Jumat, 29 Februari 2008
This month's classic is The Secret of the League, by Earnest Bramah. Secret celebrated its 100 year anniversary in 2007.
1907 (1995 edition)
Secret of the League is one of three old novels that I refer to as "Ayn Rand relics." Together with The Driver (1922) and Calumet K (1904), Secret provides clues as to the origins of Ayn Rand's later novels.
Secret of the League takes place between 1915 and 1918. Being written in 1907, the book has nothing to do with World War I. Instead, Bramah writes of the takeover of the English parliament by socialists, who immediately pass extreme socialist legislation.
(click to enlarge)
Secret dramatizes the creative solution adopted by Salt, the main character, and his friends. The solution is unique and is not beyond the reach of ordinary individuals.
I first read this book in 2004 just before I began blogging (the main character's name and the year of publication inspired my screen name). I describe Secret here because it begins to appear that we may need some unique alternative (and I don't mean a third party candidate) as a result of this year's election. The candidates for President in 2008 appear poised to expand the already unsustainable entitlement programs, increase taxes and choose judges that have no inclination to recognize the government's true constitutional limitations. Our thinking will have to be creative as we face a long era of darkness at the hands of an increasingly socialist government.
The book is far more than a "how to" manual. Secret provides a humorous look at socialist government, pandering politicians, union political pressure and other such plagues. We read with amusement as leftist government officials find themselves helpless as their spending programs leave their government destitute and powerless.
Regardless of whether we implement Salt's ideas, the fate of the government in Secret may well be the fate of our own government. Our own government may collapse under the weight of unsustainable entitlement programs. The only question is "when?" In Secret of the League, Salt and his allies merely found a way to make sure that a large faction of the country was ready to pick up the pieces when the collapse arrived and to remove from office those who were responsible for the debacle. If we do nothing, we will be helpless when social security, medicare, (reparations ??) et cetera drive government and the financial markets to ruin.
I do not reveal specifics of Salt's actions so as not to spoil the plot. For those that have read Atlas Shrugged, Salt took a different course than Galt. Salt's plan required less technology, less cooperation from powerful individuals and less disruption of the lives of his allies. But Salt's plan clearly foreshadowed Ayn Rand's theme in Atlas. Ayn Rand made the plot better and more comprehensive, added her own ideas and provided more thorough philosophical justification for the actions of the heroes [although Bramah provides a fair amount of philosophical justification as well]. There is no dialogue or language from Secret that was repeated in Atlas. Salt's plot in Secret is enjoyable in its own right and also because the reader will recognize the seed of Ayn Rand's story from a half century later.
The few technological aspects of the book provide for additional enjoyment, as the reader will recognize a crude precursor to modern day faxes and e-mails. Bramah also anticipates the ease and availability of modern air travel, but in a different form. Air travel was in its infancy when Bramah wrote Secret of the League.
If nothing else, Secret of the League will help the reader understand that socialism is not inevitable, invincible or irreversible. The book will further reinforce other writers that have opposed socialism and modern politicians that warn of the conseqences for ourselves if we allow the government to continue on its present course.
Kamis, 28 Februari 2008
More importantly, climate data over the past year indicates we may be facing global cooling instead of global warming:
Over the past year, anecdotal evidence for a cooling planet has exploded. China has its coldest winter in 100 years. Baghdad sees its first snow in all recorded history. North America has the most snowcover in 50 years, with places like Wisconsin the highest since record-keeping began. Record levels of Antarctic sea ice, record cold in Minnesota, Texas, Florida, Mexico, Australia, Iran, Greece, South Africa, Greenland, Argentina, Chile -- the list goes on and on.
Whenever trends appear that contradict the global warming religion, the left argues that anecdotal evidence is of limited value. But such arguments run only one way:
Alarmists argue that such a short term temperature change is insignificant compared to trends over the last century. However, they change their tune when temperatures are higher than normal for a day. After a few mild days in January 2007, "Good Morning America" anchor Diane Sawyer questioned if global warming is the culprit. "Today" co-host Meredith Vieira went further wondering if we are "all gonna die."H/T Newsbusters
Buckley's response ". . . and as to the reference you make to wives and call-girls, I can only welcome the news that you have finally learned to distinguish between the two."
from William F. Buckley, Jr., Patron Saint of the Conservatives, by John B. Judis, pp. 211-212.
