that we would not only build, but would live in the house we could afford and that when we could afford bigger and better, only then would we attain that house and the house after it. Apartments are a manifestation of that simple virtue. They are recognition that not everyone can afford a house, and our system evolved in recognition of that reality. If one could not afford a house, no bank would loan money that could never be re-paid. Even if one foolish enough to try to buy what they could not afford applied for a home loan, banks would not willingly assist them in destroying themselves and their families.
Rational people know that a mortgage payment is only the beginning, basic cost of home ownership. Maintenance, tools such as lawn mowers, utility bills substantially greater than those of apartment dwellers, insurance, furnishings, and myriad other expenses greatly expand that low, convenient monthly mortgage payment. For this simple reason, generations of fiscally responsible Americans deferred home ownership until they were certain they could actually—what’s that archaic word?—oh yes, until they could actually “afford” it. Even if they could never afford it, most could live in apartments that are the envy of most of the population of the world.
But Democrats knew better. They felt that everyone should have a house. It goes without saying that such trivial factors as being able to afford the mortgage payment, to say nothing of all of the incidental but necessary expenses of home ownership, were of no concern, and lenders were pressured to loan to those they knew would default. This was seen as compassionate, as building a better, more diverse and tolerant America, for who should not own their own house? What kind of cruel Republican would stand in their way? Surely such people were discriminating! Surely they were racists! Compassionate, caring, progressive government knew best, the free market be damned! And the free market was damned; all of us were damned.
Loans were made by lenders who knew they would never be paid, but they were willing to make such loans because they were backed by Fannie Mae, backed on the assumption that the Federal Government would make good those bundled loans when they inevitably defaulted. Many of those banks are no longer in business and other teeter on the edge of insolvency. Some banks resisted the siren song of diversity and compassion and remain strong today, but enough went along, and finally, circa 2008, the bills became due. All of that debt was bundled and packaged, and deferred and rolled over until it became so large that it reached critical mass—as everyone knew it eventually must--and exploded. So many mortgages were in default, mortgages backed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac--and by implication, by the public—that the whole house of cards collapsed and the bailouts and stimulus and the “summer of recovery” (remember that one? Last summer?), where nothing was recovered, began.
The Revolutionary generation could have told us this would happen. In fact, they did. The founders knew that when people discovered that they could vote themselves other people’s money that would be the beginning of the end for America. Circa 2011, about half of Americans pay no income taxes, none at all and many are given tax “rebates” because they do not pay taxes. A tiny percentage of the evil, greedy rich evilly and greedily pay most income taxes, and the rest are paid by an increasingly small middle class of producers, people who still actually produce goods, services and wealth in a manner that our forefathers would recognize and of which they would approve.
We have created an enormous and growing class of consumers, of people who do not for a moment think that they must live within their means, of people who do not expect to work for what they receive, of people who expect government to provide for much—or all—of what they have. And we have elected a man who believes in all of this, and more. Our president wants everyone to attend college on the public dime. The public dime is our tax dollars and whatever money can be begged and borrowed from nations that hate us and would delight in our destruction. As this is being written, Mr. Obama and his advisors are apparently seriously considering merely ignoring the law, ignoring the debt ceiling and spending as much money—money we do not have—as he pleases. His pleasure is unlimited. The Democrats in Congress have broken the law by not producing a budget, and proudly announced their intention to continue breaking that particular law, for they know that any budget they produce would enrage even the enervated American public. Most Congressional Democrats are more than willing to spend us into oblivion. A surprising and disgusting number of Republicans have been, and are, willing to assist them, even now.
The wreckage has become so obvious that all of Mr. Obama’s primary financial advisors have, like rats, deserted the sinking ship of state. All, that is, with the exception of the tax-evading Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who has had to recently sort of deny pervasive rumors of his impending departure. Presumably, Mr. Obama will now bring in the second string team to finish an already losing game.
We know that Socialism doesn’t work. It is the opposite of what Americans once knew and believed. It is anti-democratic and anti-American. Its foundational principles depict men as vassals of the state, as simpletons and weaklings unable to understand their own needs and unable to provide for themselves and their families. This is the very opposite of America. Yet Mr. Obama and the self-appointed better classes embrace it even as it has ruined the rest of the world, even as those sad, failing and failed nations struggle to abandon it. Margaret Thatcher was right. The problem with Socialism is that you always run out of other people’s money. And so we have.
Forget that Obamacare is not yet fully implemented and that if and when it is, it will, by itself, absent any other looming financial debacle (our other bankrupt entitlements), bankrupt the nation. The idea that tens of millions of uninsured Americans could be fully insured and that our costs would be lower and our medical care improved was a blatant lie from the beginning, a lie the new Americans of 1776 would have immediately recognized and rejected, as the majority of contemporary Americans continue to reject it. Consider what revolutionary era Americans would have thought of a president who so casually lied on such a grand scale. That we find it not only unremarkable, that we have come to expect it, clearly illustrates our national dissolution and despair.
But on this 4th of July, as fireworks soar into the night sky, so too may our hopes. All is not lost, not yet anyway. Even if a surprising and disgusting portion of Americans no longer believe that America is the one exceptional and indispensable nation, billions around the world do and they would, if they could, vote in the most sincere manner possible: they would vote with their feet and move here to become what far too many of us, starting with our president, no longer appreciate. They know what it is to be an American. They have no doubt of its distinction and value.
We may yet stave off disaster and decline. Such things are a matter of choice. By embracing the simple truths by which the first Americans lived their lives, we too may restore America to what she should be, to what she must be if mankind is to have true hope rather than the ephemeral hope of teleprompter-driven political rhetoric. It will not be easy, and it will take generations, but once again, we must—as Americans and as America—learn to live within our means and to provide for ourselves. That process has, weakly, already begun. It will truly begin with the removal of Barack Obama from office in 2012. It will continue when Americans once again embrace freedom and remove from office those who would destroy it. It will continue when Americans no longer tolerate those who do not tolerate them, domestically and around the world.
So on this July 4th, celebrate, but never forget that we remain free because of the continuing sacrifice of better men and women than ourselves. If we fail to honor their sacrifice and embrace and live the values that made July 4 more than just another day on the calendar, America will soon dissipate, like a brilliantly exploding firework against the night sky, flaring briefly and brightly, but gone forever. We will end not with a bang, but a whimper. America deserves better. The world deserves better.
Only the recreation of the new American Man, not by the government, not by fiat and mandate, but by Americans themselves, can reverse our disastrous course.

