PostHeaderIcon Halloween Costume

If you are not yet following Scott Adams’ blog, you should be:

How to Make a Little Rocket Man Costume for Halloween

 

Step 1: Get yourself one of these hats.

Step 2: Spray-paint the tips with black paint.

Step 3: Buy a pant suit wherever-the-hell Hillary Clinton shops.

Step 4: Smile like you just smoked a doobie and executed a close relative.

Step 5: Nailed it!

Wow… I was able to copy and paste Scott’s entire post, pictures and all, over here in one simple operation! WordPress is getting effortless to use!  😀 ◄Dave►

PostHeaderIcon Two Shooters!

Uh oh… We have been musing over the mysterious Vegas massacre a bit hereabouts; but I have deliberately avoided chasing the various conspiracy theories, involving multiple shooters. I had assumed that all of the reports of more than one gunman were the result of confusing echos. That just ended:

This sure strikes me as sound science (pun intended) and common sense. Now, what exactly are they hiding, and why? ◄Dave►

PostHeaderIcon Classical Liberalism

Politics managed to sneak back into the previous thread’s ribald attempt to evade such. Chris eventually explained why he thinks of ‘liberals’ as left-wing ideologues, and how outdated it is of me to omit the qualifier ‘classic,’ while employing the term outside of the modern Left/Right political paradigm. While composing a response, it occurred to me that this discussion probably deserves its own post. So, I fleshed it out as a more fulsome reply. The block quotes below are from his referenced comment

The dictionary is awash in Orwellian distortions of the English language. The venerable term ‘liberal,’ like ‘Liberty,’ is derived from ‘Liber,’ meaning ‘free’ in Latin. Liberal political philosophy was developed by 17th & 18th century philosophers during the enlightenment, known as the Age of Reason. Thinkers like Adam Smith, David Hume, Voltaire, John Locke, et al, and all manner of Liberty loving, anti-tyranny, radicals like America’s founders, would have proudly worn the label ‘liberal’ in their day. Thus, I had always assumed that the Left had deliberately co-opted and inverted the term, as typical Orwellian Newspeak. That is, until I finally took the time to look up the word.

As is not at all unusual, the muddled definition I had been carrying in my head for decades, I had originally surmised from context and common usage, rather than consulting a dictionary. I suppose this is how and why language evolves over time. I would bet that most Americans have only a vague notion that ‘liberal’ means one or more of: left-wing; altruist; collectivist; socialist; communist; Marxist; atheist; Democrat; or simply the opposite of ‘conservative.’ The way it is used so often as an expletive by conservatives, suggests as much. Yet, none of those terms are used to define it, by any dictionary I have checked.

The term is used differently in American politics as I’m sure you know. Liberal and conservative now pretty much refer to attitude regarding adherence to the meaning and intent to the constitution and rule of law.

I reckon Chris’ attempt to define it by one’s attitude toward the U.S. Constitution, is much too parochial. That would only further confuse anyone trying to make sense of politics in other countries, which have conservative political parties called, “Liberal.”

Currently, the Oxford dictionary definition of liberal is simply: “open to new behavior or opinions and willing to discard traditional values.” I really like the simplicity of that, and it describes me.

The Free dictionary offers: “Favoring reform, open to new ideas, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; not bound by traditional thinking; broad-minded.” That sure doesn’t sound tyrannical to me; quite the opposite.

My thesaurus suggests as synonyms for liberal: open-minded; broad-minded; moderate; freethinking; tolerant; laissez-faire; and noninterventionist. These are all positive values to my mind. Wouldn’t it require a rather staid dogmatist to reject them?

It turns out that all of these current definitions and synonyms, fairly describe my own attitudes and outlook on life. So, the only reason I ever need qualify my liberal bent with the prefix ‘classic,’ is to disavow the collectivist and altruistic nature of most Leftist social justice warriors, who are routinely labeled and disparaged as simply ‘liberals,’ by cultural warriors on the Right. Surprisingly, nowhere have I found the bugaboos of altruism and/or collectivism, mentioned under the heading of liberalism. This would suggest that in this case, the corruption of the English language was likely done by the Right, rather than the Left. They are the ones misusing the term.

More tutoring from Chris:

“I know it’s hard to accept but there will always be government. Always has been. Human nature doesn’t change like that.”

It depends on your definition of ‘government.’ By mine, in terms of systematic ‘rule,’ and ‘rulers’ employing armed enforcers to govern a population, there certainly has not always been. There have always been ungovernable frontiers on this planet, and there still are. E.g. the Pashtun tribal no-man’s-land, between Pakistan and Afghanistan. There are several others in that part of the world. Afghanistan itself is largely ungoverned, despite being considered a nation state.

You might not like the conditions extant in such frontiers; but there is nothing preventing those who choose to live there, from moving to the more ‘civilized’ areas of their countries, where they would be subject to the rule and rulers of the state. How many of us would move to a Galt’s Gulch in a heartbeat, to escape the tyranny of ubiquitous government rulers, tax collectors, and enforcers, if such a frontier still existed in America? I sure would.

“The single document in the world that comes closest to guaranteeing the liberalism you would desire is the constitution of the United States.”

Poppycock. Setting aside my rejection of your premise that a constitutional government is somehow required to maintain Liberty, the U.S. Constitution has obviously done no such thing, and never will. The only way such a document could ever hope to constrain a nation state’s tyrannical rulers, is if the citizenry were indefatigably ready, willing, and able to effectively revolt against their jackbooted thugs if necessary, and summarily hang the offenders without mercy, to strictly enforce it. With the passing of our generation, such will definitely no longer exist among the largely docile, dumbed-down, domesticated, sheeple that remain in America. More the pity… ◄Dave►

PostHeaderIcon True Talent

How about a remarkable diversion from politics and mayhem?

I always thought I had been born too late, and had missed out on the pleasures of the simpler life of our ancestors. It now occurs to me that the opposite may be true:

 

Just imagine what it must be like to be a modern Croatian teenager, watching such talent shows on his TV, rather than “Leave it to Beaver.” BTW… the older guy they keep showing cheering with his thumbs up, is her father. The world has truly changed in our lifetimes, and not always for the worse… no?  😉 ◄Dave►

PostHeaderIcon The Blame Game

So, some nut case in Las Vegas collects an arsenal in his hotel room then uses said arsenal to kill and wound hundreds of people.

And, we-the-sheeple demand to know why.

Well, there are the usual suspects… the NRA, the 2nd Amendment, the GOP, Donald Trump, etc.

I beg to offer another very different point of view.

For years, the progressive movement in the USA has repeated the mantra that nobody is personally responsible for the outcome of their life. It is all the fault of THEM.

From all accounts, the Las Vegas nut was distraught over his massive gambling losses. (Can one assume that the NRA, the 2nd Amendment, etc. forced this nut to gamble and lose a fortune? Of course not.) But, according to the progressive mantra, the gambler himself could not have been responsible. Nope, it was all due to THEM.

So, our nut case does the only logical thing… he kills and wounds as many of THEM as he possibly can.

In a sick way, doesn’t this actually make some sense? THEY cause these awful things to happen to you so you strike back against THEM as best you know how.

That should teach THEM!

Think about it.

Troy L Robinson


Users who have LIKED this post:

  • avatar

PostHeaderIcon Left to Right

If you don’t know Dave Rubin and Candace Owens, you should. He is gay. She is black. Both have moved decidedly from the Left to the Right, and can articulate why. Here is an excellent opportunity to get to know them both:

 

 

Beyond refreshing! Enjoy… 🙂 ◄Dave►

PostHeaderIcon I think I May Take A Vomit

It is bad enough that the functionally illiterate lame-stream-media folk are helping to destroy our culture. Now, they seem to be leading the charge to destroy our language as well.

Every time I turn on the idiot box, I hear that NFL players are “taking a knee” during the playing of our anthem. What knee are they taking and where is it being taken to? Oh yes, it turns out that said players are actually “kneeling”, perhaps even “genuflecting”. Why not just say that?

Then, a few weeks ago I heard repeated reports that people close to Trump had “taken meetings” with various Russians. Where did they take these meeting to? Well, it turn out that they were actually “attending” meetings. Again, why not just say that?

Could it be that, during these “taken” meetings they were also having dialogue with other participants? No, they were simply “talking” to each other and/or “having discussions”.

I have often heard that English is a complicated language… no doubt this is somewhat true since the language has picked up so many words and phrases from other languages over the years as it has emerged as the world’s preeminent language. So, why further complicate it by misusing words, using nouns for verbs and other such nonsense? Do the L-S-M folk think they are being cute or are they trying deliberately to make their crap harder to comprehend? Can you even imagine how much harder this is on people for whom English is not their first language?

