Keep Liberals Out of Office

tried for treason.then shot...

nobody@vox.com(ken) — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 22:15:37 -0800

i just heard another one of the democratic scum, that say they represent america, calling anybody that didn't want this socailist healthcare bill passed a right wing terrorist.who the hell do these people think they are,what country were they elected to office,what makes a congressman or a senator think they can say this... first pelosi then reid and now whitstone,all three of them should be tried for treason,shot and buried in some other country.since when does a elected official get to stand up in congress and tell the american people they are not americans for disagreeing with them,they should be impeached and then arrested.

180px-Mexican_execution,_1914

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

merry christmas

nobody@vox.com(ken) — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 17:41:40 -0800

00222

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

Know Islam, No Peace... No Islam, Know Peace

nobody@vox.com(JudgeBob) — Sun, 18 Jan 2009 08:03:25 -0800

In Christendom we have a saying. Know Jesus, know peace..... no Jesus, no peace. Radical Islam is, and always has proven just the opposite for its faith. This study is historically and empirically supported.

A Brief History of Religion

When politically correct and culturally diverse societies agree to "the reasonable" Muslim demands for their "religious rights," they also get the other components under the table. Here's how it works (percentages source CIA: The World Fact Book (2007)).

As long as the Muslim population remains around 1% of any given country they will be regarded as a peace-loving minority and not as a threat to anyone. In fact, they may be featured in articles and films, stereotyped for their colorful uniqueness:

United States -- Muslim 1.0%
Australia -- Muslim 1.5%
Canada -- Muslim 1.9%
China -- Muslim 1%-2%
Italy -- Muslim 1.5%
Norway -- Muslim 1.8%

At 2% and 3% they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs:

Denmark -- Muslim 2%
Germany -- Muslim 3.7%
United Kingdom -- Muslim 2.7%
Spain -- Muslim 4%
Thailand -- Muslim 4.6%

From 5% on they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population.

They will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature it on their shelves -- along with threats for failure to comply. (United States).

France -- Muslim 8%
Philippines -- Muslim 5%
Sweden -- Muslim 5%
Switzerland -- Muslim 4.3%
The Netherlands -- Muslim 5.5%
Trinidad & Tobago -- Muslim 5.8%

At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islam is not to convert the world but to establish Sharia law over the entire world.

When Muslims reach 10% of the population, they will increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions (Paris -- car-burnings). Any non-Muslim action that offends Islam will result in uprisings and threats (Amsterdam -- Mohammed cartoons).

Guyana -- Muslim 10%
India -- Muslim 13.4%
Israel -- Muslim 16%
Kenya -- Muslim 10%
Russia -- Muslim 10-15%

After reaching 20% expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings and church and synagogue burning:

Ethiopia -- Muslim 32.8%

At 40% you will find widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks and ongoing militia warfare:

Bosnia -- Muslim 40%
Chad -- Muslim 53.1%
Lebanon -- Muslim 59.7%

From 60% you may expect unfettered persecution of non-believers and other religions, sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels:

Albania -- Muslim 70%
Malaysia -- Muslim 60.4%
Qatar -- Muslim 77.5%
Sudan -- Muslim 70%

After 80% expect State run ethnic cleansing and genocide:

Bangladesh -- Muslim 83%
Egypt -- Muslim 90%
Gaza -- Muslim 98.7%
Indonesia -- Muslim 86.1%
Iran -- Muslim 98%
Iraq -- Muslim 97%
Jordan -- Muslim 92%
Morocco -- Muslim 98.7%
Pakistan -- Muslim 97%
Palestine -- Muslim 99%
Syria -- Muslim 90%
Tajikistan -- Muslim 90%
Turkey -- Muslim 99.8%
United Arab Emirates -- Muslim 96%

100% will usher in the peace of "Dar-es-Salaam" -- the Islamic House of Peace -- there's supposed to be peace because everybody is a Muslim:

Afghanistan -- Muslim 100%
Saudi Arabia -- Muslim 100%
Somalia -- Muslim 100%
Yemen -- Muslim 99.9%

Of course, that's not the case. To satisfy their blood lust, Muslims then start killing each other for a variety of reasons.

"Before I was nine I had learned the basic canon of Arab life. It was me against my brother; me and my brother against our father; my family against my cousins and the clan; the clan against the tribe; and the tribe against the world and all of us against the infidel. -- Leon Uris, "The Haj"

It is good to remember that in many, many countries, such as France, the Muslim populations are centered around ghettos based on their ethnicity. Muslims do not integrate into the community at large. Therefore, they exercise more power than their national average would indicate.