Monday, May 16, 2011

Newspaper article

I saw this in a newspaper, I think it was the New York Times.  I was surprised to see this FULL page ad. and was very impressed.  I believe that the national debt will ruin this country in the long run unless spending is controlled.  We don't have a revenue problem...we have a SPENDING problem.

                                                   

Sunday, April 24, 2011

How to behave during a islamic massacre

I got this from www.Pajamamedia.com  I commented the same thing several weeks ago when the muslims rioted when that idiot burned the koran.http://mydailykona.blogspot.com/2011/04/burning-of-koran.html
r

Monday, April 18, 2011

Constitutional Amendments......

I got this from GOC www.grouchyoldcripple.com

   I like the idea and figured I would pass it on.



The 26th amendment (granting the right to vote for 18 year-olds) took only 3 months & 8 days to be ratified! Why? Simple! The people demanded it. That was in 1971...before computers, before e-mail, before cell phones, etc.

Of the 27 amendments to the Constitution, seven (7) took 1 year or less to
become the law of the land...all because of public pressure.

I'm asking each addressee to forward this email to a minimum of twenty people on
their address list; in turn ask each of those to do likewise.

In three days, most people in The United States of America will have the
message. This is one idea that really should be passed around.

Congressional Reform Act of 2011
1. Term Limits.
12 years only, one of the possible options below..
A. Two Six-year Senate terms
B. Six Two-year House terms
C. One Six-year Senate term and three Two-Year House terms

2. No Tenure / No Pension.
A Congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when
they are out of office.

3. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security.
All funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the Social Security
system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social Security system,
and Congress participates with the American people.
How long do you think it would take Congress to fix Social Security if this happened? ... GOC
4. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all Americans do. 5. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will
rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.
I've got a better idea. They only get a pay raise when the budget is balanced. Deficit spending means no pay raise for the congresscritters. What kind of politicians are they if they can't survive on their already generous salaries and all the money they get in bribes and graft? ... GOC
6. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same
health care system as the American people.
Wonder what that would do to Obummercare? ... GOC

7. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people.
8. All contracts with past and present Congressmen are void effective 1/1/11.
The American people did not make this contract with Congressmen.
Congressmen made all these contracts for themselves. Serving in Congress is
an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators,
so ours should serve their term(s), then go home and back to work.

If each person contacts a minimum of twenty people then it will only take three
days for most people (in the U.S. ) to receive the message. Maybe it is time.

THIS IS HOW YOU FIX CONGRESS!!!!! If you agree with the above, pass it on.
..

Sunday, March 13, 2011

NRA.........