[click here for yesterday's lengthy tribute to WFB.]
Rabu, 27 Februari 2008
National Review founder William Buckley died today.
Buckley was a throwback to the era when the MSM/DNC enjoyed a virtual monopoly on information. I first discovered Buckley in the early 1980's. At that time, I was treated to an almost non-stop barrage of twisted news presentations, distorted facts, repeats of Democrat talking points, etc. from the nightly news and the pages of newspapers. Once a week, William Buckley (and a very few others) would have one chance to rebut the entire MSM/DNC in the confined space of an opinion column on the editorial page of some newspapers. Even though it was hardly a fair fight, Buckley's (and others') few inches of weekly space was more than a match for the daily rants of the NYT, AP, WaPo, John Chancellor, Walter Cronkite, etc. Buckley kept the conservative light glowing until the New Media could begin fanning the flames at the end of the 1980's.
Conservatives born after 1975 cannot fully appreciate what it was like to live in the era before the New Media existed. Buckley was one voice that helped make that era bearable.
Ann Coulter posts some anecdotes and quotes here, including Buckley's references to Gore Vidal as a "queer" and a "fag."
Michelle Malkin posts more detail.
Joe Sobran shared his memories in May, 2006, when Buckley's emphysema was announced:
Over the years I came to know another side of Bill. When I had serious troubles, he was a generous friend who did everything he could to help me without being asked. And I wasn’t the only one. I gradually learned of many others he’d quietly rescued from adversity. He’d supported a once-noted libertarian in his destitute old age, when others had forgotten him. He’d helped two pals of mine out of financial difficulties. And on and on. Everyone seemed to have a story of Bill’s solicitude. When you told your own story to a friend, you’d hear one from him. It was as if we were all Bill Buckley’s children.
It went far beyond sharing his money. One of Bill’s best friends was Hugh Kenner, the great critic who died two years ago. Hugh was hard of hearing, and once, after a 1964 dinner with Hugh and Charlie Chaplin, Bill scolded Hugh for being too stubborn to use a hearing aid. Here were the greatest comedian of the age and the greatest student of comedy, and Hugh had missed much of the conversation! Later Hugh’s wife told me how grateful Hugh had been for that scolding. Nobody else would have dared speak to her husband that way. Only a true friend would. If Bill saw you needed a little hard truth, he’d tell you, even if it pained him to say it.
I once spent a long evening with one of Bill’s old friends from Yale, whose name I won’t mention. He told me movingly how Bill stayed with him to comfort him when his little girl died of brain cancer. If Bill was your friend, he’d share your suffering when others just couldn’t bear to. What a great heart — eager to spread joy, and ready to share grief!
In another recent column, Sobran compared the careers of Buckley and Ayn Rand (and even Garet Garrett). While I disagree with much of what Sobran has written in recent years (especially about the war), his comparison in that article is interesting to every student of the history of the conservative and libertarian movements:
When Soviet Communism finally collapsed in 1991,
NATIONAL REVIEW felt that its mission was accomplished.
It didn't notice that the America it had set out to save
from Communism no longer existed. Say what you will about
Ayn Rand, I can't imagine her making such a mistake.
This Sobran column contains more details on Buckleys disputes with other conservatives in later years.
I have read several Buckley books over the years, the following of which I endorse:
Ann Coulter has written that this book "proved that normal people didn't have to wait for the Venona Papers to be declassified to see that the Democratic Party was collaborating with fascists. The book -- and the left's reaction thereto -- demonstrated that liberals could tolerate a communist sympathizer, but never a Joe McCarthy sympathizer."
I read "God and Man at Yale" while in college, before I could run to the New Media as a refuge from campus leftism. This book probably provided generations of pre-New Media students with the reinforcement they needed to withstand the barrage of leftism from their college professors.
Many conservatives await a new Reagan to rescue the Republican party from the moderates that now ignore and do not understand capitalism, history, freedom, the rule of law, etc. Before a new Reagan can emerge, I believe we will need a new Buckley - one who will be willing to maintain conservative principles in the absence of access to power and who can energize a new generation of intellectuals to resist the pressure of the modern leftward movement in all major institutions.
The William Buckley that wrote books and published NR in the wilderness in the years before the election of Ronald Reagan provided empowerment is the example that I fear modern conservatives will have to follow in the coming decades.