Adapted from Dr. Peter Hammond's book: Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat.. www.frontline.org.za/books_videos/sti.htm

What the Western world finds when it invades Muslim controlled lands is a demonstration in anti-socialism on a grand scale. Afghanistan was divided clan by clan and in constant conflict. Iraq was undergoing ethnic cleansing of one brand of Islam against another brand. This is the Islam that was found by the British, French, and Spanish invaders in the last two centuries. This is why the West could invade at all, and even if Islam could manage to mobilize its entire 1.3 billion population around the globe to enforce conversion or death, it would merely return to its old ways of intra-Muslim killing. The evidence in history shows, unless Muslims stand up against their extremist faction, they will incur the wrath of the Western world or they will face a world of never ending conflict, faction against faction, clan against clan, village against village.

It is a shame on Islam that the house of war knows more peace than the house of peace where Muslim upon Muslim violence claims more Muslim lives and stifles economic success than all the Crusades and the military actions of the last century in Muslim lands, combined. You are following liars, your media and your scholars and your clerics are propagating a massive conspiracy of hatred and blame on the West for the evils perpetrated on your people by your people. Break the stranglehold of fundamentalism and Sharia and call into accountability your leaders and informers. Some of you have access to the same information I do, and it is your responsibility to make the truth known to your people just as it is mine to my people.

These facts are opening the eyes of the peace activists and moderate factions in the West and their hatred and prejudice currently set squarely on the religions of the West will be redirected toward Islam and will be far greater than the so called 'crusaders' at work in Muslim majority lands today. Lies from Western and Eastern political leaders, Islamic religious leaders, news agencies, and embedded Muslim scholars in our institutions of higher learning are being revealed with the advent of the internet where people can now have information within minutes of events. The more 'in the news' violent Islam makes itself in current events, the more the public educates itself in the history of Islam and begin to shout down the ignorance of our so called tolerant and their sources of false information.

These revelations source anger and hatred toward beneficiaries of the lies which cause great personal and financial cost to the formerly ignorant West. Brothers, fathers, and sons are dying needlessly, economic malaise for tax dollars and corporate profit results in funded Muslim aggression toward the rest of the world needlessly. The end result will be a world wide movement to eradicate Islam and in that day, the farce of the 'house of peace' will pop and the resonance will be heard till the end of time just as the farce of Hitler's super race resounds to this day.

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

Note to Conservatives

nobody@vox.com(JudgeBob) — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 11:52:00 -0800

The opposition is not interested in curing global warming, universal national health care insurance, or any other massive program except in how they help their underlying agenda. Whatever you want to call it, the net effect is statism or centralizing power to a government. Any government. If not the United States Congress or the Supreme Court or the presidency then to the United Nations. Someone who will take all personal responsibility off of the individual. Someone to blame for everything. This is why the conservative arguments are not making headway. This is why the conservative agenda is not capable of getting traction in our society.

The KISS Principle "Economics"

From the HotAir blog;

[We’ll never be foolish enough to allow a band of fanatics to use “peer review” to rule all dissenting opinion out-of-bounds, then declare themselves the proud owners of a mighty consensus. You global-warming fanatics underestimate how much youneeded those tactics to gain power. You’ll never have that kind of unchallenged authority again, because we will never stop demanding the raw data, and we’ll drown you in laughter when you mutter something about deleting it by accident. We will never forget that you began with a conclusion and sought to harvest data that supported it – the exact opposite of the scientific method.]

