Author Archive
Robin Hood vs. Good Samaritan
Commenting elsewhere in a discussion among typical conservative culture warriors, lamenting the state of our culture regarding the abortion and gay marriage issues, I offered the following, which is probably worth memorializing here:
If I may be permitted to comment on these issues from a political perspective, I would like to point out three intertwined faulty premises, underlying all of these morality controversies in our national body politic.
- The first is collectivism – the faulty premise that the needs and wellbeing of this amorphous thing we call ‘society,’ trumps those of its individual members.
- The second is altruism – the faulty premise that looking out for oneself is bad, and sacrificing oneself for others is good.
- The third is democracy – the faulty premise that a majority has the moral right to impose their will upon a minority.
Mixed together, this is one toxic brew, which has been used to poison the minds of most sheeple in America, whichever side of the Incumbrepublocrat duopoly they find themselves on. One cannot assert the primacy of the collective, without trammeling the rights of its individual constituents. Then, if the model for governing that collective, is either the Robin Hood of the Left or the Good Samaritan of the Right, the individual citizen is regarded as merely a vassal.
Read the rest of this entry »
Fairies, Witches, Fords, and Chevys
Effective communication, to exchange ideas and discuss points of view, requires that we share the meanings of the terms we use. That is a challenge in this modern Orwellian world, where key words are being redefined every few years, to connote the near opposite of their previous meaning. It is particularly difficult, when a perfectly useful term becomes so loaded with emotional baggage, that minds snap shut at its very mention.
The term ‘atheist’ simply means ‘godless,’ which itself is a somewhat loaded term, only meaning ‘without a god.’ It is not a ‘belief’ as some would have it; but rather a disbelief in the existence of deities. To move the negative’s position, by saying, “An atheist believes God does not exist,” has no more profound effect than saying, “Joey believes there is no such thing as a Tooth Fairy.”
That in no way, makes Joey’s skepticism regarding the existence of fairies, into a ‘belief system.’ Nor does it put the onus on him to prove there isn’t, even if 3/4 of his acquaintances still believe there is, and really wish he would not display such disrespect for their cherished beliefs, by publicly challenging them. After all, they have personally experienced money magically materializing under their pillow; so they ‘know for a fact’ that it is real, and this gives them great comfort.
Read the rest of this entry »
Rethinking Roe v. Wade
Roe v. Wade is bad law, which should be overturned on Tenth Amendment grounds. Those most vocal in both the defense and condemnation of it however, frequently seem not to understand the implications of their goals. A case can be made that achieving those goals, by either side, would produce unintended consequences the opposite of what they seek.
As a retired sterile hermit, the incessant abortion controversy ought to be utterly irrelevant to me. It mercifully would be, except the insufferable PC moralists insist on inserting it into national political debate, where it has no business whatever being an issue. Politically Correct and Piously Correct activists alike, muck up our electoral process, by forcing candidates to publicly pronounce their personal moral position, on the question of a woman’s right to abort an unwanted pregnancy.
My natural right to dismiss this issue, as inconsequential here in my hermitage, is under constant assault by these busybodies. Years ago, I analyzed all the shopworn arguments from both sides, and carefully thought through my own position on the matter. None of the constant bickering since, has changed it one iota, nor is it ever likely to. I suspect that a majority of Americans, who are not dogmatic ideologues and are equipped to think for themselves, would generally agree with me.
Read the rest of this entry »
In Defense of Newt
My more ideological correspondents, conservative and libertarian alike, are frequently confounded by my attachment to reality, which purists tend to misconstrue as pragmatism. It is difficult to pin an ideological label on me, other than perhaps laissez faire capitalist. Since I desire nothing of government, but to be left alone, to live my life as I choose to live it, as a peaceful neighbor trading with others on a value for value basis, unmolested by altruistic busybodies, I don’t fit the mold of most ideologues. Individual Liberty being my highest ideal, were government not a necessary evil, I would be an anarchist. I must admit that the notion of a life devoid of politicians and politics is rather appealing; but since individual Liberty is actually enhanced, by a minimal level of law and order in my community, I can’t abide anarchism,.
The first step down into the real world, out of the cannabis cloud inhabited by the typical purist anarchist, lands one among the libertarians. These are the folks, typified by most of our Founding Fathers, who view government as a necessary evil, which must be kept to an absolute minimum, consistent with maintaining peace, law and order, and unimpeded free trade among freemen. Our Constitution, as originally written, is the epitome of a libertarian manifesto. As designed, it contains not one word regarding what a citizen must or must not do; but is entirely a constraint on what we will or will not permit government to do.