Selasa, 26 Februari 2008
Senin, 25 Februari 2008
thrift stores in Michigan and
and dances religiously every thursday
to revolve around this shirt and kick.
describes his style as being prepared
for lasers in the jungle.
with Helsinki street fashion.
Christian singer from Sweeden with the
most amazing vintage jacket I've seen
in a long time.
high fashion bullshit but instead
dresses like this. pretty cute i say.
Alex-20 says he gets his fashion sense
from the movie Sandlot.
Taylor-24 is studying fashion
design at Emily Griffith.
Colby-24 says her spring 08' theme
is Tokyo popstar.
picture taken but was nice enough to
stop and let us.
ass shit mixed with sodo (southern
Minggu, 24 Februari 2008
Their star quality was also, as noted above, mostly a giant bluff.
Mark Steyn - 2-23-08
Jumat, 22 Februari 2008
Peg Noonan 2-22-08
What the MSM/DNC did not tell us about the NIU killer and the hollow book guy; Benjamin Baines; Steven Kazmierczak; Rasmieyh Abdelnabi
The MSM/DNC did not dwell on the RoP connection.
A dry run?
In the case of the NIU killer, the first thing I thought of when I heard the initial report of the shooting was the Religion of Peace. But then I heard that he was a liberal sociology major and I dropped the RoP angle. But now Debbie Schlussel reports on the RoP connection:
Unlike most of us, Steve started his research from day one, reading every book he could find on Hamas. He'd give me a status report when we saw each other in class. Steve said that his perception of Hamas changed with all the research he did.quoting Rasmieyh Abdelnabi in the Chicago Sun-Times
We did not hear about Kazmierczak's affinity for Arabic and Hamas because the MSM/DNC is too busy blaming guns and video games. We will never win the war on terror if we cannot identify our enemy.
Kamis, 21 Februari 2008
I thought many times before publishing this video. But the video is already spreading throughout the internet. I don't know whether the story is true.
I recall that Obama became a Senator because someone published scandalous details [supposedly sealed by the court] on the sex life of Obama's opponent [Jeri Ryan's husband]. So I am not shedding a tear about Obama's privacy. The original video is posted at Youtube here. Part of the reason I post it is that Youtube videos have a habit of disappearing.
We will probably never know for sure if the video is true, but that will be for others to decide. If this video discussed the sex life of a Republican, the video would already have been broadcast on television.
More details here.
Visit counter added on March 4, 2008
I wonder if he told his rescuers his little joke.
Even if he doesn't claim a medal, you can bet that he will use this experience as support for his arguments against fighting the war.
I write this out of bitterness and sadness over this disaster that need not have happened. We had the opportunity to support people that the NY Times was not spoonfeeding to us - even after Thompson dropped out. But we took the bait and now the Times has dropped the hammer, just like the polls that suddenly did a 180 last week.
I don't blame the NY Times. We know what the NY Times is and what it does. We should be used to it. [We don't get mad at crocodiles when we swim in the swamp.] I also don't blame the Republicans that have abandoned McCain. That was predictable, having happened many times in Republican primaries over the past 60 years after moderates were foisted on the party by the establishment. I blame those of us who jumped on the McCain bandwagon when Thompson dropped out, thinking McCain was "electable" based on polls or on the fact that the NY Times hadn't torn him a new one yet. You have all but handed the White House to Obama and gift-wrapped Iraq to either (1) Iran or (2) Al Qaeda [or both].
As bloggers, we have become good at remembering what happened yesterday. Let's try to apply that same technique to primary voting in the future (if there is one).
Michelle Malkin posts more details.
Rabu, 20 Februari 2008
The area that is now Bosnia, Kosovo, Serbia etc. was invaded and conquered by the Moslems in the 14th century. Many of the residents were forcibly converted to Islam (much like the former Christian countries of Syria, Egypt and Turkey and the formerly Hindu region of India that is now Pakistan).
Some of the moslem portions of Yugoslavia were allied with the Nazis during WWII, as evidenced by photos of Arafat's uncle reviewing SS troops in Bosnia. When the former Yugoslavia broke up after the death of Tito in the 1980's, the moslem majorities in Kosovo began persecuting the Christian minorities (kind of like Sudan, Lebanon, northern India (now Pakistan) in the 1940's, etc.).
This was another example of Islam pushing its borders outward from the middle east and into Europe. Al Qaeda assisted the Kosovar muslims during our involvement in 1999. We were, de facto, allied with Al Qaeda (and other moslems) in that war. Now we have another moslem country in Europe. The MSM/DNC refuses to explain this conflict in terms of the jihadi implications for all of Europe. Kosovo is now one more launching pad for Islam into Europe as Europe moves toward "Eurabia."
Here are some links -
Here is an article summarizing the current problems in Kosovo.
The end of this article mentions Al Qaeda presence in Kosovo and Bosnia in 2001.
Here is an article on the Al Qaeda - KLA alliance during the 1999 war.
Here is a lengthy post on Islam's conquest of northern India (Pakistan) and current efforts to conquer India.
Arafat's "uncle" and Hitler.
Here is some background on Bosnian muslims allied with the Nazis against the rest of the Yugoslavians in the 1940's.
History of the moslem conquest of Kosovo - 1389 A.D.
As you can see, this problem predates Slobodan Milosevic by about 600 years. The MSM has distracted us from the jihadi threat by focusing on a modern individual - much like they distract us from the War on Terror by demonizing BushCheneyHalliburtonDiebold. If you get lost in the trees, you will never see the jihadi forest. Look at any map of the middle east and the surrounding regions. You will see jihad and islam spreading into southern Russia, Europe, Africa, Asia, the Indian and Pacific Oceans, etc. In each of those places, one can find "bad" people that stand in the jihadis' way and who can be demonized so that we never see the forest.
In 1999, I fully supported the war - not knowing that Kosovo was only a small part of a global problem that had been growing since 600 A.D. Ever since 2001, I have stopped thinking that way.
The problems facing America – unsustainable entitlements, broken borders, nuclearizing enemies – require tough solutions, not gaseous Sesame Street platitudes.
One of the first comments following the online version of this column directly addressed this passage and attepmted to rebut each point:
The problems facing America are not what you disingenuously claim: they are not "unsustainable entitlements" but corporate greed, not "broken borders" but xenophobia, not "nuclearizing enemies" but bullying the world. . .
The point of my quoting from this exchange is to demonstrate what happens when we identify the issues that are destroying the U.S. The Steyn passage is very sobering. The leftist response comes across as silly. When we define the real issues in stark terms, the left is forced to sound silly or cede valuable ground to us.
But instead of focusing on these issues, the GOP presidential campaign will focus on the following "issues":
(1) "me too" on global warming.
(2) "me too" on socializing health care - [but not quite as much as the Democrats]
(3) Obama lacks "the experience."
(4) "me too" on rebuilding New Orleans.
(5) "me too" on "change."
(6) "me too" on fighting corporate "greed."
(7) Our nominee was a war hero.
(8) I want to be the education President.
(9) Etc. Etc.
When Obama starts promising the sun, the moon and the stars, I would rather talk about our unsustainable entitlement programs than try to mimic Obama's promises. We can't outpromise the Democrats. We can only point out the impending doom resulting from decades of already existing social programs.
Selasa, 19 Februari 2008
A raging snow storm that blanketed most of Greece over the weekend also continued into the early morning hours on Monday, plunging the country into sub-zero temperatures. Public transport buses were at a standstill on Monday in the wider Athens area, while ships remained in ports, public services remained closed, and schools and courthouses in the more severely-stricken prefectures were also closed. Scores of villages, mainly on the island of Crete, and in the prefectures of Evia, Argolida, Arcadia, Lakonia, Viotia, and the Cyclades islands were snowed in.
For those of you whose publik skule teeches globul warmin insted of geeogrufee, this is Greece.
If and when Castro dies, I expect the usual MSM/DNC post-mortems on his life. His nearly five decades in control of Cuba will be glorified and whitewashed. His longevity will be trumpeted as an insult to the United States. Matt Lauer's teleprompter will tell us that five (or ten) Presidents tried to get rid of Castro and he survived anyway. Diane Sawyer's teleprompter will tell us of Castro's deep Catholic faith.
Charles Gibson's teleprompter will refer to Castro's Soviet bosses as his "allies."
Katie Couric's teleprompter will remind us that Elian Gonzalez has been safely reunited with his father.
All of the teleprompters will downplay Castro's instigation of revolution in Nicaragua and El Salvador.
I further predicted that no MSM/DNC outlet would mention Castro's assistance to Venezuela's efforts to destablize the rest of Latin America by using secret police disguised as medical doctors.
Even though Castro is not dead (he announced his resignation yesterday), these predictions are coming true. This morning on Today, Andrea Mitchell triumphantly announced that Castro had survived 10 U.S. Presidents, including George W. Bush (even though Bush somehow remains in office). The same people who barely contain their admiration for the fifty years of Castro's dictatorship (and who now urge the end of the embargo even though the dictatorship remains under different leadership) swoon over the candidacy of Barack Obama and the "change" he will bring to the U.S.
Michelle Malkin has more.
As usual, Scrappleface puts it all in perspective:
Experts suggest that as co-presidents of Cuba, Mr. Obama would be the mouthpiece, giving stirring six-hour speeches about the majesty and beauty of poverty in a Communist Utopia, while Mrs. Clinton would work behind the scenes to ensure full agreement with those speeches at all levels of government.
Senin, 18 Februari 2008
Unofficial primary results gave Obama no votes in nearly 80 districts, including Harlem's 94th and other historically black areas - but many of those initial tallies proved to be wildly off the mark, the board said.H/T New York Post
Remember this the next time someone claims that the Republicans suppressed votes in 2000. The Democrats' ability to create a "zero" vote total for Obama in Harlem is not something that we should underestimate. The Democrats have been undermining the electoral process for many years, but this one is as obvious as they have gotten.
In light of Hillary's near total flame-out this primary season, I can only wonder what the true vote total was in 2000 when Hillary "beat" Rick Lazio.
Los Angeles Times - 2-18-08
Minggu, 17 Februari 2008
Barack Obama is waving his arms. The crowd is cheering. … I see Barack Obama, one minute smiling, the people crying his name. I see Barack Obama grab his chest and his eyes widen and his mouth opens, and the crowd screams as Barack Obama, black candidate for the presidency of the United States of America, falls to the ground, dead, an assassin's bullet inside him.H/T Mark Steyn
Mark Steyn mentions numerous examples of leftists advocating the assassination of President Bush. To those examples I will add Bill Maher's explanation of why the world would be better off if terrorists killed Dick Cheney and Fox Network's "Family Guy's" frequent "jokes" about the assassination of Bush, Cheney and others.
I can only conclude that the left wants to rally its followers to commit violence. The Obama assassination fantasy is meant to further that goal, as leftist readers are supposed to become outraged and commit violence of their own choosing in retaliation. The same people who want to see Bush assassinated are also hoping to see Obama assassinated, but for different reasons. The left is obsessed with the concept of political violence - even if it is their own candidates that are being assassinated.
Leftists favor assassination for the same reason they favor socialism. Both of these concepts promote chaos and destruction. The left desires the destruction of the American political system. The constant cycle of assassination and reprisal that the left craves will serve that purpose, just as greater socialist controls will serve the purpose of wrecking the economy.
In reality, the only real possibility for an Obama assassination will occur if Obama names Hillary to be his running mate - in which case Obama will be killed as soon as he takes office, after which his death will be ruled a suicide by the official inquest.
Mark Steyn - February 16, 2008
Sabtu, 16 Februari 2008
Kamis, 14 Februari 2008
Rabu, 13 Februari 2008
It appears now that Hillary cannot win the nomination. Commenters at Politico.com have done the math. Even if she wins PA, Texas and Ohio, she will not have the necessary delegate total to win the nomination, unless she maneuvers some convention trick that will leave the party in disarray. The piling on has begun. Writers are finally acknowledging the obvious. James Carville has sounded a pessimistic note about her chances.
Tonight, Drudge posts an advance excerpt from the New York Times' Thursday edition:
NYT THURSDAY: Clinton's advisers acknowledged it would be difficult to catch up in race for pledged delegates even if she succeeded in winning 3 states on which she is most pinning her hopes: Ohio and Texas in March and Pennsylvania in April. Dem party's rules would be decided obstacle in efforts to catch up to Obama before voting phase of nominating process ends later in spring... Developing...
These type of statements are not made unless the candidate is doomed. Hillary can see the handwriting on the wall too. My prediction is that Hillary will not wait for the convention. Rather than endure months of defeat and piling on, Hillary will withdraw from the race prior to the convention. The Pennsylvania primary, even if Hillary has not withdrawn by that point, will be an anti-climax. I will go out on a limb and predict that Hillary will withdraw prior to the Pennsylvania primary on April 22. Either the smaller primaries will outweigh Hillary's gains in Ohio and Texas, or Hillary will lose one of those big states.
[Of course all of this analysis depends on MSM/DNC reports and insiders.]
When the end comes, there will be endless discussion of why her campaign failed, with endless explanations focusing on white noise. The real question is not why Hillary's campaign failed, but why it ever seemed real in the first place. Hillary is one big nothing. She has no accomplishments. She is devoted to one thing -- her own advancement and ambition. If she were a man with no connection to Bill Clinton, she would be indistinguishable from ordinary bureacrat wannabes. Her candidacy and career have been entirely dependent on MSM/DNC sycophancy. She has turned herself into a Potemkin village.
Peg Noonan touched upon this idea in December, but only in relation to this campaign instead of Hillary's entire life:
This thought occurs that Hillary Clinton's entire campaign is, and always was, a Potemkin village, a giant head fake, a haughty facade hollow at the core. That she is disorganized on the ground in Iowa, taken aback by a challenge to her invincibility, that she doesn't actually have an A team, that her advisers have always been chosen more for proven loyalty than talent, that her supporters don't feel deep affection for her. That she's scrambling chaotically to catch up, with surrogates saying scuzzy things about Barack Obama and drug use, and her following up with apologies that will, as always, keep the story alive. That her guru-pollster, the almost universally disliked Mark Penn, has, according to Newsday, become the focus of charges that he has "mistakenly run Clinton as a de facto incumbent" and that the top officials on the campaign have never had a real understanding of Iowa.
Peg Noonan was right, but not just about Iowa. The above paragraph is a microcosm of who Hillary is. Hillary spent her entire public life in a series of simultaneous evasions/publicity stunts. If the term "evasions/publicity stunts" seems like a contradiction, consider the following :
- In 1994, she made headlines because she wore pink to a Friday afternoon press conference timed to avoid tough questions on Whitewater.
- Ten years ago almost to the day, she created the label "vast right wing conspiracy" before a fawning Matt Lauer who could do no more than toss her softballs.
- In 1993, she appeared in a fashion magazine photo shoot while her health care task force attempted to dispose of our freedoms in secret.
- She placed her name on a large autobiography that reaped great publicity while saying nothing of substance [the innocuousness of which was later used against her when she attempted to claim credit for accomplishments that were not mentioned therein].
- Hillary's autobiography sold many copies while saying nothing, at the same time that her actions more closely reflected the plans touched on in the college thesis that she tried to hide for so many years.
- She notoriously decried the "politics of personal destruction" while plotting in secret to destroy enemies.
This is not simply a list of scandals - although she has plenty of those in her background. Hillary's public life has been a series of empty gestures, spin and window dressing, all of which exist side-by-side with something Hillary needed to evade. She has spent her life evading and hiding. She gives new meaning to the phrase "hidden in plain sight." Few past presidential candidates have been so well known yet so little understood.
Years from now, we may wonder how she got so close to the seat of power. Her opponents may wonder what they were so afraid of for so long. In fact, her power existed purely as a projection of MSM/DNC spin and the self-fulfilling prophecy of polls. It is only in this age where so many wait to be told what to think that a Hillary could appear to prosper for so long. Only after decades of the welfare state could a large portion of the population be rendered so pliant that a candidacy based on smoke and mirrors would seem viable.
This is what socialism is really all about. Socialism is not merely an economic theory or a dictatorial type of government. Socialism implies the remaking of the individual in a way that wipes out his very individuality. Socialism prevents us from acting or thinking without the sanction of the crowd. Socialism takes the most private activities and makes a public spectacle out of them. The sexual revolution is one of socialism's greatest accomplishments. Sex has been taken out of the privacy of one's bedroom and made into a public commodity, where monogamy is treated as old-fashioned and "free love" has reshaped our lives. In the same way, the choice of candidates has been socialized. Choice, itself, has become a communal process. Polls could not retain their power to create bandwagon effects in a nonsocialized society. "Focus groups" instead of "focus individuals" are candidates' tools of choice. It is not merely our doctors that the left wants to socialize - it is our minds.
Hillary is not the real villain here. It is our own tendency to support the inevitable winner that is the villain. It is our own desire to gravitate toward power - or the appearance of power - that is to blame. Rather than analyze Hillary's debate strategy, we should remember every time we asked "can he/she win?" instead of "what does the candidate believe?".
It is our own willingness to follow a trend that encourages those who would claim ownership of that trend. In the end, we can see that Hillary was foisted upon us by those who took advantage of our own "follow-the-leader" mentality. If we ever learn that we can say "no" without wondering whether others are saying "no" too, we will be immune to the Hillary's of the world.
It took 16 years for us to acknowledge that the emporer has no clothes. We will not have that much time when the next "Hillary" comes along.
Another thought occurred to me that is also unlikely to succeed, but worth considering. I recently remembered the 1980 Democrat convention, in which Ted Kennedy tried a parliamentary manuever to undo Jimmy Carter's delegate victories during the primaries:
Kennedy came into the Democratic convention at Madison Square Garden in New York City with 1,225 delegates to Carter's 1,981 and 122 uncommitted. Kennedy's only chance to wrest the nomination from Carter, who had enough delegates to win, was to pass an "open rule" motion.
Joe Trippi was on the convention floor the evening of Aug. 11, 1980, marshalling the Kennedy delegations from Texas and Utah. He remembers the deciding vote as "the robot rule vote," which came after an hour-long debate that played out in front of a prime time television audience. The debate was over whether delegates should have to vote for the candidate they'd been pledged for, or have an "open" vote during which they could pick Kennedy or Carter, Trippi recalled in an interview. The back story being that the economic and international political situation had deteriorated between the time most people voted and the time of the convention, opening the door to Kennedy, who was billed as a change candidate. "It went all the way down to the wire," said Trippi, who was an adviser to Edwards' 2008 campaign.
Kennedy had no real basis to undo the delegate commitments except for the fact that the domestic and foreign situation had grown worse since each of the primaries. That was a flimsy pretext not founded in law or party rules. I can recall the controversy leading up to that convention, in which numerous Democrat elected officials spoke out one way or the other. I recall Robert Byrd speaking in favor of the "open convention" motion, even though he professed to support Jimmy Carter on the ultimate nomination battle. I also recall Jimmy Carter repeatedly denouncing the idea of a convention decided in "smoke filled rooms" instead of on the basis of the primary votes.
Ted Kennedy addresses the convention - August 12, 1980
I suggest that we try the same manuever here. I am not familiar with RNC rules. But this motion would not depend on RNC rules. It would depend on the idea that the RNC cannot nominate someone who does not represent Republican policies or positions, especially where such nomination results from victories in which the nominee received no more than 35% of the vote. That is no more flimsy than Ted Kennedy's argument in 1980, and Kennedy was treated seriously at the time.
This move would provide the ultimate irony against the man who, behind the scenes, used the gang of 14 to derail the Bush administration's judicial nominees and who, with the help of Ted Kennedy behind the scenes, kept trying to resurrect amnesty despite overwhelming public opposition.
This is a desparation move and probably destined to go down in flames, but the Republic is at stake. As I wrote last week:
Because the stakes are so high, I am not yet ready to declare the Republic dead yet. Most of us are suffocating inside that coffin that is now being nailed shut. Once the Republic is dead, it is not coming back. More than 1800 years elapsed between the death of Rome's republic (@ 48 B.C.) and the birth of the American Republic (1776). I can not wait that long for the rebirth of freedom somewhere in the world.
We cannot give up the fight now or even after the convention or the election itself. We won't know that we have lost for sure until the day (in the now not too distant future) that we receive official notice of which government medical facility we must now use and where to redeem our now worthless dollars for the new "revalued" currency and which government agency will now have custody of our children, etc.
Subfreezing temperatures will continue into the mid morning hours with ice accumulations greater than a quarter of an inch possible.
These weather posts of mine are among the most boring items I have ever posted. But the MSM/DNC has placed us in the position of having to repeat the obvious over and over again. The MSM/DNC almost seems to take pleasure in denying the obvious, so we must repeat the truth continuously so that we don't forget our own experiences in the barrage of propaganda.
Click here for a reminder of some of the weather we endured last year at this time.
Selasa, 12 Februari 2008
I try also to tie in concurrent, unrelated events as memory aids, like major sporting events:
Without the Ice Bowl (or other event by which to remember a bitter winter), we would forget that a major cold spell occurred at that time. We would be left with only vague memories of winters past and MSM/DNC drumbeats about global warming. Each year's bitter weather would fade into the same memory hole as Bill Clinton's sale of nuclear weapon technology to China or Islamic terrorism.
Today, the "Potomac Primary" is taking place, in which voters in Virginia, Maryland and D.C. take part. Severe snow and cold weather is hampering voters' efforts to elect a candidate that will solve "global warming."
Click here for the National Weather Service advisory. Years from now, as we remember the election that put the first George Soros agent into the White House, we can remember the conditions in which voters went to the polls.
Meanwhile, schools are closed and roads are littered with cars from Illinois to Indiana to Kentucky to West Virginia and Ohio.
A record for cold has been set in northern Minnesota.
Madison, Wisconsin has seen its snowiest winter on record.
A winter storm warning has been posted in Pittsburgh and throughout Pennsylvania.
Previous - China, 2008.
McCain used the institute to promote his political agenda and provide compensation to key campaign operatives between elections.
The ability to pay campaign operatives between elections is key, as fundraising is difficult during "off" years. The candidate that maintains a campaign staff and conducts campaign activities during the supposedly quiet "off" years has an advantage and a head start over others. This is especially true for a candidate with national ambitions as opposed to state or local candidates. State or local candidates can always use their official staff for political activities (even though they are not supposed to). But it is much more difficult for a Senator to use his government paid staff to coordinate campaign activities nationwide.
One question this raises is, why was Soros' connection to McCain not raised before McCain became the presumptive nominee? I know why the MSM/DNC did not raise this issue. But I am asking why conservatives did not raise this point until now. The WND article lists those few conservatives that discussed this issue prior to 2008. The article also lists the salaried McCain staffers that interlock the Reform Institute and some of the funding sources for the Institute.
If we are destined for a George Soros funded president regardless of whether McCain or Obama (or Hillary (if we are pretending she is still viable)) wins, then there is no point in supporting McCain. At least with a Democrat, Soros' control will be open and susceptible to opposition.
With Obama in office, we will have one enemy - the Soros funded Obama socialist tyranny. But with McCain holding the White House, we will also have to fight confused Republicans within our own ranks who cannot bring themselves to strike out at the Soros-Republican administration. This internal battle will be constant and will paralyze our attempts to rid the country of Soros' foreign influence.
There is no real solution at this point, but this is dilemma we have given ourselves by nominating an open borders "moderate."
Their battle cry is, as ever, "Let's support the lesser evil!
We're realists! We've got nowhere else to go!" And they will
wind up, as ever, gaining nothing. Backing the "lesser evil"
means only delaying defeat. It never means victory. A string
of "lesser evils" going back to Richard Nixon has only
resulted in entrenched tyranny. Liberals haven't had to settle
for lesser evils, so they've gotten what they want from the
Democrats. Where is it written that a surrendering
conservative is better than a conquering liberal?
Joe Sobran - April 2000
Senin, 11 Februari 2008
One week later, frightened Republican voters all but handed John McCain the Republican nomination, driving Mitt Romney from the race. Today, "the polls" tell us that Obama leads McCain by six (6) points.
The polls served their purpose. They drove Romney from the race. They pressured and misled Republican voters into supporting the "electable" John McCain because he would appeal to "moderates" and "independents." Mission accomplished. Now that McCain stands virtually alone in his race to wrap up the nomination, "the polls" can once again resume their function as self-fulfilling prophecies, boosting Obama with an early "lead" so that the "independents" and "undecideds" will know which direction to follow.
I predicted this outcome on January 31st. I did not foresee how rapidly the reversal would come. [While two different polling companies have provided these opposite poll results, I am sure those pollsters are as different as NBC News and ABC News.]
Any Republican who voted for McCain in a primary because he was more "electable" has been suckered.
The map below depicts Pennsylvania temperatures this afternoon. The temperature was even colder this morning and overnight last night.
February 11, 2008 - WHTM TV
The temperatures are not much better around the country.
People have died in weather related accidents and are enduring bitter temperatures throughout the East and Midwest.
Detroit's "Winter Blast." - AP photo
There is nothing really earth shattering about these temperatures and conditions. These conditions recur every year, but we tend to forget the conditions we have endured when the MSM/DNC tells us, months later, that the Earth is about to boil over and drown us all in runoff from melting icebergs from the North Pole.