I will work more on my Desert Storm postings, but it is the weekend and that is when I work so it will be a day or 2 before I can.
      Anyway, I was working the Archery range for the cub Scouts so they can get a beltloop.   The people teaching the BB range were NRA instructors, I had no problem with that.  However we were talking during lunch and discussing guns and other things that we like, like more guns and that obama is a tool.  The female instructor made some comments, because she likes to use inline black powder to hunt and shoot.  She made some derogatory comment about people that like to use the Barrett BMG.
  They were that people that want more than 1 round to hunt with, she said that they don't NEED to have a Barrett.  I was surprised by this elitist attitude.  She was acting all holy like her choice of firearms was correct and all others were beneath her attention.  I commented that who determines what somebody needs? and I also commented that the 2nd amendment is not about hunting.  I also retorted that if she thinks that the anti's will not go after her choice of firearms, she is sadly mistaken.   Needless to say, she wouldn't say anything to me the rest of the time.
       Is this what we have to put up with in the gun community? people that think that they are exempt from the gun control movement?  If we don't stand together, we will lose separately.

Monday, February 21, 2011

How America and Americans are viewed in the world.

My friends know me as a student of history, one of my favorite quotes are:" Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat history".  I was at work and my mind is always working and I got to thinking how Americans are perceived in the world.  From everything that I read before Vietnam if you went anywhere and people knew that you are an American, you wern't trifled with.  They may not like you, but they respected and feared you.  The word "American" meant a lot, From Teddy Roosevelt's "The great White Fleet" where before the turn of the last century to showcase the growing might of the United States, President Roosevelt had the capital ships of the newly modernized American Navy. 

The Great White Fleet


America became a global power in the latter days of the 19th century by defeating Spain in the Spanish-American War, taking possession of Puerto Rico, the Phillipines and Guam. Assistant Secretary of the Navy Theodore Roosevelt (credited with preparing the Navy for the war, before resigning his appointment to serve as a Colonel in the U.S. Army) understood the importance of naval power to a nation's economic and military strength.

A decade later, as Roosevelt's presidency was drawing to a close, he dispatched four squadrons of four battleships each (and their escorts) from the Hampton Roads, Virginia on a 43,000-mile, 14-month journey that would circumnavigate the globe. This fleet, "The Great White Fleet", began its journey exactly 100 years ago -- and would demonstrate to the world America's global reach and blue-water navy capability.

Tensions with Japan were rising due to Japan's incredibly lopsided victory over Russia's Baltic Fleet in the Battle of Tsushima two years prior -- and their growing sphere of influence in the western Pacific. This led many (including Harpers magazine) to believe that the outgoing president was launching a war against Japan.

       The Great White fleet and the subsequent actions that we did leading up to World War I.  We as Americans didn't have colonial holdings in China or in Africa.  We were in the Philippines and Hawaii and some of the other Islands like Wake and Guam.
     In World War I we as a nation basically saved the Allies who was drained from  3 years of killing a generation of their people in Europe on the trench warfare in France.  We got there the same time the other half of the Imperial German Army arrived from the eastern front after Russia sued for peace when the bolsheviks with Lenin and Trostky basically swept into power after the Czar abdicated in 1917( he and the entire royal family were executed later on)  Following WWI and the runup to WWII we were respected in the world.  WWII cemented that.  We were known for being individuals, rugged with faith in our country and our way of life.  We were the beacon for the world, " this is what you could do if you had a system for the rule of law in place, and it applies equally to all.  Also we as Americans believed that we could do anything, because we are Americans and we believed in ourselves, we were special in the world and we knew it.  
       This changed during Vietnam and the subsequent years during the carter malaise and for a time the poison in our soul receded during the Ronald Reagen years, he believed in the exceptionalism of the American spirit, he made us proud to be Americans again.  Then the Gulf war happened, we were saviors of a country that was brutally invaded by Iraq.  I was part of that, it felt like a crusade to save Kuwait.  Then we elected Bill Clinton( remember the elections have consequences thingie I like to quote)  He weaken us on foreign policy because that wasn't his interest.  Then we had W, he did a lot of things wrong, but the invasion of Iraq and removal of the taliban from Afganistan was proper.  Now we have a president that believe that we are no different than everybody else, that and the several generations of entitlement spending and policies have sapped the American spirit, when you have people that are willing to go on the dole with no shame because they look for the government to take care of them.   50 years ago, the idea of welfare would have been considered shameful.   Now it is used as an opportunity to get free stuff from the government.  Free stuff??  That free stuff is paid for by other Americans who still believe in work and taking care of themselves.
     I went on a tangent when I started this posting.  the point that I am trying to make is that We as Americans are no longer feared, local thugs take us prisoners and we do nothing.  We have illegals crossing the border and we do nothing.  We have pirates capture Americans, because they have no fear.  The United States Navy was built to fight the barbary pirates, the shore of tripoli mentioned in the marine corp song.  We went over there and kicked their butts.  Now what we do, apologize and try to bribe them.   What happened to the chutspah that made us Americans?   Have we been neutered?    I commented that the 19th century was PAX Britainia, the 20th century was PAX Americana.  What does the 21st century going to be?  PAX China?     I hate to think that the greatness of America is behind me, and my son will inherit a country that is weaker and viewed with contempt by the world for our weakness.

  An educated citizenry is the best defence against government tyranny