Golden Opportunity
This is insanity. The global economy is about to crash into a deep depression over all the phony liquidity held by financial institutions, and gold is dropping? There must be a lot of traders selling their gold to make margin calls. This is a golden opportunity for anyone who is still holding paper assets of any sort, to cash out of them and buy physical gold or silver. Take the hit on your 401Ks even, get out of paper – NOW! ◄Dave►
The Incumbrepublocrat Duopoly
I have heavily edited and rearranged my 2008 “Incumbrepublocrats” essay, and thought I ought to throw it up front here for critique:
Incumbrepublocrats: n. A cabal of incumbent ruling elites, organized into a duopoly called Republicans and Democrats, to fool complaisant sheeple into believing they have a choice, of shearers and shepherds. (aka: iRats)
As an independent swing voter and militant moderate, I am becoming increasingly disgusted with both caucuses of the Incumbrepublocrat Party. We used to laugh at the notion that the Soviet Union only had one political party, and their citizens were only allowed to choose from a slate of competing Communist Party members. Their candidates might differ over how best to achieve the Party’s goals, but Communism itself was not permitted to be questioned. Our two-party system was touted as infinitely better. Really?
At this point, I truly fail to see the difference. Communists and Incumbrepublocrats are both monolithic cabals of ruling elites, organized into a duopoly of nominal Left/Progressive and Right/Conservative caucuses. The only real differences between the caucuses, is the speed with which they move toward implementing a totalitarian, centrally controlled, Marxist nanny state, and minor disagreements over how much of our money to confiscate, and where best to spend it to buy votes.
Winning Ticket?
I’ve been thinking… How many watched the one-on-one TEA Party debate, between Newt and Cain? To me, their good-natured discussion was a very enjoyable experience; and it struck me at the time that they would make a great ticket. It was cool the way they teased that very idea. When introduced, they posed for the cameras in the classic embrace, each with their free arm in the air, and Newt commented that someone had said they could be the ticket, they just hadn’t decided yet who was to be at the top. Then, at the end, Cain had the best line of the night, when he asked Newt what he would wish to tackle as his first project, if offered the VP position. Great theater.
It occurs to me that they could take that show on the road immediately, and knock Romney out of the race early. What would happen if they announced a winner-take-all agreement, whereby they were offering themselves as a ticket, each agreeing ahead of time, to accept the VP nomination, if the other won the Primary. Then, they could campaign together as a team, by holding lots of similar Lincoln/Douglas debates that were more or less choreographed. The ostensible purpose being, to help the Primary voters to choose which one they wanted on the top of the ticket. I suspect the good-natured camaraderie between them on the Primary stumps, would be a real crowd pleaser.
Thoughts? Would such a move make you more or less likely to vote for either one of them? Would it put you off to the point where you would vote for Romney or Paul to stop them? Which one would you prefer on top? Why? ◄Dave►
Why Live in a Salad Bowl
I have added my latest entry as an essay, as I hope to carry on an extended discussion to develop the idea of giving the ‘Occupy’ movement what it seeks, and allow the Federal government to go ahead and collapse now, rather than waiting for the financial collapse that is now unavoidable in the near future. Please read it and join me in kicking around the idea, which I think has real merit. ◄Dave►
Poignant & Profound
Don’t miss “What Have I Done” at the shutupnsing blog. E.g.:
How in the world can we sit in a movie theater, follow and comprehend the mind-numbing twists and turns of a movie like Inception and yet be completely oblivious to the plot of the very simple and straight-forward movie we’re actually starring in ourselves? Especially when we’ve all seen the same movie before?
…and:
How many times have we heard people say, and said ourselves looking back on the pure evil that manifested itself during Hitler’s rise to power, “How could the German people have allowed this to happen? How could they not have seen this coming?” Well when people are out of work, hungry and demoralized they tend to lend an ear to the promise of jobs, food and…hope and change! I would also ask you how are the Obama Youth Corp, Code Pink, AFL-CIO, SEIU, ACORN, NEA, AARP and today’s Democratic Party any different from the Hitler Youth (HJ), League of German Girls (BdM), German Workers Front (DAF), National Socialist People’s Welfare (NSV) and the various Professional Organizations that served very effectively as Hitler’s propaganda arms?
It is short, read it all. What else can we do to wake people up, if it is not already too late? ◄Dave►
Best Advice Yet
I enjoyed reading an “Exclusive Interview With Diapason’s Sean Corrigan” about the world economy, which I highly recommend for the insights provided. Then, near the end, his answer to the following question was so profound that I wanted to memorialize it here for future reference:
We here at Zero Hedge are labelled as fringe lunatics who thrive on bad news. We only take issue with this to the extent that the label allows “others” to dismiss us out of hand, while not debating us on the merits of our ideas and opinions. Central to our platform is the debunking of generally accepted conclusions of mainstream Wall Street Economist and Strategists. We do so, not only because it is sometimes fun, but because we want to encourage our readers and ourselves to think beyond what we are all being spoon fed. We are interested in what advice you would give a 25 year old graduating from University about the future. How should they think about money, how should they be investing, and what do you think their future will look like (10 year time horizon) in a developed nation? Would you give different advice to a 25 year old in an emerging nation?