To paraphrase a late master of the language, Winston Churchill, “with this, I am finding it hard to put up”.

Of all people, should not those who charge themselves with informing the rest of us not work hard to be correct and precise? Or is this just another bit of evidence that everything that was once great about us is headed to hell in a hand-basket.

Put another way, would we be impressed if surgeons, engineers and scientists deliberately pursued their respective crafts with such sloppiness?

Think about it because it actually does matter.

Troy L Robinson


Users who have LIKED this post:

  • avatar

PostHeaderIcon NFL Solidarity

I recently mentioned that I rarely even turn on my TV anymore. That is primarily because, as a political news junkie, that is all I have ever watched for the past 40 years or so. It hasn’t always been that way. As a young man, I was hooked on football. It began long before TIVO, when I couldn’t miss a pro game on Sundays. When it advanced to the point of not wanting to miss a college game on Saturdays, it finally occurred to me that I was wasting my weekends, watching other people have fun. I went cold turkey in the mid ‘70s. Now, I only ever watch the Super Bowl, and half the time I DVR that.

Now that I am effectively boycotting cable news, for loss of interest in partisan politics, and am probably getting too old to enjoy much exercise, I just might become a football fan again. My prime motive would be to support the NFL, in the face of the state’s call for sheeple to boycott their games. Whatever one might think of their personal motives for doing so, the players’ open defiance of nationalistic rituals, needs to be encouraged by right-thinking Liberty-loving individuals.

The notion that those dissatisfied with the state, can just stop waving its flag or standing at attention for its anthem, is certainly to be encouraged. It wouldn’t do if the NFL had to knuckle under to the state’s economic pressure, so the least I can do is help keep their ratings up. I think I’ll set my DVR up to record all NFL games, even if I don’t bother to watch them.  😉 ◄Dave►

PostHeaderIcon Free Education?

Profound: “My education was not free – I paid for it with my mind!” -Candace Owens

Start here:

 

 

…to watch the last 15 minutes of this remarkable interview. If you find her as inspirational as I do, then when you have the time you’ll want to go back and watch the whole hour from the beginning.

BTW: Here is her hot YouTube channel.  Her clips are all short and powerful. Enjoy… ◄Dave►

PostHeaderIcon Cultural Suicide Redux

Pat Condell continues to rail against cultural suicide by virtue signaling:

It is somewhat surprising that Google/YouTube still allows him to get away with such delicious blasphemy.  😉 ◄Dave►

PostHeaderIcon Tribal Narratives

Furthering my jihad against all forms of collectivism, including careless use of collective pronouns, a TED talk offers some profound food for thought regarding origin myths and tribal narratives:

We all have origin stories and identity myths, our tribal narratives that give us a sense of security and belonging. But sometimes our small-group identities can keep us from connecting with humanity as a whole — and even keep us from seeing others as human. In a powerful talk about how we understand who we are, Chetan Bhatt challenges us to think creatively about each other and our future. As he puts it: it’s time to change the question from “Where are you from?” to “Where are you going?”

 

Be yourself. I am. All that is necessary is to stop caring a whit what other people might think of the authentic you. 😉  ◄Dave►

PostHeaderIcon Why Not Redefine The Problem?

How long has the war between western culture and Islam been going on? In round numbers, 1,000 years. Our own modern, active participation has been going on for over 20 years.

Are we winning?

The answer is a simple NO.

Why aren’t we winning?

Could it be that we either don’t know or refuse to admit who/what we are fighting?

I think so. If this is true, or even somewhat true, would this not be a good time to refocus and try one or more new approaches? If so, what keeps us from doing so?

First is a mistaken understanding of our own Constitution. Said Constitution does state that “Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of a religion”. However, it does not say “Congress shall make no law protecting said Constitution (and the Republic it established) from destruction by group or system of thought that clearly states its intention to do just that”. Such a Constitutional clause/statement would be paramount to insanity. Yet, there are those among us who try to pretend that it says just that – and, to convince the rest of us, particularly those among us whose brains are still in the plastic state. So, are we insane? To a frightening degree, yes.