The majority of people everywhere now, do not want to be responsible and certainly do not want to be held responsible for the problems we face. Like little children they don't want to make sacrifices by their own will but would rather be told what they have to do or not do. Appealing to their reason simply will not have any effect on these desires unless and until you first address their emotionalism. They have no shame for the political tactics, the violence they instigate, the outright made up data they use to write studies and reports which support their arguments to get this agenda in place. The kiss of death to a conservative talking point is to base it on reason alone. You have to link it to the real and personal consequence involved for the individual you are trying to reach with your concerns. You don't even have to explain the reasons why you are concerned. Like a parent saying to a child, "Because I said so!" with its implied "-or else I'll spank you!" we simply have to rain consequences on the children for their own benefit. You have to be the grown-up to their irresponsible attitude and behavior the same way you'd be the grown up in the park when one unruly kid is behaving in a way that is dangerous to anyone else. You don't just tell 'em to knock it off, you ensure they knock it off. So must we be vigilant in correcting the childish agenda and liberal behavior. No longer can we afford to allow them to continue until the consequences of their arguments and policy fall on them because like children, they will continue until the damage is irreparable. "Stop swinging that stick, you're going to put someone's eye out!" "Stop increasing government and government spending, our economy is going to collapse. If you feel bad about the poor now, just imagine how you'll feel about the poor when you ARE homeless and hungry. If you feel bad about the uninsured now, just imagine how you'll feel when you can't get a needed operation because the waiting list is too long or they simply won't do it for you. If you feel bad about the damage done to the environment now, just imagine how you'll feel when there isn't any fuel to keep warm so your cherished trees are chopped down for firewood. If you're going to cause me to lose my job by your cap and trade bill, I'm coming to your house to find wood for my fire and food for my kids."

On the voter battleground, not usually in the halls of Congress, (though quite often this liberal disease is employed there as well especially with regard to the banking regulations) as evidenced by liberal talking points on Climategate, ACORN support, war support, and a slew of other damnable evidences, the liberal is not accountable to truth or shame. Regardless of climategate the peer reviewed studies are respected, regardless of ACORN's abuses they were a force for good in national policy, regardless of Democrat's congressional voter support for the war in Iraq it was an unnecessary war.

Some of the best conservative institutions are great at providing statistics and data we need for reason, but on the ground, out here in the battle for hearts and minds, reason is not the most effective weapon. Real or implied, immediate, and personal consequences are. Never leave a discussion on policy with anyone thinking a liberal policy is not immediately and personally consequential.

On the lighter side;

Smoke and mirrors matter to the magician. With them he can make you believe what is not.

Speech and horrors matter to the politician. With them he can make you feel what is not.

Facts and data matter to the scientician. With them he can learn what is true and what is rot.

If he muddies the information, a magician certainly, a politician perhaps, a scientician he is not.

Smoke put in your eyes, Oh the discomfort and disabling of sight.

Smoke put in your arse, Oh the discomfort and disabling ensuing fight.

He who put smoke in my eyes has made me the fool.

He who put smoke in my arse is a fool to think I am fooled.

When I was in trouble, did he think to take advantage.

Now I'm awake, it would be no adage

my anger is unmeasured to recompense disadvantage

Oh look!, he's unconcious. We'd better employ his tobacco enema and resuscitate him.

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

Apostates Devise New Ways To Spoil Everyone’s Christmas

nobody@vox.com(epistolizer) — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 04:08:33 -0800

One of the shortcomings I remember the most about the Christian elementary school I attended was how a number of the less-than dedicated educators would punish all of the students for the misbehavior of a single pupil. To this day, I remain convinced this had more to do with lazy teachers preferring not to mess around with recess than correcting actually delinquency.

As miniature societies, the dynamics of schools often reflect the processes that govern nations and countries. Unfortunately, the good students --- or rather citizens in the macrocosmic case --- are having something that is by every right their's taken away just because those in charge don't want to deal with those out to ruin things for everyone.

For nearly 15 years (or at least since I've been writing about the topic annually), Christians and allied conservatives have waged a noble effort against secularists claiming the First Amendment, through an expansionist interpretation of the Separation Clause, forbids the erection of Nativity scenes and even less conspicuously devout Christmas symbols on public property.

Since Christmas has become a pivotal component of our culture, most Americans instinctively recoil at efforts to banish the beloved winter festival even if they are not particularly religious. Thus to be successful, secularists realized they would need to pursue a different strategy.

One of the foundational dictums (feigning a posture of sophistication, those of this mindset eschew the notion of creeds) of radical ecumenicalism is that, if you can’t beat them, join them. However, the ecumenicalist does not seek union or compromise with the more thoroughgoing traditionalist for the purposes of common ground but rather to eventually wear down the traditionalist to the point where the traditionalist capitulates to the original demands of the ecumenicalist.

For example, realizing that Americans aren’t willing to give up the public recognition of Christmas yet esteem the idea of fairness nearly as much, a number of wily atheists decided on a new strategy. These hostile unbelievers surmised, “Fine, we will allow you to have your religious display provided we are granted equal access to put up a display depicting our beliefs as well.”

Frankly, in some ways they had a point as it is often through verbal conflict one not only comes away better knowing what one’s opponent believes but what you believe as well. After all, Americans --- both devout and apostate alike --- are often complacent in regards to both theology and politics.

However, a critical populace of an analytical inclination is the last thing the government wants. And in the clamp down to prevent an outbreak of citizens thinking for themselves rather than handing the process of ratiocination over to leftist bureaucrats, even more radical academics and the media dupes of each, victory by default is handed over to the more malevolent brand of secularist.

It is pretty much the establishmentarian consensus that public displays commemorating America’s religious roots in the Judeo-Christian tradition cannot be directly set up by the government. Rather, in most instances, a public forum is established with a mad dash being made by adherents of the respective viewpoints to get permits to sponsor the annual display or to divvy up the space equally.

Thing of it is there is only a finite amount of space in most government buildings even if the power of the agencies housed therein often is not while the number of worldviews clamoring for public acclaim in an age of pluralism is nearly infinite. The rational American at their noblest wanting to see the greatest number possible satisfied and at their most base just wanting the incessant whiners to shut up would probably be willing to accept a Nativity with a snowman, a Menorah, and possibly even a flying spaghetti monster to please the acolytes of evolutionist Richard Dawkins though most would be rolling their eyes and mumbling under their breath about it.

In an age where every viewpoint is considered equally valid, who is to say more eccentric belief systems are not as worthy of exhibiting their own Yuletide emblems? For example, upon opening their display space to both the glory and Hades bound alike, the Washington State Capitol saw the erection of a Festivus pole, a fabricated holiday popularized by the minds behind Seinfeld, at least one of whom now thinks it is comical to urinate on artistic portrayals of Christ.

Where does it end? Since Star Wars has also weaved itself into the Christmas fabric of many that grew up during the 70’s and 80’s (just recall the fan film “Christmas Tauntauns” as well as the Star Wars Christmas special Lucas is claimed to have seldom acknowledged the existence of with its Wookie Life Festival), are we going to allow a display to this as well?

In the name of getting a handle on this, the Washington State Capitol has banned all holiday displays from the building. Leesburg, Virginia tried to pursue a similar policy, but rescinded the edict after citizen outcry against the abrupt ending of a tradition that extended back decades.

Of those of the mind that we must downplay the acknowledgement of certain statutorily recognized holidays because certain elements of the population finds them disturbing, does that mean we also eschew all other civic commemorations because a scant few find these others distasteful as well? For example, should Martin Luther King Jr. festivities transpiring on or near public property be cancelled since there a few that know this figure was hardly the godlike personage he is portrayed to be in the popular memory but rather someone with questionable Community ties and faulty theological assumptions no matter how laudable certain aspects of his philosophy might have been.

More importantly, what about Black History or other assorted ethnic supremacy months? One reason no one is suppose to mention Christmas since to do so is to be "divisive" because it is not a celebration that everyone embraces.

So because around three percent have an attitude problem, the rest of us are suppose to sit around with out lips sealed shut. Few would admit it for fear of losing their jobs or having rocks hurled through automobile windshields as I can assure you does occur when one enunciates positions on these kinds of subjects other than the one insisted upon by the diversitymongers. However, there are definitely more than three percent of the Caucasian population that, if you could assure them that there would be no repercussions, would admit to opposing these fill-in-the-flavor-of-the-month history months.

As Ann Coulter, I believe it was, once remarked the United States is not a bus stop. All should be free from violence and deliberate mistreatment even if their ideas fall outside the norm. However, as a nation, Americans should not have to cower in shame before a few disgruntled malcontents whose rights have otherwise been upheld and protected.

by Frederick Meekins

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

Soft Hearted vs. Soft Headed

nobody@vox.com(JudgeBob) — Sun, 13 Dec 2009 10:23:21 -0800

This post is dedicated to Emmi.

Government and the poor

My friend over at Liberty Pen has posted another great video on his YouTube channel. Milton Friedman is one of his major subjects and this video is an interview on TV from back in the early 60's. Friedman gives one of the best arguments against modern liberalism. Topics covered include Social Security, Minimum Wage, and The Great Depression. But the key statement was his comment on the adjectives we use as titles. He says, "I consider myself a liberal in the truest sense of the word, while those who call themselves liberal today are actually conservative. They are conservative in the truest sense of the word because they want to preserve the course this nation is on which is bigger government and moving toward socialism. They think of themselves as soft hearted but the softness has moved into their heads. You know, I want the poor to be helped and for the underemployed to make a living wage, but the laws and policies they want to implement don't get the results they are seeking. A worker with low skills doesn't get higher wages because the law forces the employer to avoid hiring him at all. People I would trust personally actively lie to the American public because they believe these policies are best for the public. For instance, with the Social Security program, the law states that the employee pays half and the employer pays half but the truth is the employee pays all of it. If the employer is able to afford (adjusting for the times) $15.00 per hour he subtracts the amount going out for taxes and benefits so that the employee is actually taking home $8.50 for each hour he works. The rest goes to the government to manage for him." Considering that is nearly half the employee's earning power, you've yet to figure in sales, property, estate, and a slew of other taxes. So if we figured the government's true cost, we can only conclude that the government's take is nearly 60% of our earning power with some 15% coming back in very limited benefits they should have no authority to purchase and dole out.

Today we are seeing how well the government has been managing our money and still many of the American people want the government to take even more for our health care management while countries that have been employing that system are working to get out of these obligations they cannot meet.

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

the socialist mindset?

nobody@vox.com(ken) — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 13:07:28 -0800

HannahchopsACORN

Wantedposter_monster_397x224

after a exausting one week investigation of the way its local people do buisness acorn has decided that they did nothing wrong.importing illegal immigrants,okay dokey.underage prostitution okay dokey.tax evation,okay dokey

up next on the socailist agenda is putting a bounty on the head of the chamber of commerce.what was his crime? he refused to help obama and his gang of marxists turn the united states into a marxist state,i quess they don't understand that the chamber of commerce is about the free enterprise system,it was sort of like asking your grandmother to go smoke a corncob pipe with you.

are socailist really this blind to their own actions or is it they just don't care,they will jump up and down for months at a time when some republican has a affair,but when underage prostitution is involved they say its ok. when someone says no to socailism they put a $200,000 bounty on his head,but when a congressman has a prostitution service being run out of his office they give him a slap on the wrist and tell him not to do it again.are all socailsts whores,is that why they see nothing wrong with this,all they think they have to do is lay on their back and get paid for it.i've always thought of conservatives as adults and liberals as children,but the more i look at it ,the more i see their way of doing buisness, i think they are just whores.marxist,socailist,communist whores.i really don't think we need a marxist whore in the white house ,in the congress,or anywhere in the united states. there has to be a way to outlaw whores all together. no matter what they call themselves,they are whores,socailist whores.

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

A Lesson on Governments

nobody@vox.com(SuperSparky) — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 21:49:09 -0800

I have noticed lately that a lot of people do not know or understand the differences in governmental systems. Many do not understand the governmental system set up by our founding fathers to give us freedom. Frequently it is called a "Democracy", which is incorrect, and thank God!

Here's a simple video that pretty much explains governmental systems. It doesn't ask you to pick or choose between them, it just explains them.

I ask everyone to pay special attention to the last couple minutes of the video and see if you can draw some modern day parallels.

The American Form of Government.

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

English Balls, Eco-Snitches & Filipino Whores

nobody@vox.com(epistolizer) — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 04:12:34 -0800

British Balls calls for mandatory sex education. The Secretary of Education there has announced that students over the age of 15 can no longer be exempt from compulsory instruction regarding human procreation and physical relationships. The parents of students failing to report to these classes could be fined or prosecuted.

Rosie O'Donnel denounced Glenn Beck as a carnival barker. If that's the case, then as a lesbian, wouldn't she be the bearded lady?

Cheryl Crowe to be at National Christmas tree lighting. Wonder if this witch flew into town on a single sheet of toilet paper.

Are you morally obligated to obey a command from government that is not based upon any established law? That is the conundrum faced by a Perkaise, Pennsylvania woman who received a call from local authorities asking her not to dry her laundry on the clothesline and anonymous written threats from neighbors saying the practice made the COMMUNITY look like trailer trash. If these liberals are such prudes that they can’t stand the sight of someone’s unmentionables dangling in the breeze on private property, perhaps they should go back to the inner city slums they fled from even though they will continue to insist upon how much they embrace diversity.

The entire fiasco leading to the Kelo decision may have been for no other reason than to show that the power existed to do it. After demolishing the homes snatched from their owners, Pfizer has announced it has changed its mind and no longer wants to expand its complex on the disputed parcel.

With the government ready to seize control of a significant percentage of the U.S. economy in the form of pending healthcare reform legislation, it seems representatives of every form known of tyranny want their specific cut. And spiritual charlatans are no exception. Believing pain and sickness do not really exist, Christian Scientists want to be reimbursed for praying away something that is not even there to begin with.

A couple at a Philadelphia restaurant was hauled away in handcuffs for refusing to pay the mandatory tip over lousy service. If it is required, it should not be called a "tip" but rather a tax or a surcharge. Often the onus about tips is placed on the customer in terms that, without such financial outlays, the laborers in such establishments could end up being economically deprived. Why shouldn't this be the proprietors responsibility? Say what you want, but one never has to put up with this nonsense in WalMart or MacDonalds.

OneNewsNow.com reports that Sodomite terrorists are threatening violence against churches and Pro-life leaders if Obama does live up to the expectations of gays and lesbians. The online comments have be forwarded to the FBI for investigation.

Environmentalists claim global warming is forcing more Pilipino women into prostitution. However, it is not because they are hot and bothered. It is argued changes in climate decrease agricultural opportunities, compelling rural women into the cities in search of employment. Though potentially a lamentable development, this is frankly yet another attempt to guilt Americans into compliance with the radical environmentalist agenda. For aren't the ones guilty of this transgression firstly any criminals that impress women into this practice against their will and secondarily those women that freely turn to this way of life rather than pursue more honest work, and the men that make this activity financially worthwhile.

One lone gunmen has nearly toppled the United States in terms of exposing the inability of the nation’s leaders to classify his deed as an act of Islamist terror. TV shrink Dr. Phil excused the mass murder on the grounds that the perpetrator may have been under considerable stress. One must ask will the same sense of clemency be extended to wife-beaters as well?

One might respond what else would one expect from an Oprah lackey like Dr. Phil because, if he does not give lip service to her religious universalism, he’s likely to find himself without a job in the spotlight. However, one would expect a bit more out of Fox News. Yet Shepard Smith exhibited one of the most spineless displays in the American media when he went on and on about not wanting to reveal the assailants name until absolutely necessary

The response from officials in government regarding the Foot Hood atrocity has been little better. President Barack Hussein Obama has yet to call Nadal Malik Hasan mmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmm mmmmmm a terrorist. Army Chief of Staff General George Casey basically said in an interview that diversity in the military is more important than the lives of U.S. service personnel. Secretary Janet Napolitano speaking before an Arab audience in Abu Dhabi vowed not to crack down on subversive terrorists but to make the protection of Islamic sensitivities her top priority.

The White House adorned itself with a giant red ribbon for World Aids Day. Will there be a Christmas wreath this large placed on the front of the White House? If I was a bookie, I'd start a betting pool as to whether or not Obama will be able to say the name Jesus at the tree lighting ceremony. More importantly, will there be other decorations in honor of diseases that actually claim more victims but whose sufferers are less likely to throw hissy-fits if the world does not stand around and applaud how they came down with the affliction?

by Frederick Meekins

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

Are You An American or Borg? [Updated]

nobody@vox.com(SuperSparky) — Sat, 26 Sep 2009 10:23:37 -0700

Locutus of The Borg Collective

Yes, you read that title right. For those of you that do not follow the Star Trek universe, the Borg is an empire of cybernetic (part alive, part machine) organisms that travel the galaxy "assimilating" other societies (against their will) to benefit the Borg collective. In the process, they strip each person of their individuality in favor of the "good of the collective" which makes the knowledge of that society part of the Borg collective. They now think as one giant organism instead of individuals. The loss of individuals, or "drones", is insignificant unless it significantly endangers the collective. The individual just becomes a number, a drone without self thought and operates (and lives) at the mercy of the collective.

In the Star Trek universe, the Borg are the Federation's (and Earth's) greatest threat and enemy. The Borg show no mercy and adapt quickly to all resistance to their weaponry and advances. The Borg does not negotiate. They come in and take, and consider you insignificant. They are the living realization of Bill Maher's philosophy "...He just needs to drag them to it. Like I just said, they're stupid. Just drag them to this..." The Borg consider themselves "progressive perfection" and everyone else insignificant.

The Borg usually have a lot of success and insignificant hurdles (resistance) with assimilating other societies. Humans, however, are proving to be quite difficult to assimilate. Their typical tactics haven't worked against the humans' ingenuity and tenacity. So the Borg realize that some psychological warfare is going to be necessary to achieve their goals. So they capture the Federation's most trusted (and famous) officer, the Captain of their flagship called "Enterprise". They assimilate him and give him a new name, quite unusual for the Borg to appoint a drone an individual role. The picture you see, is him. His new name is "Locutus" and he is now "ambassador" to the humans, except he isn't negotiating. His role is to demoralize the humans and to use his knowledge of humans and technology against the humans. He knows about weaponry, battle tactics, secret codes, etc.

US Constitution

So, how the heck does all of this relate to the title of this article? The United States of American was a new idea. For centuries, the common thought was that the "good of the crown" or the "good of the people" or "the good of the nation" etc. was placed above the individual. There was always a small group of "elites" that thought themselves greater and smarter than the populace, and ruled as such, usually with a disregard for that populace. With a few minor exceptions and spurts here and there, the world remained stagnant and without much significant advancement. The occasional "spurts" as I mentioned before happened during times of governmental experiments which gave individuals rights and the ability to improve themselves. This happened with the Greeks, the Romans and the Anglo Saxons. These societies became great because people were not only encouraged to have good ideas, but were allowed to profit from them. Citizens had representatives they had elected to determine the law. Sure, these societies were flawed, but they had the distinction of recognizing the individual. Rome fell for two reasons, both related. The people kept expecting more "free" handouts from the government because their representatives became more corrupt by learning that if they promised free stuff, they would get elected. This free-loading got so bad that it was very easy for someone desiring power to gain it as emperor by promising he'd "fix" everything and give people more. Well, what really happened was people lost their individuality and their freedom. Only a select elite around the new emperor got all the riches and everyone else worked hard to support their opulent lifestyle. Citizens eventually lost everything that made them unique from non-citizens. The government couldn't support itself as the "rich" were now generally just government officials, and the people had no more incentive to support them. Rome fell under its own weight.

I see this happening right now in the USA. The new idea of the individual becoming the most important thing pulled the world out of perpetual stagnation. In a little over 200 years, the world went from horses and buggies, outhouses, bad hygene, etc. to cars, cell phones, computers, landing on the moon etc. All because of a new idea that made each person important, which had the side effect of making society better.

Now we have a group of Borg, with their own Locutus (Obama, except he's a willing participant) wanting to assimilate everyone into the Marxist collective. When you think you can help the individual by disregarding it, then you're fooling yourself. The United States Constitution, what it says, how it says it, and those that wrote it, changed the world for the better. The so-called "Progressive Movement" is a lie. There is nothing "progressive" about Marxism or so-called "collectivism". All it has ever brought a people and nation is stagnation and misery. Sure, everyone (except government officials) are equal ... equally poor. Nobody has an incentive to invent or to improve themselves. Why? The government will just confiscate it and pat them on the head or give them a medal. They will still be living in their generic one bedroom apartment like everyone else.

Why do people keep getting suckered into Marxism? Don't they understand that human beings are naturally freedom loving and competitive? Don't they understand that individuals are not equal? Some are smarter, some are prettier, some are more athletic, some are artistic and creative, some are great thinkers and inventers, etc. The notion of "equal" is preposterous! The US Declaration of Independence said instead that people have EQUAL OPPORTUNITY, equal amount of God-given rights, and that they have the responsibility to take care of and support themselves and not allow some bureaucrat to dictate their lives. Is this so hard to grasp?? This isn't something that is "living and breathing" as progressives will claim. This is a concrete truth and fact. The truth being: society benefits the most when the individual is its most important asset. This isn't something that changes or morphs over the years; it is concrete and steadfast. Martin Luther King Junior understood and appreciated this too, as his speeches were full of such ideas that everyone had the right to better themselves, everyone had the right to be judged by the content of their character and not the color of their skin.

Any structural engineer will tell you that the most important "floor" of any building is the foundation. It supports the whole building. If you disregard the importance of the foundation, the whole building will collapse. The foundation here, is the individual, the building is society, and the top floor is government. Marxism concentrates on the building and disregards the individual floors and the foundation. It makes the strongest floor the top floor by putting equal stress and weight on all of the floors. A collapse is inevitable as it has no foundation.

I love how the trumpeters of Marxism don't actually practice it themselves. Hollywood elites fly around in jets, living a life of opulence, catered to by maids and butlers, eating the best foods, driving the best cars, the ultimate examples of capitalism, yet decrying the very thing that gives them their riches in favor of a tyrant like Mao Se Tung, Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro, Chez Guevara, or even Josef Stalin! Some will even say if Hitler hadn't been psychotic by massacring millions of Jews, his government was perfect! Noting that "Nazi" meant "Nationalsozialist" (or "National Socialist" in English, it's not an acronym but an abbreviation) a member of the "Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei" (or "National Socialist German Workers Party" in English), the ultimate example of Fascism and socialism.

This pontification and claims of being smarter than the little people (Bill Maher said "...Americans are stupid...") is what the world lived with for centuries. The "new" ideas the USA brought to the world of personal responsibility and opportunity made it better. The ideas of Marxism, spreading the wealth, having the government take care of you, etc. are the same old song and dance of those wanting POWER over the centuries. It's just been repackaged and given a new name. Today, it has been given the new name of "Hope and Change". Which is ironically not related to those words.

People, don't you realize what you are doing? What those in our government are trying to do to this nation will have only one effect, and it will not be the improvement of society. It will set us back hundreds of years. There will be another period of stagnation the world has seen before.

You cannot benefit society by rendering the individual insignificant. Society benefits when the individual is free to live as he or she chooses to live it. The United States of America is PROOF of this. The former USSR and many nations of history, is proof of the flawed design of society first or the intellectual knows best ideas.

These Marxist, socialist, pro-Mao, pro-Chavez, pro-Castro people living in mansions, going on expensive vacations, wearing expensive clothes saying "you need to sacrifice more and pay more taxes", "spread the wealth around", and pay for someone else's mistakes have no thoughts nor cares for you. They think they are better than you. They think you need them, when you only need yourself. Do you realize how much money capitalism has made for Michael Moore and Sean Penn, yet they constantly put down the very system that makes them filthy rich?! Hypocrites! You have the likes of Michelle and Barack Obama, Van Jones, Dick Durbin, Rohm Emmanuel etc. saying you need to spread the wealth around, yet they live in the lap of luxury! Hey! You first!

The problem is not capitalism. It's greed and corruption. Capitalism worked quite well for the past 250 years. Greed and corruption of our government has caused the natural balances of the market to become blocked. Isn't it ironic that the very group of people that brought our economy to this dire position have the balls to claim they know how to fix it? These people should be in jail, not in the halls of government. What the Obama administration and his supporters in government are doing are treason, plain and simple. Their plan is to collapse the US economy so they can replace it with a global Marxist economy, a "Utopia" in their eyes. The so-called "stimulus" was written by a Marxist lobbying group called the "Apollo Group". You know, the thing nobody read before they voted on it. How can a Marxist group possibly want to write anything to rescue a free economy? How can anyone quadruple our national debt in mere days and not want our economy to collapse? It's called "assimilation" and they think resistance is futile.

So, how's that "Hope and Change" going for you right now? What happens when there is no more wealth to spread around? Who will pay for your social programs then?

Here's a thought:

Be responsible for your own life
Earn your own living
Be responsible for your own medical care. You'll find medicine was a lot cheaper before insurance and medicare.
Understand you have a right to succeed
Understand you have a right to fail
Be charitable and give a hand up not a hand out. Pull people out of the mud and don't just pay them enough so they don't sink (like welfare programs do).
If you don't speak the language, learn it. Success requires communication and not your refusal to learn or laziness to be catered to.
Protect yourself and your neighbors. Do not rely on the government.
Understand that what your neighbor owns he earned. Stop comparing yourself to someone else either positively or negatively. Instead of taking away what someone else earned, how about making your success greater than theirs?
Judge people by their abilities, talents, and content of their character. Understand it's the differences in people that make them special and unique.
Be prepared in all things. Do not expect the government to baby you.
The government is there to protect you from enemies and criminals, to ensure free economic trade, and to make sure your freedom and liberties are never infringed upon. Yes, that is what it says in the Constitution, nothing else.
Understand that EVERY SINGLE RACE HAS BEEN IN BONDAGE AND SLAVERY throughout human history (even whites, study "Rome"). No single race has the right to claim they are special and deserve special treatment in being "former slaves". Understand that YOU are not a slave and have every right and capability to succeed. Understand that those continually labeling you the victim are modern day slave owners.
Understand that actions have consequences, either good or bad. Justice requires a punishment, even if the offender is "reformed". A truly "reformed" offender would understand this. Compassion makes sure justice is accurate for the crime itself and not anything after. Forgiving someone does not mean denying justice.
Understand it is the individual that makes the nation great, literally. People with freedom and money tend to travel and spend. People recognizing this will make goods and services to spend it on by hiring people to do it.... and so it builds. People without such incentives do nothing as they are not allowed to, and if they do, government will just take it away.

Read and post comments | Send to a friend