Author Archive

PostHeaderIcon Obama’s Civilian Army

Remember this?

How about this? Read the rest of this entry »

PostHeaderIcon Dilbert on Guns

Scott Adams has penned another provocative article, “Why Gun Control Can’t Be Solved in the USA“:

On average, Democrats (that’s my team*) use guns for shooting the innocent. We call that crime.

On average, Republicans use guns for sporting purposes and self-defense.

If you don’t believe me, you can check the statistics on the Internet that don’t exist. At least I couldn’t find any that looked credible.

But we do know that race and poverty are correlated. And we know that poverty and crime are correlated. And we know that race and political affiliation are correlated. Therefore, my team (Clinton) is more likely to use guns to shoot innocent people, whereas the other team (Trump) is more likely to use guns for sporting and defense.

That’s a gross generalization. Obviously. Your town might be totally different.

A generalization, perhaps; but an entirely plausible one. It will surely be deemed bigoted by the PC SJWs to publicly say so; but the Democrats have only themselves to blame. The Republicans have always pandered to the “law & order” and NRA folks, while the Democrats have pandered to the malcontents ensconced in a culture of victimhood. Read the rest of this entry »

PostHeaderIcon Trump on Hillary

Trump begins the General Election season with a well delivered speech, which deserves to be well received:

If you haven’t heard it, it is worth your time to do so. He pulls no punches in positioning Hillary in the beginning, and then lays out his vision for rebuilding America. Whatever one might think of his brash antics, employed to achieve victory in the Primaries over the befuddled career politicians of the GOPe, here he demonstrates that he can eviscerate Hillary in a rather gentlemanly manner, befitting the office he seeks. Well done. 😀 ◄Dave►

PostHeaderIcon Get a Gun

Good advice from a pro:

It doesn’t get any clearer than that. Pay attention… ◄Dave►

PostHeaderIcon Hillaryous Plot

Need a good laugh? Read this:

Activists plot ‘world’s largest fart-in’ during Hillary’s DNC speech

Fart_In

I can’t wait to see how the media chooses to cover the occasion! 😀 ◄Dave►

PostHeaderIcon Dilbert is Persuasive

It is becoming increasingly obvious why Dilbert cartoonist Scott Adams, regularly garners several thousand comments to each of his blog posts. Here is another brilliant one, posted only a few hours ago, which has already passed a thousand. Yet, it is Sunday, when his presumptive office worker fans, are not goofing off in their cubicles.

How to Un-Hypnotize a Rabid Anti-Trumper

Regular readers of this blog know I’m a trained hypnotist. I’ve been studying the ways of persuasion – in all its forms – for decades.

My background in persuasion is the reason I recognized last summer that Trump would exceed most people’s expectations. He was pitch-perfect on persuasion technique. If you don’t study persuasion, Trump’s actions appear random and even dangerous. If you do know how persuasion works, you probably realize Trump is in a league of his own.

You think I’m overstating the case for persuasion. Perhaps you think Trump is doing well for a variety of reasons that include his accurate reading of the Republican base.

But Trump’s accurate reading of the Republican base is part of the art of persuasion. None of what you see in Trump’s election success so far is luck or coincidence. It is technique. If you’re not trained to see it, the method is invisible.

For example, I have already used several persuasion techniques in the paragraphs above. If I were to see another writer use these same persuasion methods on me, I would recognize them. But most of you did not recognize the methods – at least not all of them – when I used them right in front of you.

Persuasion hides in plain sight.

Just for fun, I’ve un-hypnotized several rabid anti-Trumpers lately. It takes less than ten minutes, requires nothing but conversation, and you can probably pull it off just by reading how I did it. Here’s how…

You don’t want to miss it. Whatever one’s opinion of Trump, most serious thinkers should agree that his suggestions are provocative, and very persuasive. 😀 ◄Dave►

PostHeaderIcon This is Classic

I don’t often share emails; but this one was classic:

Frog_survey1

I had never heard of a yellow-legged frog; but a quick search confirms that it does in fact exist, and is so rare that it is now on the endangers species list! Anyway, the property owner’s response Read the rest of this entry »

PostHeaderIcon Gun-Free Existence

To the timid souls and precious snowflakes, perennially advocating gun control and/or a gun-free existence:

Have you ever lived in a totally gun-free society, where even the police had no firearms, and there was no military? I did, back in the late ’60s on a tropical island out in the middle of the Indian Ocean. At one point, there was a frightening period of political upheaval, before an election. Whipped up by Chicom backed ‘community organizers,’ for the “People’s United Party,” the restless natives, drunk on toddy (fermented palm sap), began rioting.

The sparse police force, armed only with truncheons, was completely overwhelmed by rioters wielding pangas (machetes), and beyond useless at crowd control. Without an airport, and located a thousand miles from the nearest land mass of Africa, there simply was nobody they could call for mutual aid backup. It got pretty ugly for a few days. I can just imagine the special snowflakes ensconced on today’s Ivy League campuses, stamping their dainty feet over there being no phones, with which to dial 911 demanding their “safe spaces,” be cleared of the unpleasant riffraff.

The generally ex-military American expats living there, were on our own, and also unarmed; but not quite helpless. Yankee ingenuity was employed in preparing to defend our homes and families. After unstringing our spear guns, and fabricating powerful slingshots with surgical tubing, we turned our attention to what today are called IEDs (Improvised Explosive Devices). It happened that large 4 & 6 inch firecrackers were readily available, in the Chinese sundry shops scattered around the island. Read the rest of this entry »

PostHeaderIcon Flag Day

Flag_Day

 

I always remember Flag Day, because 50 years ago today, I was discharged from the US Army. Now, of course, it is also Read the rest of this entry »

PostHeaderIcon Homegrown Intolerance

Homophobia, Hoplophobia, or Islamophobia – which is the more rational fear or aversion? Which would likely create a safer society, banning gays, guns, or Jihadists?

His parents were immigrants; but…
He was born in Indiana…
Thus, he is an American citizen…

Where have I recently heard those very same remarks – as if they made one iota of difference in evaluating the situation at hand?

Were it not so tragic, it would have been amusing today, observing all the PC challenged politicians and pressitutes, tying themselves into knots, while trying to spin away the facts in Orlando. How could a Muslim American, registered Democrat, with legally obtained weapons, a carry permit, and a security guard license, employed by a DHS contractor, call 911 to swear his allegiance to ISIS, while in the process of gunning down over 100 patrons at a gay bar? Progressive minds just cannot cope with such an unorthodox stack of incongruities. 😉

What they found most difficult to discern at first, is what his motive might possibly have been? His father, an acknowledged Taliban sympathizer, who claims of all things, to be the new president of Afghanistan, assured them that it had nothing to do with his Muslim religion. He explained that he had been recently disgusted, by seeing two men making out in public in front of his son. To the boggled Progressive mind, that was hardly a relief. They are prepared to forgive a lot of uncivilized behavior, in the name of Multiculturalism; but homophobia is not one of them.

Then, when the authorities were forced by overwhelming evidence, Read the rest of this entry »

PostHeaderIcon Texit, Vexit, & Hexit

The upcoming “Brexit” referendum in the UK, is essentially an European secessionist movement. As is the fundamental right of a free people, the citizens of a disgruntled sovereign state, are deciding whether to throw off the yoke of a remote out-of-control central government. While there may very well have once been good reasons for joining the trade association known at the time as the Common Market, mission creep has since morphed it into the Leviathan now known as the EU, which has become more of an oppressive liability, than an asset to Great Britain.

Since the most common target of the secessionist musings in the US is the Republic of Texas, it would seem a natural to coin the portmanteau ‘Texit,’ yet a quick search of the term, yielded no such reference. Perhaps we should change that. 🙂

Meanwhile, I stumbled across an article the other day, with the implausible title, “How Bernie Sanders can still become president.” I only bothered to follow the link out of curiosity. It turned out to be an interesting and informative piece, well worth pondering:

Bernie Sanders will not become president of the United States. But he could still become president of Vermont if the Green Mountain State secedes.

It’s not such a far-fetched notion. Vermont was an independent republic from 1777 to 1791, and despite signing the Constitution, Vermont reserved its right to leave the union. New York, Rhode Island and Virginia explicitly did so.

Hmm… I had forgotten that talk of secession has been as common in New England, as it is in Texas in recent years. Let’s add ‘VexitRead the rest of this entry »

PostHeaderIcon Oligarchy Psyops?

Those paying attention to Trump’s rather sober victory speech last night, probably noticed how sharply he made the point about the system being rigged for politicians of both wings of the Incumbrepublocrat duopoly. I sure did:

Just remember this: I’m going to be your champion. I’m going to be America’s champion because you see this election isn’t about Republican or Democrat; it’s about who runs this country – the special interests or the people and I mean the American people.

Every election year politicians promise change. Obama promised change and it didn’t work out too well. And every year they fail to deliver. Why would politicians want to change a system that’s totally rigged in order to keep them in power? That’s what they’re doing, folks. Why would politicians want to change a system that’s made them and their friends very, very wealthy? I beat a rigged system by winning with overwhelming support, the only way you could’ve done it – landslides all over the country with every demographic on track to win; 37 primary caucus victories in a field that began with 17 very talented people.

After years of disappointment, there is one thing we all have learned – we can’t fix the rigged system by relying on very, and I mean this so, so strongly, on the very people who rigged it, and they rigged it, and do not ever think anything differently. We can’t solve our problems by counting on the politicians who created our problems.

The Clintons have turned the politics of personal enrichment into an art form for themselves. They’ve made hundreds of millions of dollars selling access, selling favors, selling government contracts, and I mean hundreds of millions of dollars. Secretary Clinton even did all of the work on a totally illegal private server. Something about how she’s getting away with this folks nobody understands. [Bold emphasis mine]

The oligarchs cannot be happy about the specter of having this clumsy oaf thrashing about in their exquisite china shop; but what could they do about it now? Read the rest of this entry »

PostHeaderIcon Remembering When

…we had a real POTUS:

…and I still had a sense of patriotism, for the nation I loved, and actually thought was invincible. A whole lot has changed in the past 22 years… 🙁  ◄Dave►

PostHeaderIcon Dilbert’s Endorsement

I told you this guy was an astute thinker. He is also a pragmatic one: My Endorsement for POTUS:

I’ve decided to come off the sidelines and endorse a candidate for President of the United States.

I’ll start by reminding readers that my politics don’t align with any of the candidates. My interest in the race has been limited to Trump’s extraordinary persuasion skills. But lately Hillary Clinton has moved into the persuasion game – and away from boring facts and policies – with great success. Let’s talk about that.

He then explains why Hillary’s new fear based attack on Trump may actually start a race war, which he wants no part of. Read the rest of this entry »

PostHeaderIcon Dilbert on Trump

You are probably familiar with the Dilbert comic strip. It turns out that Scott Adams is also a blogger and astute thinker. He has penned a very thought-provoking piece entitled, “The Risks of a Trump Presidency,” which begins:

What exactly is the risk of a Trump presidency? Beats me. But let’s talk about it anyway.

Your Abysmal Track Record

For starters, ask yourself how well you predicted the performance of past presidents. Have your psychic powers been accurate?

I’m not good at predicting the performance of presidents. I thought Reagan would be dangerous, but he presided over the end of the Cold War. And I thought George W. Bush would be unlikely to start a war, much less two of them.

But it gets better. Even AFTER the presidency, can you tell who did the best job? I can’t. You think you can, but you can’t. And the simple reason for that is because there is no base case with which to compare a president. All we know is what did happen, not what might have happened if we took another path. You can’t compare a situation in the real world to your imaginary world in which something better happened. That is nonsense. And yet we do it. Watch me prove it right now.

That should be tease enough for a thinker Read the rest of this entry »

PostHeaderIcon Waiting For SHTF

I was participating in a thoughtful comment section discussion elsewhere, regarding the 2nd Amendment, when I was inspired to pen a rather fulsome reply to a comment, which I think worth sharing here. He was at once advocating serious preparation for an inevitable SHTF armed confrontation, and then declaring his support for Trump, because he hopes he might be able to delay that reckoning a little longer. My reply:

Has it ever occurred to you that we are being played like a fiddle, and by continuing to delay the inevitable SHTF, our generation is letting our posterity down? It might just be that hoping Trump can again delay it, might one day be viewed as an act of cowardice by an old man, hoping to put off the unpleasantness until after he has gone.

I have been saying for years that they are delaying the implementation of their NWO dreams, until after we Vietnam era veterans have either died, or are too old to fight. At the same time, they have been indoctrinating and training the current kids in the military and DHS, to be ready and willing to confiscate civilian arms, and shoot or roundup dissidents when so ordered.

After the first oil crisis in ’73, I became convinced that the US government was completely broke, and that there was no way the politicians could continue to get away with inflating the currency, to hide it from the sheeple. Today the term is ‘preppers’; but back then they called those of us preparing for SHTF ‘survivalists.’ Read the rest of this entry »

PostHeaderIcon Imprecise Language

In a reply to a recent remark I had made, attempting to clarify my position regarding a laissez faire stateless society, Chris said:

So now your saying government is ok as long as it’s on your terms. It’s just the size and scope that you find offensive. We can debate that all day which is pretty much where we started off. 🙂

OK, fair enough; in my various attempts to express and defend my still evolving thoughts, on the avoidable misfortune of mankind being forcefully subjugated to the will of often impetuous rulers, I have occasionally used imprecise language. When I have used the term ‘government,’ I have generally meant the Federal government, or ‘state’ known as the USA, headquartered in Washington, DC. Reviewing several dictionaries, I find anywhere from six to nine different definitions for the term ‘government,’ and an astonishing 126 different terms for various forms of government. Those employing words like ‘control’; ‘rule’; ‘authority’; and ‘state’ I would steadfastly oppose outright. Yet, I suppose it is not entirely unfair to apply the generic term ‘government,’ to the chief and/or council of a tribal village, or some other forms of voluntary social compacts, which do not entail rulers and/or coercion. Read the rest of this entry »

PostHeaderIcon Alongside Night

In my continuing  research into what I refer to as a Laissez Faire Stateless Society, I have encountered a lot of new terms attempting to redefine anarchy, which has such a negative connotation in the minds of sheeple. One of them is ‘Voluntaryist.’ I have discovered an interesting and informative website, with the simple URL of voluntaryist.com. Friday evening, I was perusing a section of it entitled, “How I Became a Voluntaryist,” which consists of personal testimonials. While reading Ben Speers’ biographical, “Conscience of a “Former” Conservative,” I encountered:

This idea, that people should be free to do whatever they want apart from initiating violence, crystallized in my mind. Soon I realized that there could be no ethical justifications for exceptions to this rule. This immediately led me to a conclusion that shocked me to the core, for I had never considered it before. The conclusion that I came to was that there was no moral justification for any violence-based government, which is to say any government at all based on the popular definition of government. Logically, the only road left to me was anarchism.

Bingo… welcome to my world! Read the rest of this entry »

PostHeaderIcon Megyn & Trump

Like a great many, I couldn’t resist watching this. In case you missed it:

Personally, I rather enjoyed it. I reckon they both scored… 😀 ◄Dave►

PostHeaderIcon Madison’s Angels

Recently, in objections to my interest in exploring anarchy, or what I prefer to call a laissez faire stateless society, James Madison’s famous quip that “if men were angels, no government would be necessary” has been mentioned a few times. The implication being that since we are not angels, we absolutely require rulers and a coercive state to make us behave, or society would quickly devolve into total chaos.

I decided to pen a rebuttal to this common belief, and did a quick search to find Madison’s exact quote, and the precise context in which he made it. It was in “The Federalist No. 51,” where he was expounding on the necessity of the separation of powers, with checks and balances, in the Constitution:

“The great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department, consists in giving to those who administer each department the necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachments of the others. The provision for defense must in this, as in all other cases, be made commensurate to the danger of attack. Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. The interest of the man must be connected with the constitutional rights of the place. It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.”

Thus, the context speaks for itself. Madison was far more concerned with mechanisms to limit and control the government, than how best to control the people. Read the rest of this entry »

Subscribe via Email

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

Political Spectrum
Political Circle
Think Up/Down not Left/Right
Archives
Internal Links
Other Sandboxes
T-Speak
Please also join us here. ◄Dave►