Second is a “hate America and everything it once stood for” group, embedded among us, that will support any cause, no matter how insane, so long as it promises to damage or destroy western culture. To this end, we now have a near majority of citizens who think that somehow the statue of a Civil War leader or Founding Father is a symbol of white supremacy or neo-Nazism. Can anyone truly believe that the pen that wrote “all men are created equal” really belonged to a man who did not think that Negros were human? Even though he lived much of his life with one of them playing the role of spouse? Yes, Jefferson owned slaves. Yes, he knew it was wrong. He understood it to be one of those wrongs that have no really good way to make right (“But, as it is, we have the wolf by the ear, and we can neither hold him, nor safely let him go. Justice is in one scale, and self-preservation in the other.”) Can anyone truly believe that George Washington was an early Nazi? Such is absurd. Yet, there are serious discussions about tearing down the Washington DC and Mount Rushmore monuments to these two people (among others).

But I diverge. My topic is about another approach to our war with “radical Islam”. Here I offer a suggestion that, IMHO, would alter the existing “war” instantly and in our favor… Our government (the President) should simply (and publicly) announce that, lacking any REAL evidence that there is a form of Islam that does not support (at least with its silence) the actions of the supposedly “radical” form, we (the USA) will consider ourselves to be at war with Islam and will act accordingly until such time that evidence of meaningful disapproval of the acts of the “radicals” by this supposedly “other” branch of Islam.

That is to say, we will outlaw the practice of Islam within our own borders and will cease to give aid, comfort and weapons to any nation/state that supports Islam. Further, we will respond with every weapon at our disposal to every nation/state that harbors and/or supports terrorism in any form or fashion.

Our next move should be to discover why so many American Jews seem to support a movement (Islam) that is vowed to destroy all Jews. Something about this simply has never smelled right to me.

Would the “left” have a cow over such a declaration? Of course. But, they are already trying to destroy the Republic as we know it so who really cares how many cows they have.

Am I a bigot? No, I think I am simply realistic.

Think about it.

Troy L Robinson

PostHeaderIcon The Big Lie

What would happen if all the useful idiot SJW sheeple, rioting across America under the banner of “Antifa,” watched this while actually sober?

 

 

These college indoctrinated fools couldn’t have read Jonah Goldberg’s ten-year-old book “Liberal Fascism,” which explained this subject well. Better yet was John Taylor Gatto’s earlier book “The Underground History of American Education: A Schoolteacher’s Intimate Investigation Into the Problem of Modern Schooling,” which not only covered extensively the subject of the collectivist nature of fascism; but explained how we have all been deliberately dumbed down by the Progressives (link points to free PDF of this remarkable tome – probably the most important book I have ever read!).

Alas, red pills are generally unappetizing for anyone under 30 or even 40, so they are unlikely to read  Dinesh D’Souza’s “The Big Lie” either. I suppose I should; but I already know the subject all too well, and am of the ineluctable opinion that it is far too late to do anything about it. ◄Dave►

PostHeaderIcon How Dare Trump Tell The Truth

I know we are supposed to be transitioning this blog from politics to religion and philosophy – yet I can’t stay quiet about the (in my view) approaching civil war.

Donald Trump’s overall reaction to the insanity in Charlottesville, VA (not NC as much of the lame-brained media seem to think) – his position that it took TWO sides to cause such trouble is right on. And he is catching hell for saying it.

There is no place in our society for neo-Nazis and we can all easily agree to that. But there was more to the protest in Charlottesville.

In the first place, there is nothing overtly racial or bigoted in the continuing Southern reverence for Robert E Lee. Indeed, his bearing and his conduct of the war was about all Southerners we had left to be proud of once the shooting had stopped and the looting began. And most present Americans understand to little about those days that I, for one, do not grant them the right to an opinion. In other words, learn about the thing you would pontificate on and THEN we can have a discussion.

A couple of simple thoughts to ponder:

First, Robert E Lee was at worst ambivalent about slavery (some say he outright opposed it, others that he simply knew it was untenable). For sure, his family (of whom he was titular head) used their own wealth to free slaves and relocate them to Liberia.

Second, while estimates vary, the net estimate is that no more than 20% of white Southerners owned slaves at the outbreak of the Civil War. If we assume that the makeup of the Confederate military pretty much reflected that of the South as a whole, then one has a quandary to deal with. It is somewhat easy to insist that the 20% were willing to fight to retain their primary source of wealth. Bit what of that other 80%? Do you suppose that they were gladly willing to die for the fortunes of a pseudo aristocracy? Somehow that does not ring true to one such as myself who grew up under the remnants of said pseudo aristocracy. Ergo, they must have been fighting for something far more personally important to themselves.

Let us diverge for a moment and think about the legalized abortion issue that plagues today’s politics. A clear majority of females, especially the younger ones, will fight like hell to preserve access to legal abortions. Yet, relatively few of them actually get abortions, even when an unplanned for family addition suddenly presents itself, mid-womb. Does this not raise the same question as the one above regarding the non-slaveholders willingness to fight and die? I contend that the same reasoning is at work. In both cases, the people involved simply do not want to surrender their right to make up their own minds about certain issues rather than be dictated to by others who have far less at stake in the issue.

I close with a warning to this nation: Years ago, the author John Donne postulated that “no man is an island, Entire of itself, Every man is a piece of the continent. A part of the main…” We Americans have so very little time left to understand our interdependence, ergo to respect our fellow humans as essential to our own survival. And then, to treat each other accordingly.

Were Trump WRONG about Charlottesville, the so-called riot there would have been no more than the sound of one hand clapping.

Think about it.

Troy L Robinson


Users who have LIKED this post:

  • avatar

PostHeaderIcon West Wing Woo-Woo

Oh, good grief! I have been immensely entertained by all of the palace intrigue of late, and had been looking forward to more shenanigans as Trump moves to repopulate the White House with only loyal members of the “Let Trump be Trump” club…

** Whoa! See what I mean? Right in the middle of writing this, my Apple Watch just tapped me on the wrist to alert me that Kelly just took out Scaramucci! I can’t wait to get the buzz on that one! **

…but back to the woo-woo. This is all great fun; but a red headline on Drudge this morning had already spoiled my day:

Spiritual Awakening Underway at White House; Bible Studies Taking Place…

WASHINGTON – A spiritual awakening is underway at the White House.

Some of the most powerful people in America have been gathering weekly to learn more about God’s Word, and this Trump Cabinet Bible study is making history.

They’ve been called the most evangelical Cabinet in history – men and women who don’t mince words when it comes to where they stand on God and the Bible.

Ralph Drollinger of Capitol Ministries told CBN News, “These are godly individuals that God has risen to a position of prominence in our culture.”

They’re all hand-picked by President Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence.

“I don’t think Donald Trump has figured out that he chained himself to the Apostle Paul,” Drollinger laughed.

That may amuse the Piously Correct Rev. Drollinger; but it strikes me as far more dangerous than the Mooch’s revelations about Priebus’ mental state, or Bannon’s yoga feats. 😉

Health Secretary Tom Price, Energy Secretary Rick Perry, Education Secretary Betsy Devos, Agriculture Secretary Sunny Perdue, and CIA Director Mike Pompeo are just a few of the regulars.

“It’s the best Bible study that I’ve ever taught in my life. They are so teachable; they’re so noble; they’re so learned,” Drollinger said.

It’s groundbreaking since he doesn’t think a formal Bible study among executive Cabinet members has been done in at least 100 years.

America’s top cop, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, also attends the study.

If these politicians need a guru, I recommend George Carlin:

…he had this BS figured out long ago. 😀 ◄Dave►

PostHeaderIcon Why The Silence?

Why is it so quiet here? It can’t be because there is nothing going on. After all, there is a Russian hacker under every bed (You do have one, don’t you? I’m sure I have several but they are so quiet I don’t notice them.)

Meanwhile, the establishment refuses to give up a single iota of its power (and they say there is no bipartisanship in Washington!)

I sense there are more people than ever ready and willing to fight back but we somehow lack organization. Trump has turned out better than I dared imagine but he is NOT a leader. Despite his often ill-advised “tweets” on whatever riles him at the moment, he does not try to engage the people in any form of resistance. For sure, he tweets about the evil media and the like but always from a personal point of view rather than their obvious determination to harm the nation and its principles – Trump simply being an easy target for the larger objective.

Are there no potential leaders out there in the wings? Please don’t suggest Ivanka and Chelsea or I will surely find a way to digitally vomit on you.

Better yet, where is Dave? (Hello Dave – are you there? I’m sorry I criticized your stance on anarchism. Please come back.)

Please, somebody say something sane. I feel like I am in solitary confinement. Plus, misogynist or not, I miss Bill O’Reilly on Fox. Tucker Carlson just argues for the sake of arguing with little logic to back up whatever he is trying to say (usually, it is not clear to me and I am not sure it is clear to him either). On a recent episode, he seemed to be arguing with a fellow who was trying to agree with him.

Have we all simply given up?

Don’t even think it.

Troy L Robinson

PostHeaderIcon Bastiat Knew The Answer All Along

Readers of this blog will know that I have long thought universal suffrage to be a recipe for national ruin. For a change, time and history seem to be proving my point. It turns out that such an idea (restricting the franchise) had occurred to a real thinker years ago – in 1850 to be precise.

I had read Frederic Bastiat’s masterwork, The Law some years ago but some of the finer points did not stick effectively in my mind. Yesterday, on the long drive home from The People’s Republic of Austin (TX), we listened to a reading of The Law on CD. This time said finer points hit me square in the brain. I had previously suggested some ratio of taxes paid versus government benefits received as a yardstick to determine eligibility for the voting franchise. None of my suggested schemes seemed viable (because they were not). Then, listening to Bastiat’s words again, I realized the obvious.

This Republic has never practiced universal suffrage. Originally, the franchise was restricted to “freeholders” (property owners). Later, after some initial enlightenment had broadened access to the franchise, women and children were still denied the vote. Why, one might wonder? Was the Republic anti-woman until the 1920’s and anti-child to this day? Not at all. The objection to these, and other groups, was the general lack of sufficient formal education to make an informed choice in the voting place. For sure, a few American women were well educated before the 1920’s (and, no doubt told their husbands how to vote) but it was not until women were universally given the same primary education as men that they were (finally) extended the franchise.

This actually makes sense. We don’t really want our elections to be a random game of chance do we? So, why not continue that notion today? That is, extend the “privilege” (it is not a “right”) of the franchise only to those with sufficient education (no matter whether formal or self taught) to make an informed choice? Yes, I realize that the literacy tests once used in parts of the South were declared unconstitutional but that was pandering nonsense. Our original Federal Constitution did not speak to voter qualification because, among several other good reasons, our Federal Constitution did not empower the Federal Government to conduct elections. This power, rightly, remained with the several States (as it actually still does to this day although one would hardly know it what with the constant interference with the Federal Government when the States try to take actions to curb voter fraud).

So, I hereby propose the re-institution of some manner of test to establish that each proposed voter understands the English language and has sufficient literacy and information to understand the issues and/or candidates subject to the upcoming vote. Details to be worked out by smarter people than me – and the federal courts told strictly to piss off as this is not within their jurisdiction! (The English language part of this proposal should be enacted as part of a law establishing English as the one and only official language of the United States of America.

What to do about those supposedly educated snowflakes being produced by our secondary indoctrination system I leave for others to ponder. I seriously doubt that my solution (shooting them and their professors) would be widely accepted.

On another topic, Bastiat opined that the United States of America (in 1850) was a nearly perfect Republic, stained only by slavery and tariffs, either of which might eventually destroy us. IMHO, slavery actually did. Aside from the obvious death and destruction of the Civil War, national guilt over slavery and the subsequent institutionalized bigotry (for instance, the so-called “Jim Crow” laws) opened American hearts to the notion of relaxed standards and welfare payments to Black citizens – soon expanded to any “affected” group (read – any group with enough numbers to invite political pandering). This has ultimately led (again IMHO) to a nation of “victims” and “cry babies” who are generally neither self sufficient nor dependable (or actually educated for that matter). I see no good path back to where our Republic was in its glory days.

Bastiat also opined that socialism, which The Law was written to defeat in his native France, depended on a foundation of legalized and institutionalized plunder such that the law became destructive of its own original purpose (to protect life, liberty and property). I especially admired one idea from the book – “if you want people to respect the law, then make the law respectable”. I continue to be amazed how many thinkers (such as Jefferson, Franklin, de Tocqueville, and Bastiat), way back then, could clearly see and understand the causes of our eventual demise.

Think about it.

Troy L Robinson

PostHeaderIcon Random Thoughts From A Dimming Mind

As stated in earlier articles, I spent the more productive time of my life as a systems analyst. Since retirement, I have frequently amused myself with attempts to analyze current events and predict likely outcomes – with ever decreasing accuracy as is obvious to those who follow this blog. So I have given that up. Yet, lacking the common sense to shut-up completely, I offer the following random questions and observations (dare I say insights?) concerning several items lately in the news:

Fake News (aka intentionally misleading (mis)information):
– Aren’t most of us old enough to remember all those “genuine” UFO sightings from the 50’s and 60’s? And the “leaks” from government/military insiders assuring us that amazing things RE aliens were being hidden from us? Can this have been other than fake news? (OK, toss in a few genuinely confused people if you must.)
– Then looking much further back, can there be any doubt that all organized religions are based on fake news?
– Can there be any serious doubt that most of this is nothing more than an attempt to keep our government in a constant state of turmoil so that little or none of the Trump agenda can be realized?

The various hazards inherent in a Trump presidency:
– To begin with, how can the “media” make so much of a few amateurish blunders by Trump when they covered up for obvious treason by the late President and influence peddling by his first Secretary of State? Might they be relying on our collective ignorance and indifference?
– How can the talking heads get so excited when Trump chooses not to play the “game” by traditional rules when the last president who chose not to play by the rules caused the downfall of our primary enemy in the process?
– Why would any sane society allow the deliberate destruction of a duly elected leader at the clear detriment to the nation’s future? After all, how much damage can one person accidentally do in 4 years after what the Obamanation intentionally did in 8 years?

The So-called Russian Interference in our “Democracy”:
– Is one to suppose it is harder to subvert a Republic? (Hint, of course it is. Many of the critical issues are defined by a Constitution rather that being left to the passing fancy of the ignorant mob.)
All of our enemies, foreign and domestic (and including some supposed “allies”), regularly spy on us by whatever means are available. No news there.
– I have yet to see a shred of evidence that the Kremlin somehow preferred Trump to Clinton as POTUS. After all, was it not Hillary who sold them control of must of our uranium?

The Firing of James Comey, late Director of the FBI:
– Even though he deserved to be fired, Director Comey was put in an impossible position. His superiors, all the way up to the Obamanation were determined to protect Hillary Clinton from her obvious crimes.
Further, his more direct superior, then Attorney General Loretta Lynch, had compromised herself via an airport meeting with Bill Clinton, ex President and partner of the criminal Hillary.
– So, Comey seemingly did the only thing left to him, laying out Hillary’s various crimes in a public presentation then doing as he was required, seemingly dismissing it all as somehow not presecutable (lacking the supporting judgment of a Grand Jury as our Constitution requires).

Campus Craziness:
– Who put these immature, indoctrinated morons (students) in charge of our universities?
-bWhy do we-the-sheeple continue to fund this nonsense? Said differently, if the morons/students want to run the educational system, why not let them also pay for it? (Remember the “golden rule” – whoever provides the gold gets to make the rules.)
-bHow can the same society that worried so about possibly gay scoutmasters not seem to mind when the minds of those same children are left to the ministrations of misfits and traitors?

The Overall State of the Republic:
– Can there be any reasonable doubt that the Soros-funded progressive movement has determined (apparently successfully) to destroy Fox News?
– Can there be any reasonable doubt that the Soros-funded progressive movement has determined (apparently successfully) to destroy our educational system, turning it instead into a vast system of progressive indoctrination?
– Why are the honest people in this Republic so (apparently) afraid to say or do anything about the above?
– As I have asked before, can it be possible that we are dying of our own prosperity?
– Does the process of maturing a useful humanity actually require some level of real threat, some degree of actual effort to survive?
– Can that miracle once known at the Republic of the United States of America survive? Indeed, is it gone already except in the memory of the elderly?
– Can “social media” actually be more dangerous that cancer, nuclear war and terrorism?
How can we, at the same time, be the best educated generation in history and still manage to behave like uninformed morons?

How I miss the mental acuity I once enjoyed, even if I was just deluding myself at the time! I freely admit that I no longer understand the world and most of the people around me (assuming I ever really did). Most of what I see and hear today simply makes no sense to me whatever. It increasingly seems to me that, while in my mind life is simple and can be quite good, many of us go out of our way to make it complicated and unpleasant. And for no good reason.

I don’t really expect answers to this musing but would welcome any conversation that it may inspire. To those of you who may have wished I was gone for good I only ask your patience. Everything in good time.

Troy L Robinson

PostHeaderIcon A Reasonable Democrat

I totally agreed with this outspoken and principled lady:

I have always been somewhat impressed with her, and having the courage to face Tucker just took it up a notch. Then, Tucker gets an attaboy for not even trying to flay her.

All of the Republican Trump sycophants praising his attack need to wake up, and Read the rest of this entry »

PostHeaderIcon Utterly Absurd

Racist?

 

Funny? Extremely. Disrespectful? Perhaps. Racist? Absurd. 😆 ◄Dave►

Subscribe via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Political Spectrum
Political Circle
Archives
Blogroll
Internal Links