Chew On This
This is really thought provoking:
No wonder Iran got so indignant about this latest lie, which had some of our politicians beating war drums. When do they start inciting Patriots to do criminal acts they are fully prepared to do if necessary; but sincerely hope will never be necessary? There are a lot of angry folks out here in flyover country, who could easily be enticed to join a false flag operation to take back our country from the Marxists in the White House.◄Dave►
Suicidal Superpower
Any who have read my old “Dark Ages II” essay, or ever pondered the implications of Mark Steyn’s, “America Alone,” will understand why this is my next read. From a Drudge Report Exclusive, profound quotes from Pat Buchanan’s new book, “SUICIDE OF A SUPERPOWER – Will America Survive to 2025?” :
Introduction: Disintegrating Nation
“As the faith that gave birth to the West is dying in the West, peoples of European descent from the steppes of Russia to the coast of California have begun to die out, as the Third World treks north to claim the estate. The last decade provided corroborating if not conclusive proof that we are in the Indian Summer of our civilization.”
“America is disintegrating. The centrifugal forces pulling us apart are growing inexorably. What unites us is dissolving. And this is true of Western Civilization….Meanwhile, the state is failing in its most fundamental duties. It is no longer able to defend our borders, balance our budgets, or win our wars.”
Malleable Morality
Troy and I have been having a debate in the comment section of his The Slope Just Got Slicker post below. The discussion is getting deep, and worthy of a new thread on ethics. Those not following the debate may want to catch up at the link above; but for setup, Troy had said:
None of these events can be defended on any rational basis. … If we allow ourselves to sink to the level of our enemies, what point is there in defending ourselves rather than simply joining them?
Say It Again
One sunny day in January 2013, an old man wearing what was once very nice clothing, but now worn and ragged, approached the White House from across Pennsylvania Avenue, where he’d been sitting on a park bench. He spoke to the U.S. Marine standing guard and said, “I would like to go in and meet with President Obama.” The Marine looked at the man and said, “Sir, Mr. Obama is no longer President and no longer resides here.” The old man said, “Okay”, and walked away. Read the rest of this entry »
Deficit vs Debt
Brother, Can You Spare A Trillion?: Government Gone Wild!
Whenever a politician mouths the phrase, “reduce the deficit,” he is being condescending, lying, or both; because he knows the difference and is counting on us to conflate the terms debt and deficit. Read the rest of this entry »
Hollywood Exposure
I must admit that I had never heard of this lady. I have only ever known one lady named J9, whom I usually refer to as Saint J9; so at first, I thought she might be famous for more than just putting up with a sometimes mercurial blogger named Troy. It turns out she was a star in a popular TV series called ‘Northern Exposure,’ back in the early ’90s, when I either didn’t own a TV set because I lived on a yacht in Hawaii, or couldn’t get CBS at my cattle ranch in the Sierras when I did.
In any case, Janine Turner has penned an op-ed for the Washington Examiner that nails Hollywood hypocrisy:
In Hollywood, they think America is inherently bad, a world embarrassment, even as they gorge themselves on the American dream.
Hollywood is a surreal and pretend world whose way of life is actually ruthless free enterprise — it is called show business, after all. Hollywood is where stars, movie producers, writers and agents actively seek glamour, money, power and fame; where they covet fast cars and face-lifts and fly in private jets. They drink fine wines and insist on free spirits. They are the ultimate connoisseurs who insist on living liberty at large.
Yet somehow, the inhabitants gag at the very thought of capitalism going on elsewhere.
For another conservative’s perspective on what it is like to have to live in such a miserable place, read the rest at: ” Living amid Hollywood hypocrisy.” ◄Dave►
Gold Buy
For anyone who has not yet converted their excess cash into real money, this would be a fine day to do so. I cut up all my credit cards thirty years ago; but if I had any, I wouldn’t hesitate to go max them out in the coin store today. ◄Dave►
Palin v. Obama? You Betcha!
This has to be the most brilliant Machiavellian strategy I have ever encountered. I so want to discover that it is her idea, which she is floating through Joseph Farah, the editor of World Net Daily:
If Sarah Palin ran as a Republican candidate in a crowded field, she might win. Then again, she might not. She would be a late entry. Much of the big money needed to win is already committed. She would add some excitement to the GOP race, but she might not stand out all that much.
Only one Republican is going to get to face off with Barack Obama in 2012, and I can hardly count the number of contenders for that opportunity right now. She’d be a frontrunner for sure, but her tea-party base is already eyeing other candidates.
However, there is something Sarah Palin could do right now that would be truly radical – and, at the very least, bloody Barack Obama so badly he wouldn’t have a hope of beating the Republican nominee.
What’s that?
Brace yourself for a crazy idea.
Sarah Palin should reregister as a Democrat and announce her intention of seeking the Democratic Party nomination in 2012 over Barack Obama!
Go read the the whole article and then add the following data to your thoughts about it:
