Sunday, August 12, 2012

Martial Law and Courts Martials - Military Service in the Age of Tyranny

When a man or woman makes the decision to serve his or her country as a member of the Armed Forces, it's a momentous decision. He or she is embarking upon a journey unlike any other ever experienced in his or her young life. It starts at a recruiting office where the uniformed equivalent of a used car salesman shows them all the POSITIVE aspects of military service, but omits the LESS than pleasant ones such as BOOT CAMP. Nonetheless, our military is the finest in the world and bears the awesome responsibility of protecting this country and its interests at home and abroad. An enlistee or officer is also writing a blank check to the people of this country for an amount up to and including his or her LIFE, and he or she is prepared to honor that check should the need arise.

Soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines undergo rigorous physical and mental conditioning designed to increase their physical strength and mental toughness, but it also turns the individual from a self centered individual concerned only with himself, to a member of a unit, a part of something greater than themselves. For the Marines, it's the simple code of Unit, Corps, God, and Country. These are his or her priorities and it's drilled into their marrow as part of their training. All branches of the Armed Forces have similar indoctrinations. They also take an oath upon enlistment or commission to “support, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign AND domestic, and to OBEY the ORDERS of the officers appointed over them” Orders given MUST be obeyed if they are given by a competent authority. For the average recruit, that authority is evidenced in the stripes on the sleeve or bars on the collar of the officer or sergeant giving them the order.

The military has it's own internal code of law and conduct in addition to the Constitution and laws of the State called the Uniform Code of Military Justice, or UCMJ. This code contains laws of conduct applicable ONLY to members of the United States Armed Forces. These include the duty to follow orders. Disobedience is a criminal offense that, depending upon the degree of charge, can result in reductions in rank, forfeiture of pay, general or dishonorable discharge, or a sentence of incarceration. Every serving member is taught the basics of this code, but they are not lawyers, nor are the expected to have a lawyers understanding of legality when it comes to the military. They are not expected to analyze orders, but to OBEY them unconditionally. and this is driven home to them again and again. It's necessary to the good order and discipline of the military, but it also saves lives in the stress of combat, when there is not the luxury or leisure to discuss things in committee. As Jack Nicholson's character, Colonel Nathan Jessup in “A Few Good Men” put it, “We follow orders or people DIE. It's THAT simple.” And if you DISOBEY an order, there WILL be consequences.

Since the days of the Nixon Presidency, there has been a contingency plan for the declaration of marital law in this country. Nixon believed that the Viet Nam protesters were controlled by Russian communists and that they may at any time erupt into unfettered violence in an attempt to bring out revolution and the overthrow of the United States government. This idea seems far fetched to us now, with the hindsight of history. WE know that this did NOT happen, but at the time it was a very REAL possibility, and as the Venona papers revealed, such ideas HAD been considered by the Central Committee and Politburo of the former Soviet Union. So Nixon authored the plan to be executed in the event of a civil emergency, not unlike Hitler's VALKYRIE plan that nearly cost him HIS government when it was subverted by plotters seeking to overthrow the NAZI regime in Germany. Every President since Nixon has had access to this plan, and all have made various modifications to it, but NONE have ever admitted publicly the plan's existence or any role they may have played in it's evolution.

Today we're facing a federal government like NEVER before. Since Nixon's time, we've seen the PATRIOT Act, the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, domestic spying and monitoring of our internet usage and email traffic, the NDAA which authorizes indefinite detention of ANYONE without due process or habeus corpus, etc. The government has become increasingly hostile and adversarial to the civil liberties of law abiding, tax paying Americans and it shows NO signs of loosening its grip on our freedoms in the foreseeable future. There's also evidence that our election processes are no longer fair or honest and that their results may be untrustworthy. Voter fraud was RAMPANT in the last Presidential and congressional elections and will only AMPLIFY in the coming one. The stakes are too high across the board. If people cannot trust elections, then can they trust the legitimacy of our GOVERNMENT itself? And what happens if they CANNOT? President Kennedy said it best when he said “Those who make peaceful transition impossible will make VIOLENT revolution INEVITABLE” and he was right. Given what transpired in Iran and Russia when THEIR elections were disputed or suspected of FRAUD, should the same thing happen here, a similar uprising is not inconceivable.

If the protest is in the form of a TEA party, then the civil authorities have no worries, but if it's more of a VIOLENT protest or RIOT, the civil authorities may not have the capability to respond and military forces may be called in to restore order and enforce a declaration of martial law. If that force is resisted in any way, our troops may be called upon to do the unthinkable, open fire on their fellow American citizens. How will they handle themselves in that moment. For the troops facing the people, most if not all of whom will be unarmed, they will receive the order to open fire from either a sergeant or a junior officer. How they react in that split second will impact them for the rest of their lives, one way or another. Who are these men and/or women who have the power of life and death over political protesters, and how will they react? Will they open fire and slaughter American civilians, or will they refuse to follow these orders and risk reprisal from the military?

When soldiers take to the streets and are given the order to open fire, the ones holding the weapons will be kids only a year or two out of high school. The ONLY thing they'll have to go by is their moral compass, and their loyalty to their chain of command. They will NOT play issues of military or civilian law in their minds, and they will be hard pressed to disobey their orders. There are severe consequences to a member of the armed forces should they do so. They will not be thinking of the Nazis who answered for their crimes at Nuremberg with the defense that they were “just following orders” nor will they know or care that that defense did not work. The most conflict they will have will be MORAL conflict, if they were raised in a good Christian home, but even THAT can't be counted on these days.

For military enlisted persons, or commissioned officers alike, when an order to fire their weapons is given, there can be only one of three possible responses. They can OBEY the order and risk the consequences that may come of THAT at a later date, or they can REFUSE to obey the order, in which case they risk criminal prosecution for any number of infractions under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. They can lock their weapon, lay it down and step back, thereby refusing to obey and subjecting themselves to immediate arrest, they can take that weapon and run to join the people, thereby risking a charge of desertion, or they can encourage others to join them in their actions, thereby risking a charge of Mutiny or Sedition as well as desertion under fire, all of which carry the DEATH penalty if guilt is adjudicated by a courts martial.

While the UCMJ provides the defense that an order may be disobeyed if it is illegal or unlawful, the burden of proving that the order was unlawful in the first place falls upon the soldier who substituted his OWN judgment of legality for that of his chain of command. It is an uphill fight that MOST defendants lose, because the good order and discipline of the military depends on soldiers following the orders given. In combat situations, there isn't TIME to debate, and the man with the most stars or bars has to know that when he gives an order, it's followed.

If it is the intention of the Commander in Chief to use the Army as his own private police force, dissension in the ranks is a THREAT and will be dealt with VERY harshly so as to discourage OTHERS from doing the same. A soldier who refuses an order to fire can be charged with offenses ranging from simple disobedience, to Mutiny and Sedition, which are CAPITAL offenses. If YOU were in their place, would YOU risk that? Some will, but MOST will likely NOT. It's far easier to just follow the order. After all, there's a chain of command that will own the responsibility if it's the wrong order. And the men confronting protesters will likely not be combat infantry troops that have seen action in the field. They will more likely be Military Police battalions specially recruited and trained for just such an assignment.

There are growing calls across social media for the military to step in and remove an unlawful government, but there is no precedent in our law or history for such an action. The Founders wrote our constitution to prevent a tyrannical government from coming to power, but they could not foresee progressives, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, the Patriot Act, NDAA, or any of the things that have since come to pass in this country. They could not have known about SEIU, ACORN, Occupy Wall Street, the TEA party, the takeover by communism of Academia, the Media, the Courts, and the CONGRESS, either. We are living in dangerous times and there is no book or blueprint to get us out of the mess we're in. It ultimately took NAZIS to get communists out of Germany, and they just came HERE and set up shop in Columbia University. It's taken progressives nearly a CENTURY to wreak as much social, political, and economic havoc as they have in this country, and we're not going to clean it up overnight.

But to those calling for the violent overthrow of our corrupt government, be careful what you WISH for. You might just GET it, and then God help us! I would have NO objection at ALL to a military coup d'etat if I thought it would be led by a WASHINGTON and not a NAPOLEON as was the case in France and Spain. In THOSE cases, the CURE was worse than the DISEASE. But no citizen uprising can be successful without the military being on board. Only the MILITARY could have stopped HITLER before he destroyed Germany, and that lesson is NOT lost on our commanders. But they are SWORN to uphold the constitution and unless and until a competent authority tells them otherwise, that means they are subject to civilian authority, as long as that authority is constitutionally empowered. The military would likely require a finding of unconstitutionality by a Court of competent jurisdiction such as the Supreme Court before it would ultimately act, but it would be better if the military with its resources went against the GOVERNMENT than having it used by the government against US. We've seen what Quadhaffi did to his people (though not for long), what happened in Iran and Syria when THEIR people took on their military, and again in IRAN what happened to the SHAH when the military REFUSED to obey HIS orders to attack the civilians, so what OUR military will do when given such an order is a matter for speculation at best. We can only HOPE they will do the RIGHT thing.

Tuesday, June 5, 2012

Department of Justice vs. State of Florida - Nation of MEN vs. Nation of LAWS

The USA was founded to be a nation of laws, not a nation of men. Our Founding Fathers knew all too well the European style of governance where the will of the King was the law of the land and those laws were subject to the caprices of often mercurial monarchs. They did not want that here in their newly minted republic. They also wrote restrictions into the Constitution against bills or laws of attainder - laws that do not apply EQUALLY to everyone but target specific persons or groups in their enforcement. The Founders understood that in the hands of a corrupt official, such laws could be used as a weapon that would give an incumbent politician a major advantage over anyone else and they knew that men COULD be corrupted. To balance HUMAN nature, they made us a nation of LAWS that would apply equally to all. To ensure the uniform enforcement of Federal laws we have a Department of Justice, headed by the Attorney General of the United States and a similar legal hierarchy in each of America's FIFTY states. The Attorney General, though a political appointee in many cases holds a unique position. He or she may owe his or her position to a politician, but should that politician run afoul of the LAW, he or she is expected to investigate and prosecute that politician without passion or prejudice or appoint a special prosecutor in the event he or she is unable to do so without the appearance of conflict. In short, NO one is above the law - in THEORY anyway.

In REALITY, we have a "Justice" Department and Attorney General at the Federal Level who seems to be more about being a political ATTACK dog for his MASTER and his political PARTY than a WATCHDOG for the uniform and blind enforcement of Federal laws. Today we have more of an INJUSTICE Department, or Department of Obstruction of Justice and Eric Holder is like a Mafia Enforcer carrying out attacks and lawsuits against anyone designated by his CAPO or DON against anyone or any entity that is not towing the politically correct, ethnically pandering, party line. We've seen COUNTLESS examples of how the Attorney General and Department of Justice have attacked states attempting to legislate enforce their own laws within their own borders, some of which have NOTHING to do with Federal authority, especially laws that are designed to minimize Voter Fraud. Why would the Attorney General of the United States NOT want honest elections? Could it be that it's because HIS party generally BENEFITS the most from such FRAUDS?

Enter Governor Rick Scott and the State of Florida who are merely trying to ascertain which persons currently on the State of Florida's voter rolls may be DECEASED and therefore no longer ELIGIBLE to vote. Secretaries of State, the state officials responsible for conducting and overseeing elections in their jurisdictions, are charged with this responsibility and it is often done as a matter of routine. For SOME reason, however, Attorney General Eric Holder has mounted a personal CRUSADE against ANY state trying to minimize or ELIMINATE voter fraud in local, state, and national elections. We've seen multiple instances of states being attacked by the Attorney General and the Department of Justice for merely requiring registered voters to show an official form of photo identification before casting their ballots. Who exactly would that disenfranchise? Who does NOT carry SOME form of identification with them in modern America, as one is required to do just about ANYTHING. The only people who would NOT have valid photo identification would be people who are NOT who they claim to be and such people are usually either illegal aliens who do not have a legal RIGHT to vote, or people purposely committing voter fraud.

The State of Florida is attempting to remove DECEASED persons from its voter rolls so that no one can assume a deceased person's identity and cast a vote in their name. We know that many people have been caught in acts of deliberate voter fraud in the past several election cycles and this is one of the PREFERRED methods of casting illegitimate ballots. The State of Florida is within its rights to clean up its own voter registration rolls and minimize voter fraud. One MIGHT even argue they have a DUTY to do so. Sadly, our Attorney General does not think so and he's threatened legal action against the State of Florida if it continues in this pursuit. Thank goodness the State of Florida has REFUSED to back down to the Federal BULLY. I'm sure Florida's Governor, Rick Scott, and Attorney General, Pam Bondi, will vigorously defend their state's rights in Court and will be fully vindicated in doing so. Law enforcement is about ENFORCING laws, not in PREVENTING their enforcement. We do not HAVE to please the KING to follow the law in this country. Maybe the United States' Attorney General needs a REFRESHER course in basic jurisprudence. I'm sure Florida's Attorney General will be very HAPPY to give it to him. I'm EQUALLY certain an unbiased Federal JUDGE will, too.

Friday, May 11, 2012

O'Reilly vs. Kardashian - For the DEFENSE!

Say the name Kim Kardashian and, depending upon the company you're in, the response may be either positive or negative. Love her or hate her, the one thing that's certain, we all know who she is. But it's WHY we all know who she is that's the REAL story here. She's famous, yes. But WHY is she famous? Unlike other celebrities, she has NO discernible talent that I am aware of. If she can sing, play an instrument, or act it's news to me. But she IS famous, mostly for being INFAMOUS and that is her BRAND which she has carefully and assiduously nourished over the years. Kim Kardashian has done what was before only a fiction in the advertising industry, branded and marketed a NON existent product. That was the premise of an old Doris Day movie about the advertising business in which a New York advertising executive created a marketing campaign around a fictitious product known only as “Vip”. When brought before the ad council on ethics charges he finally presented a hastily concocted product,  a candy that was made with REAL alcohol and was capable of inducing intoxication upon consumption.

Kim Kardashian is like “Vip” and LIKE the fictitious product "Vip", she too is capable of inducing intoxication, but merely upon exposure. How ELSE can one explain the legions of fans of all ages and genders who make it their “mission” in life to “keep up” with the Kardashians, particularly Kim Kardashian, herself.   In a self started and driven publicity campaign that would make even the biggest names in Madison Avenue advertisers blush with PRIDE, she's waged a one woman marketing campaign that, judging by its results, is worthy of a Clio award at the very least. She has demonstrated the skills of a publicist, a marketer, promoter, and adult film star in her rise to fame and success. And she has parlayed that fame (or infamy) into an enterprise that not only produces television shows, but an impressive array of other merchandise as well.

Kim Kardashian is an entrepreneurial success story in the FINEST American tradition. So, imagine my surprise when last week I hear none other than Bill O'Reilly remark that Kim Kardashian is an example of what's WRONG with America today. Is free market entrepreneurial capitalism what's WRONG? That sounds more like the mantra of the Occupy Wall Street flotsam, most of whom probably FOLLOW Kim Kardashian on Twitter or Facebook and leer at photos of her in various states of undress while sponging off their parents, squatting on public property and screaming “down with capitalism.”

So, shame on you, Bill O'Reilly. Kim Kardashian is not what's WRONG with America, but rather what's RIGHT with it. She took what could have just as easily been her “fifteen minutes” of ancillary fame when the cameras were following her FATHER, Attorney Robert Kardashian, during the O.J. Simpson homicide trial. We all remember Robert Kardashian, the swarthy and stylish gentleman with the leonine head of salt and pepper hair and stylish and well tailored suits sitting right next to O.J. Simpson at the Defense table day after day. The paparazzi and media couldn't get ENOUGH of the “dream team” and so it pursued them into their private lives. When they discovered that Robert Kardashian had a trio of exotically attractive daughters, they suddenly began the process that would later become known as “keeping up with the Kardashians.”

When the trial ended the media spotlight could easily have faded away had Kim Kardashian not taken it upon herself to keep that light pointed and focused in HER direction, and to achieve this she gave us quite a show. It was that show that she parlayed into a media career first in modeling, then reality television, and later into a merchandising enterprise. There's NOTHING wrong with that. Sure, she had a privileged upbringing and she got her initial opportunity by happenstance, but she CHOSE to make the MOST of it and took ACTION to make it happen.  As a result of choices she made and actions she took, she has succeeded and on her OWN terms. That USED to be a GOOD thing, Mr. O'Reilly. Personally I think it STILL is.

In my opinion,  the people that Bill O'Reilly and other commentators and pundits are REALLY referring to as the problem in America are the legions of "lemmings" who care more about keeping up with a Kardashian than they do about what's happening in the REAL world, such as the war in Afghanistan, or the upcoming Presidential election. But there's an old saying about which is the bigger fool, the fool or the fool who FOLLOWS her? Kim Kardashian is not the problem here. It's the people that are obsessed with keeping up with her for all the wrong REASONS that are the REAL problem. 

These days it seems ANYONE can become a “celebrity” if they're willing to show enough skin, or make a fool of themselves on YouTube. Gone are the days when you had to find Lana Turner working the soda fountain in a Hollywood drug store, or the next big musical act playing to the dinner crowd in a spaghetti restaurant in Eerie, Pennsylvania. Celebrities are now more often than not plucked from obscurity on either a reality based contest show, or just by the sheer number of views their videos get on YouTube. If they get enough views it's called “going VIRAL", and it's the video equivalent of self publishing.

It is much easier to self promote these days than it was back in the nineties when Kim Kardashian first started grabbing for the spotlight, but she made the effort and that effort has paid off in a HUGE way. There's even rumors she's planning to back and star in her own SCRIPTED sitcom on a major television network in addition to her other reality shows on the cable entertainment channel. Some may say she doesn't “deserve” that as there are many more qualified “real” actresses out there, but if she's backing the show with her own cash, why NOT let her do it. We KNOW she brings EYES which translates to RATINGS which means MONEY for the network, and if she can DO it, more power to her. If she can't, she'll FAIL and that's all right, too. It happens to the best of us sometimes. Just ask Oprah Winfrey whose OWN cable network enterprise is struggling, But don't hate her for doing what she does. She earns major BANK for doing it, pays her TAXES, and in the process creates more JOBS than any Washington politician can honestly claim to have done.

There are only two possible “reasons” to “hate” Kim Kardashian, and they go to the old “sour grapes” psychological term rationalization; or, as Aesop put it in his "Fox and Grapes" fable - "It's EASY to DESPISE what you CANNOT get."  If you're a woman hating on her, it's because you can't BE her and have her LIFE;  or, your MAN is fantasizing about being with HER instead of with YOU. If you're a MAN hating on her, it's because you can't be WITH her. But these are superficial reasons at best that reflect human nature at its WORST. 

 In the case of Bill O'Reilly, I believe his scorn is misdirected. Or maybe it's that he's “just not that into her.” I suspect the feeling's MUTUAL on her part, too. But even if it's not, and Kim Kardashian is a regular “Factor” viewer, she's also a successful entrepreneur and media mogul deserving of our respect, if not our admiration. And thank God for the internet, as I'm sure there's a copy of her sex tape floating out there somewhere. If you're a MAN, you gotta love that. And, if you're a woman still hating on her, you can find her video and compare how she looked THEN to how she looks NOW. Maybe you'll find some minor flaw or sign of aging you can point to and feel all superior, if only for a moment. God BLESS America, land of opportunity. And to borrow a line from a James Bond theme, when it comes to being “famous”, “nobody does it better” than Kim Kardashian.

Monday, January 30, 2012

Holy WARS - The Battle for the SOUL of the Conservative and Libertarian Republican

When Henry VIII was King of England, he found himself with a problem not unfamiliar to men today, but with very different ramifications for him and his dynasty.  He had a menopausal WIFE and no SON to succeed him on the throne, i.e. the family business.  Now for men today, this is no problem at all.  You file for DIVORCE, but back in Henry's day, divorce was not only FROWNED upon, but in the case of a KING, even the ATTEMPT could start a global WAR, especially when your WIFE was a blood relative to a King who had a lot more men under arms and the wealth of two continents, as well as the EAR of the POPE and the title of Holy Roman Emperor.

Such was Henry's dilemma when he met and fell in love with the vivacious Anne Boelyn, a first rate social climber complete with sycophantic family looking to get RICH and POWERFUL in the ONLY way open to them at that time, the FAVOR of the KING.  The Boelyn family had already pimped out ONE daughter to horny Hank, but he had his fun and left her, pregnant and DISGRACED, called "The Great Prostitute" by all the nobles and courtiers in England.  Sir Thomas Boelyn vowed his younger daughter, Anne, would NOT suffer the same fate and would be QUEEN of England.  To this end, he instructed his daughter to tempt and seduce the King at every opportunity, but to REFUSE his attentions until she got the ring and the crown.  Anne Boelyn, ever the dutiful daughter, and the headstrong social climber in her OWN right, dutifully obeyed and so Henry was a man with a wife he no longer desired and a mistress who would not comply.  It's enough to drive a monarch MAD.

The solution to BOTH Henry's problems was a simple one on the surface.  He would get RID of Catherine of Aaragon, his longsuffering WIFE, and marry Anne Boelyn, his younger and reputedly more FERTILE girlfriend, enabling him to have to the desired son and heir, as well as a lot more fun in the royal bedroom.  However, in the affairs of KINGS, nothing is EVER simple.  His wife, Catherine, REFUSED to go quietly, and appealed to both her powerful nephew, and the Pope for help.  The nephew, King Charles V of Spain, basically told Henry that any disrespect to his aunt could be conceived as an act of WAR, and Charles had the larger army and treasury.  Charles also drove the point home to the Pope by having a mercenary army invade Rome and the Vatican and take the Pope prisoner, just in case he was tempted to comply with the King's request for nullification of his marriage or an alternative divorce.  Undaunted, Henry convened an ecclesiastical court which he attempted to RIG, but the Pope sent his personal emissary to be part of the proceedings, which stymied and frustrated Henry's goals in EVERY way.

The solution seemed to avoid the King and his sexual and political frustrations increased.  Enter a LAWYER named Thomas Cromwell, a personal friend of and employee of Thomas Boelyn with some books by William Tyndale, a writer and avowed disciple of Martin Luther, the excommunicated catholic monk who believed that the Borgia Papacy had rendered the entire catholic church corrupt beyond redemption and in "Protest" of this, he initiated the PROTESTANT reformation and started the LUTHERAN Church.  Unknown to Henry at the time, both his intended wife and her FAMILY as well as Thomas Cromwell, were devout LUTHERANS, a heresy punishable at that time by BURNING at the STAKE.  However, Cromwell seized upon Tyndale's book "The Obedience of the Christian Man" which stated that it was the KING who was the rightful ruler in his own kingdom and NOT the Pope.  This fed right into Henry's wheelhouse and ego and he sought to have himself declared Supreme Head of the Church in England.  After bribing, threatening, or executing members of parliament who opposed this power grab, Henry got his law and the protestant reformation and revolution in England was under way,

This battle for English SOUL continued unabated through the reigns of Henry VIII, Edward VI, "Bloody Mary" Tudor, Elizabeth I, James I, and Charles I and was at the heart of the English civil war.  Not unlike "conservative" and "libertarian" Americans today, they knew they were no longer practicing Catholics, but as Henry had merely SHATTERED the Catholic church, but FAILED to replace it with a single orthodoxy and made the Bible and New Testament available in the ENGLISH language, every man in England suddenly though he heard GOD telling him how to reform the church and so the protestant faith continued to fracture and subdivide.  There are many more protestants in the world today than there are catholics, but unlike the catholics who are UNITED, the protestants are factioned and fractured.  It's pretty much the same with the non communist Americans today.  We know we're NOT communists, but since the republican party has been so infiltrated with communist progressives, the message of REAL Republicans has gotten lost in the collectivist rhetoric and deeds of the "establishment" republicans.

Like the Protestants of England, only the coronation of Mary Tudor and the Catholic MASSACRES of protestants, regardless of sect, was enough to bring them together.  So, too, MUST it be that the assault of COMMUNIST Democrats and their socialist minions in the Unions, Media, Academia, etc. will bring those of who do NOT self identify as either Communists or Democrats.  By all accounts, self indentified "Liberals" (aka progressives or communists) make up only TWENTY FIVE percent of the population.  That means WE outnumber THEM by a ratio of three to one, but the difference is that THEY are UNITED and WE are DIVIDED.  Til we recognize that and come together with linked arms and in lock step, THEY will continue their progressive "march to the SEA" and like Sherman, leave nothing but SCORCHED America in their wakes.

What we the "Conservative" and "Libertarian" MAJORITY must accept is that ideological purity in a political candidate is a MYTH, especially when dealing with a POLITICIAN.  Politicians are by DEFINITION, compromisers and LIARS.  They will SAY anything they need to say to get elected, and if you bring up a voting record that runs contrary to their rhetoric, they will either make an excuse for that vote, or claim to have "changed" since it was taken.  We cannot know a man's mind or heart.  We can only know his HISTORY, which has a NASTY way of repeating when we stop paying ATTENTION to it.  That said, ANY of the republican field, and YES, I said ANY, would be an improvement over the current "Apologist and THIEF" if we want America to continue to remain a sovereign and FIRST world nation.  If you value your freedoms, including the right to speak your mind, the right to own a gun, the right to grow tomatoes in your own back yard, etc., then you MUST vote AGAINST the Communi-Crats in November.  If you do NOT, you may as well vote FOR them.  Even if we screw up and elect another globalist who thinks we can bomb anyone at anytime, that person can be IMPEACHED and REMOVED if we get the CONGRESS back, but picking the wrong presidential candidate can put THAT at risk as well.  A candidate with high NEGATIVES can turn off the moderate and independent voters and send them scurrying back to the Democrats which affects OTHER races down the ticket.   America is a CENTER right country, not a HARD right country.  That's the mistake the hard LEFT made in 2008.  We cannot AFFORD to make it again.

One final thought here, as in the English Reformation, the rhetoric was heated and vicious and led to beatings, lynchings, burnings, or other forms of atrocities.  Let's dial back the rhetoric, especially on OUR side.  Leave the HATE to the LEFT.  Let THEM engage in "reductio ab adsurdem" with their overuse of RACISM against anyone who disagrees with them.  We are NOT them and THAT needs to stand out in clear contrast to the rhetoric being spewed by the left and their media puppets.  If we run around like Howard Beale, ranting and raving about how MAD we are, that's the caricature that they will stick to us with SUPER glue.  It's already being applied to ONE of our candidates.  If we can't' build up our candidate without tearing someone ELSE'S down, then we must NOT have MUCH of a candidate.  And even if we don't, come November, the choices come down to "Winkum, Blinkum, or Nod" on OUR side; and, NERO on the OTHER.  Nero believed Rome had become too crowded and unsanitary by the time he became Emperor, so he decided it wouldn't be the worst thing if it burned away.  History doesn't show that he SET the fire, but history DOES show that when it was finally out, he built a HUGE palace over the ruins of MANY people's homes and shops.  And if we truly ARE a Christian nation, we DEFINITELY don't want to become a MARTYRED one.

These are the choices facing our country, and we may only have this ONE last chance to get it right.  If we are to remain the United States of America and not the United Socialist States of AmerKa, or just a STATE in the United NATIONS, we cannot AFFORD to get this one WRONG.  When it's all said and done, the primary elections are for voting your CONSCIENCE, but if the guy you LIKE can't WIN, it's not going to matter in the general election and its aftermath.  As we've seen all too CLEARLY of late, elections have CONSEQUENCES, and if you want an Imperial President who rules by regulatory FIAT, then vote Democrat.  If you want a REPRESENTATIVE government instead of an IMPERIAL one, vote REPUBLICAN.  Rule of LAW must be restored, because rule of MAN is KILLING us. We on the right  may very well need a NEW party and relegate the GOP to the scrap heap of history like the WHIG party it replaced, but that's an issue for NEXT time.  In THIS election, we're trying to SAVE our country.  If we fail to do THAT, the REST is moot.  2012 is not just an ELECTION, it's a federal government RESTRAINING order.

Saturday, July 23, 2011

Closing Arguments: Schaddenfreude, Reality TV, and No JUSTICE for Caylee Anthony

It's FINALLY over!  Both sides have been heard, the jury has decided, and Casey Anthony is a FREE woman forced into hiding to work out her demons, sort through offers, and plan the rest of her life which is once more her OWN.  But is she really FREE?  Can she go out for a cappuccino at Starbucks?  Can she shop for a new dress at the local mall?  Can she go into a public hair salon and get her hair styled?  In theory, she can, but in REALITY she would be risking her LIFE.  There is a very real and palatable HATRED of this woman the seeing her in public would likely generate and "Ox Bow Incident" mentality and end with her either being torn limb from limb, or at the very LEAST, lynched or beaten to death.   Sadly it was that way LONG before the jury made it's ruling, which is why this woman has spent most of her pre-trial incarceration in ISOLATION.  It was feared by the Sheriff's department (and RIGHTLY so) that she would not have survived in general population, especially since most of the women incarcerated with her were themselves MOTHERS or just women who had already concluded, like MOST of America, that she was  a child murderer long before the first piece of REAL evidence had been introduced.

Why do so many people HATE Casey Anthony?  It's only natural to want a guilty person to pay for his or her crime, but do we HATE everyone that's accused of murder in this country?  I hope not because there are so many, we wouldn't have time for anything else, nor would likely live very long as HATRED is a very self destructive thing to carry around.  It's physically, physiologically, and psychologically harmful to its host. Hatred is also highly irrational, esp when it's directed against a veritable STRANGER.  It is usually NOT organic in nature, but a result of external stimuli.  Germans didn't HATE Jews instinctively.  They were PROGRAMMED to do so by propaganda from the Nazis.  Anti-semitism results in PREJUDICE, bot not HATRED on it's own.  To get to HATRED, you need provocation and that usually comes from  media saturation.

That's what  has been driving this ENTIRE case.  Absent the media saturation, no one would know the names Caylee or Casey Anthony outside of the people who knew them on a personal basis before they achieved "realty TV star" stature and notoriety.  Had either Caylee or Casey not been so physically attractive, the story would have remained a blip in the local Orlando news and been long since forgotten.  So it's the MEDIA that jammed this story down our throats from day one.  It;s media pundits and commentators that have driven this story, and in a fashion reminiscent of Jean Paul Marat's "Friend of the People" tabloid newspaper, ginned up the lynch mob mentality that sent thousands to the guillotine in an orgy of blood lust during the french revolution.   Marat and Nancy Grace know how to gin up a lynch mob.  Who can forget  the Duke Lacrosse Rape Case, or the total FICTION that was CALLED a rape case?  When emotion drives the bus, the logical and rational "rules of the road" go right out the window, and that is EXACTLY what happened in this case.  But where did the emotion come from and why did it get so intense?

At the heart of everything is a cherubic little two year old toddler named Caylee Marie Anthony.  Who  Gould see that little girl's pictures or videos and not just MELT?  You would have to be INHUMAN to not feel sadness at the thought of that little girl being taken from her family by person or persons unknown; and lest we forget, that is how  this case started.  When her picture first popped up the cable news program as a missing person, my first thought was that she had been abducted by a child  sex trafficker and, even after media pundits and legal analysts starting baying for her mother's blood, I maintained that the EVIDENCE supported that conclusion far more convincingly than it supported the premise that Caylee had been murdered, let alone that her own MOTHER was responsible for it.  It was far more likely that Caylee had been abducted using a long can paradigm that had led THOUSANDS of young women into white slavery, the disappearing modelling agency.  If your target was a CHILD however, the modelling agency wouldn't work, as a mother would tend to REMAIN with her child during the photo sessions.  Far more likely would be a NANNY or daycare scenario, as a mother would be more likely to leave a child there for a prolonged period of time, usually to go to work.

Whenever I argued or defended  this theory, I was ridiculed and attacked by people who had already made up their minds that Caylee was dead and Casey had killed her.  I was called a  dreamer, of thinking like a LAWYER (a pejorative in MY vocabulary) or of being interested in Casey or attracted to her, etc by people who ordinarily were liberal in their thinking and therefore open to possibilities outside the obvious, or at least imbued with the perception of having OPEN minds.  Not in this case, however.  With the EXCEPTION of a few lawyers who practiced criminal or defense law, nearly everyone I talked to regarding this case had concluded the worst and condemned Casey Anthony before there was even the slightest evidence that Caylee was anything but a missing person.  

How then did a local missing persons case get to be a national media event with the appeal of a network produced reality television show?  The simple answer is that it was turned into one by the 24-7 news media and non stop barrage of legal and media pundits and commentators that first created, then FED the addition to all things ANTHONY, much like the average heroin pusher will first create the dependence and then provide the supply of his TOXIC product.  The "reality" in modern America is that it's sometimes difficult, if not IMPOSSIBLE do discern the difference between real life and reality TV.  Some people used to believe anything they saw on TV.  However, since the advent of "reality TV" it's soemtimes hard to tell what's "real" and what's "contrived" to LOOK real.  Just as shows like "Survior" and "Jersey Shore" create "stars" of people who are talentless and mediocre at BEST, so too does a non stop media spotlight create another kind of "star" when it overdoses the public on a criminal defendant (ESPECIALLY and attractive one) like Scott Peterson (who to this DAY still gets love letters and marriage proposals even though he's been CONVICTED or murdering his wife and unborn child) and Casey Anthony, who's now free to PROFIT from being free to sell HER story to a publisher, go on media interviews for pay, and may even end up on a reality TV show, or the cover of HUSTLER.  She, too has recived money from her legions of horny males fans, and  a few marriage proposals as well.  That would NOT happen if she were netiher HOT< nor prospectively looking at getting RICH.  

Some of the hatred directed at Casey Anthony comes from the standard green eyed monster, JEALOUSY.  Women are jealous of her because she's young, attractive, soon to be RICH, and will have her pick of men, including (in thir irrational minds and their husband's wildest fantasies) THEIR husbands.  If you could treat the average couple on a couch watching Casey Anthony on the news like a comic strip and put a though bubble over their heads, you would see something like "She's HOT. I wouldn't kick HER out of bed for eating crackers) over the MAN'S head, and probably something like "BITCH.  I wanna scratch her eyes out" over the WOMAN'S head.  To be fair to the women, some of the hatred comes from the fact that these women are themselves MOTHERS and have natural maternal instincts when it comes to the welfare of children.  Like Sarah Palin and her "mama Grizzlies" implies, women WILL protect their children and attack anyone who tries to harm them.  The protective instinct is not limited to their OWN children, either.  However, these dame women, more likely than not, know EXACTLY what the man next to them is REALLY yhinking as he stares at Casey Anthony, so they HATE her for THAT.

The other explanation for both the popularity of the Anthony case, and the anger over the verdict is the psychological phenomenon of "schaddenfreude."  The term comes from the two german words meaning "damage" and "joy" and more simply put, it means that one takes pleasure in the suffering of another, esp another who ordinarily would have it much better than the person enjohing their suffering.  In one of my favorite episodes of the series "Boston Legal", Betty White uttered the line that describes it best.  She said "It's FUN to see PRETTY people fall."  She was referring to Heather Locker's character being on trial for murdering her older and richer husband.  That line has a missing subtext, however.  It should read: "It's FUN f (for UGLY people) to see PRETTY people fall."  It can also apply to the scenario in which it would be fun for POOR people to see RICHER people suffer.  That mentalilty gas us Madame DeFarge and the French Revolution!  But the conflict between the pretty people and the less than pretty people can be found everywhere as well.  Think of the passions aroused against Lindsay Lohan, and Paris Hilton when THEY were facing jail.  It's the exact same thing with Casey Anthony.

If you look at the "angry mobs" outside the Orange County Courthouse and jail, you don't see many lookers in that crowd.  That may have something to do with the fact that a face contorted in anger is rarely an attractive one, but even putting THAT aside, most of the people baying Casey's blood are much more like the "hound" than the "fox."  This is not to say that everyone protesting outside the courthouse is only mad befcause they're jealous of Casey being young, HOT< and likely to make major bank, there are also MOTHERS and FATHERS out there as well as looks have nothing to do with THEIR anger and frustration at what they perceive is a system that failed to deliver JUSTICE for Caylee Marie Anthony and nay do the same for THEIR child some day,  Regardless of the driver, it's the EMOTION that's in charge of these people.

Any average person has to believe that Casey Anthony had something to do with what happened to Caylee Anthony.  She was the last person seen with her, she had motive, means, and opportunity, and there was a LOT of circumstantial evidence that could lead one to conclude she's involved.  But it's a far crown from being INVOLVED, to being a cold blooded murderer who actred with malice and deliberation.  Those are LEGAL standards, but such circumnstantial cases have sent many men and women to death rows who were later proved INNOCENT by advances in forensic technology such as DNA.  There was none of that here, but the ABSENCE of it ahs to give one pause and create doubt, and by legal standard, that "doubt" MUST innure to the benefit of the Defendant, like her or not.  Do I believe Casey is blameless in this case, not on your life.  But suspecting is a lot different form having it proven to the legal standard.  Like Johnny Cochran once said, "If the gove don't FIT, you MUST acquit."  In a jury trial, only TWELVE opinions matter, and OURS are NOT among them.

Looking at the facts presented from a DISPASSIONATE prospective, which iis what JURORS have to do, There is no way to overcome the presumption of innocence beyond a "reasonable" doubt  Courts exist to apply to LAW, and the legal standard for convinction is that the state must prove the DEFENDANT committed the crime charged "beyond a REASONABLE doubt."  The sticking point in many people's craws is that word "reasonable" which makes since, since it's a SUBJECTIVE standard.   To Adolph Hit;er. Josef Stalin, and Bill Ayers, GENOCIDE was "reasonable."  To a liberal, NOTHING is reasonable because they are driven purely by EMOTION which negates logic and reason,.  Either way, the only way to conclude the Casey Anthony wilfully MURDERED her child based on the evidence presented would be to let anger and hatred overrule logic and reason: and, fortunately for all FUTURE criminal defendants (of which ant of US can be one some day) that did NOT happen here.  LAW is the result of the thoughts and actions of MEN, and as such it is NOT prefect.  JUSTICE is the purvue of "god" or a "higher power" and is best left to him (or HER);

As for Casey Anthony, what SHE deserves at this time is to relegated back to ANONYMITY.  She should be devoutly IGNORED.  Do NOT buy her books, do NOT watch her on television or listen to any interview, close your wallets to anything Anthony, and justice will prevail because the only woman can PROFIT by her act or omission is iw WE buy anything form her.  If WE stand firm and turn her off, tune her out, and shut her down, she will be punished far greater by Universal Justice than anything the State of Florida could have done to her.  She's now a media junkie.  She CRAVES attention, positive OR negative, and she has to have it.  She's an attention junkie, and the best thing we can do is cut her off cold turkey.  Let her return to a life of anonymity and a the only career for which she's qualified, the STRIPPER POLE.  That  outcome would FINALLY deliver JUSTICE, even if it IS only POETIC,  for Caylee Anthony.

Tuesday, April 19, 2011

Journalism MALPRACTICE: "Liberals" Behaving BADLY!

A few SHORT months ago, following the tragic shootings in Tucson in which a Federal District Court Judge and others were killed, and Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was wounded, every Democratic Party power player and every liberal media pundit made teary eyed and impassioned PLEAS for civility and a decried the need for  a "new tone" in political discourse.  This was due in large part to the fact that they blamed the TEA party for the shooting, despite the fact that it was a LEFT wing loon that actually pulled the TRIGGER.  They made a similar erroneous conclusion when ANOTHER left wing lunatic flew his plane into a building housing offices of the Internal Revenue Service.  When did they stop hiring FACT checkers in the media, and if they DO still have them, they seem to be performing at the level of sleeping air trafic controllers these days.  So, why haven't they been FIRED?  Aah, they must be UNION so they CAN'T be fired for anything less than a CAPITAL crime and not without an act of Congress or the bureaucratic equivalent thereof.

After months of media diatribes about the need for "cilivilty" in our political discourse, the newly elected Republican Governor of Wilsconsin, the Hon. Scott Walker, attempted to carry out his mandate to reign in runaway government spending in his state which necessistated curbing the power and influence of public sector unions, and the ensuing protests commence and take on a tone of rheorc reminiscent of the WORST of the Viet Nam era protests.  UNION goons harasss and even THREATEN state politicians and their supporters, trash and vandalize public property and the media is suddenly nowhere to be found.  One Wisconsin TEACHER even went to far as to communicate TERRORISTIC DEATH THREATS to the republican politicians and again NOTHING from the press, or the LAW ENFORCEMENT community for that matter.

On Tax Day when TEA party members and supporters held rallies calling for less government intrusion into our lives and less government SPENDING, they were harassed and harrangued by UNION goons.  While the MEDIA has never waivered in its' attempts to paint peaceful TEA party members as out of control crazy people, they consistently FAIL to report the FACT that it's the leftist UNION goons that are REALLY the out of control crazy people.  If you compare the two sides OBJECTIVELY, it's the LEFTIST protestors that get arrested for disorderly conduct, vandalism, assault, etc.  Not ONE Tea party member has ever been ACCUSED, let along CONVICTED for such behavior.  If you look at the TEA Party Rally held in Washington DC, the grounds were left clean and litter free at the conclusion of the events, and no publci property was destroyed.  Conversely, when the LEFT held THEIR rally, the City of Washington DC had to spend THOUSANDS on clean up, and police had made numerous arrests and issued even more summonses and citations for disorderly conduct.   Last but not LEAST, several SEIU members were arrested for disorderly conduct and criminal trespass when they attempted to barge into the office of a state official in Seattle, and not one WORD of this appeared in the PRESS.

So, why isn't the "journalists" doing their JOBS?  If you ask THEM, they ARE, and they are working harder than ever to keep pace with fast breaking news in a twenty-four/seven news cycle.  If that's true and they ARE doing their jobs, they're doing them about as effectively as a sleeping air traffic controller, unless THEY have a different understanding of what their job IS than WE do.  I never aspired to be a professional journalist, but I DID take a journalism ELECTIVE in college and in that course I was taught that the job of a journalist was the objective dissemination of INFORMATION.  To the PROFESSIONAL journlaist, however, the job is more one of "shaping public opinon"  which they do by editing the story and deciding what information the public should and should NOT receive.  They think of us in the same way Jack Nicholson's character in "A Few Good Men" thought of Tom Cruise's character, namely that we can't "handle the truth."

The REALITY if not that we can't HANDLE it, but that if we were TOLD the TRUTH, we might come to the conclusion that the things the journalists and liberals in general support are not GOOD for this country and that's what they can't abide.  They can't accept the FACT that America was at it's best BEFORE we became a progressively dominated "nanny state." Most people who live their lives in the progressively and marxist dominated professions will NEVER understand that big government is not the solution to our problems,  but rather that it's the SOURCE of most of them. The best way to explain this view on the part of those who are of the progressive mindset is with this quote by  Dresden James, who said: ‎"When a well-packed web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic." That is why no liberal will EVER be able to relate to the average tea party member, or any small business owner.  And WHO is that has been the most ardent SELLERS of the "well packed web of lies" that government FORCE and not individual initiative and personal responsibility, is the best path to prosperity.  The two biggest "pushers" of the marxist DRUG are TEACHERS and JOURNALISTS.  

In the case of TEACHERS they were first the addicts (victims of OTHER liberal educators who instilled in them a sense of victimization and need for social "justice" delivered by government) and now they are PUSHERS perpetuating a vicious cycle that's gone on for GENERATIONS now and results in students who can't read or write, but know that gay penguins are good and dodgeball is BAD.  In the case of journalists, the same paradigm applies, but it is augmented and amplified because every "professional journalist" was trained in the Walter Lippmann model of journalism, aka PROPAGANDA.  

Walter Lippmann was part of Woodrow Wilson's propaganda trio that included Edward Bernays and George Creel.  These three were Wilson's allies in "persuading" the American oublic that we "needed" to be involved in World War I.  Wilson's motivation for wanting us to get into this conflict was very simple.  He saw it as the perfect way to bring out his "League of Nations" the precursor to the United Nations.  Of course, trying to persuade the average American that his or her SON should risk DEATH for this lofty and imperious goal was gonna take a different method of "persuasion" which is where hs trio of propagandists come into play.  In his book "The Phantom Public" Lippmann wrote "The hypothesis which seems to me the most fertile are that NEWS and the TRUTH are NOT the same thing and must be CLEARLY distinguished (emphasis added)."  He goes on to say: "the function of news is to signalize an event. The function of TRUTH is to bring to light the HIDDEN facts, to set them into relation with each other, and to make a picture of reality on which can ACT"  In other words, namely MINE, the "journalist" is, in FACT, a puppet master, NOT an honest broker of information.  Is it any surprise then that the most infamous propagandist of them all, Dr. Josef Goebbels, Hitler's Minister of PROPAGANDA, read this BOOK.

Walter Lippmann is often hailed as the "Father of MODERN journalism" especially by students of the Columbia University School of Journalism where he is practically a DEITY. Columbia University has been the "mother ship" of American Communism (which is what many of the so-called liberals REALLY are) ever since the Nazis drove the Frankfurt Institute communists out of Germany and onto the faculty of Columbia University. So is it any wonder that students at THAT school of journallism would embrace PROPAGANDA as a means to their desired goals? In point of fact, the modern censorship and thought control phenomenon known as "political correctness ALSO originated at Columbia University, and was the product of Dr. Herbert Markusa and his colleagues, part of the aforementioned Frankfurt Institute Communists expatriated from Germany by the Nazis.  Put marxists who worship at the alter of "political correctness" and "propaganda" together, and you have today's "Journalists."   

The most "liberal" professions in the fabric of mdoern American society are the legal profession, the teaching profession, and the journalism profession.  So, when teachers "misbehave" for political reasons, it stands to reason that their fellow liberals in the journalism profession would IGNORE of downplay  that behavior so that the FACTS don't get in the way of the NARRATIVE they're trying to sell us.  Teachers get a pass for bad political behavior, but they're front page news if they have SEX with a student.  Criminal and terroristic death threats to opposing party policians-NOT news, but consensual sex with horny student-front page NEWS.  It's all, quite simply, LIBERALS behaving BADLY!

Wednesday, February 9, 2011

The Baby Boomers, Our "WORST" Generation!

"What's the matter with kids today?" is the title of a song from the musical "Bye, Bye Birdie" pretty much sums up everything I'm about to say about the generation that gave us hippies, "Hanoi Jane" Fonda, the "Easy Rider," Woodstock, and free lovin''. I'm referring of course to the "Baby Boomer" generation, those children born in the late 1940's following the end of World War II. This generation owes it's size and everything else to the fact that there were a lot of "hookups" happening when "Johnny came marching home" from the European and Pacific theaters. These actions had consequences,  and in keeping with the morality of the day, these men and women got MARRIED and actually RAISED the children they had conceived during their drunken "hook-ups."  Lucky for the BOOMER Generation, there WERE no Planned Parenthood abortion mills or free clinics around the corner to keep THEM from being born.

So how is it possible that the generation that survived the Great Depression and then fought and defeated the Axis powers of Germany, Italy, and Japan, came back home and led this country to one of the greatest periods of prosperity and growth the word has ever seen, produce a generation that in less than fifty years time would singlehandedly undo everything their parents and grandparents had done for them? Sadly, a significant portion of the blame rests wtih the Greatest Generation, themselves. They were so determined that their children should know none of the hardship and adversity that marred their younger lives that they were over-indulgent and over protective of their children to the extent that they literally spoiled them ROTTEN.

The GREATEST generation had grown up in a country that was in the grip of the Great Depression for mos of their lives.  They had their CHARACTER forged in the blood and iron of World War II.  They had know real hardships, deprivation, and seen all manner of human suffering and they were determined that their CHILDREN would not know such things if they could help it.  This goal was made possible by the economc boom that followed the finish of both the WAR, and the economic policies of Frankin D. Roosevelt wnen a President with good old fashined COMMON SENSE took the office and proceeded to dismantle the maze of alphbet soup buracracies put in place during the New (or was it RAW)  Deal.  Truman understood that it was in fact these very policies that were responsbile for the United States being the ONLY country int he WORLD to have a GREAT Deperession, which  had only ABATED during the war and reared its' ugly head once more when Johnny came marching HOME again and tried to a find a JOB that did NOT include catching bullets as part of its' enumeration of duties.

Thanks to the economic boom that Truman enabled, the children of the BOOMER generation were the first to grow up if not actually IN the LAP of luxury, they were in pretty closee proximity to it.  It was THIS generation that was the first to expect new cloethes at the beginning of EVERY school year, catered birthday parties (complete with clown or magician), a backyard swimming pool, air conditioning, television, and the possibility of getting handed the keys to a new or late model used  car upon reaching their seixteenth birthday and obtaining their driver's license.  This was ALSO the first generation for whom the possibilty of a university education was more than a remote one.  Sadly, many of the boomers did go to college wehre they ran smack into the waiting arms of communist ideologues tthat had been infiltrating the faculties of these colleges and universities since the early part of tghe twentieth century, when Americans learned the extent of the atrocities perpetrated by the Bolsheviks during the Russian Revolution and Communism become the anathema to Americans that it did and SHOULD have REMAINED!

Imagine the pride shining in the eyes of parents of the GREATEST generation as they packed their wholesome, fresh faced, corn fed progreny off to college to become Doctors, or engineers, or even LAWYERS (which were still REPECTED in those days). These children would have opportunities the parents never even DREAMED of.  Conversely, imaagine their HORROR when, a few short months LATER, they opened their door to find a greasy, long-haired, unhygenic, drug addled HIPPIE standing  where there son had been, or if it's a daughter, add PREGNANT to the description, the father being one of her philosophy professors.  Now imagine, that you've reovered from your initilal shock,  only to find out over dinner that the child that had revered you as his HERO and wanted to be just like you, now referred to you as a "capitalist PIG" or "the MAN" or "the ESTABLISHMENT" or  a  "Bourgoisee criminal" and vowing to bring your entire way of life down around your ears.  These were scenes that played out in American households all throughout the SIXTIES and SEVENTIES.

To be fair, not EVERY member of the boomer generation turned into a HIPPIE.  Indeed, many of them, thanks to a strong  Christian family upbringing, were able to resist the lure of marxism and the temptations of hedonism.  It was for this reason that more extreme marxists like Bill Ayers opined that students needed to be radicalized at an earlier age, prompting many commynist thinkers and sympathizers to become teachers themselves and enter the elementary and secondary schools to being indoctrinating children that were less mature and less experienced.  For these reasons, they were less likely to oppose the ideas being forced upon them by teachers more interested in creating future communistis than in actually TEACHING children to do anything productive, like READ.   But that's a topic for a while different essay.

If there is a simple way to distill the real legacy of the boomers into something that will fit in a Twitter post, it would be that this generation destroyed the American concepts of  personal responsibility, and the FAMILY. If you think about it logically, thanks to boomers actions no long have CONSEQUENCES, at leastt not PERSONAL ones, in theory at least.

Think about it this way. If you're sexually irresponsible, they created a pill to spare you those consequnces, and they'll give out condoms as well as teach you how to do things in school. if you STILL manage to and get KNOCKED up, they made it legal to murder the baby so it doesn't become a burden to you, and they'll even help you get around telling your PARENTS.   If you opt to HAVE the child, you're eligible for all manner of free stuff from the federal and state government including unearned income tax cfedit, welfare, subsidized housing, food stamps, medicaid, etc.  You've hit the JACKPOT.

Likewise, If you rack up debt you can't pay, no problem. They pass a law and suddenly you're FREE and CLEAR.  If you take crazy risks run a business into the ground, no problem. Either the GOVENRMENT can bail you out, or you can go bankrupt, and as long as you  haven't committed a criminal act (like a Madoff style Ponzii scheme) , your house, car, Rolex, and bank accounts are safe.  Too bad the same CAN'T be said for your shareholders.  This explains to conduct of Wall Street, Counbtrywide Morrgage, and FANNIE  MAE and FREDDIE MAC in causing the recent housing and stock market MELTDOWN,  but why it is that only Bernie Madoff lost everything and wen tto PRISON?  Why is Angelo Mozilla still strutting aroudn free an dliving in his placial estate?

IN a different way of illustrating lack of personal responsibility, if a government wants to invade your privacy but that pesky FOURTH Amendment keeps getting in the way, no problem again. We'll just pass a PATRIOT Act, and suddenly, they can LEGALLY come into your home, business, bank account, mailbox or wahever whenever they  please, and WITHOUT your knowledge, let alone CONSENT.  The whole BOOMER generation thinks they can LEGISLATE anything, and that their drones in the LEGAL system and Judiciary will give them cover.  Sadly, they seem to have been RIGHT in that assessment for the most part. Progressive or liberal activist judges have legalized CRIMINAL behavior msny times over.

Why do you think good little commies become either LAWYERS or Community Organizers? It's to FORCE legislation, or write law via the BENCH that they can't get through the ballot box such as ABORTION!  No elected legislator ever passed a law legalizing abortion.  That was done by the COURTS.  Since the landmark and totally UNCONSITUTIONAL "Roe v. Wade" case, however, MANY legislators have voted to spend taxpayer dollars subsidizing the abortion INDUSTRY via Planned Parenthood, and now through Obama Care!   Since the boomers entered colleges, more generation of Americans are becoming Teachers, lawyers, or community organizers than any other career fields.  Wouldn't it nice if you could find a DOCTOR when you need one?  Wouldn't it be even NICER to find MEN who know how to DO more than talk or type?

The BOOMERS have been on the political, social, and economic scene for nearly FIFTY years now, and in their wake is a country that went from a moral nation and an eoconomic and military superpower that produced the finest goods in the world and had a rock solid economy, to a national riddled with debt, social problems, economic misery, devalued currency and eroding freedoms.  To see how  much we've lost form what THEY inherited, you have only to watch old movies, find old newspapers on microfilm at your local library, watch reruns of "Happy Days" or even the more current show "Mad Men."  I think one of the reasons for the popularity of THAT show, it that it reminds of the time in our history when it was really GOOD to be an AMERICAN!   Clearly we've lost a LOT during the stewardship of the BOOMERS, and like the ripple effect created in a pond when you toss a rock in th ecenter, this generation has INFECTED every successive one in greater and greater numbers.

So, the next time you see an aged hippie boomer rolling down the road on his power scooter and you're sorely temptedto exact a little "poetic justice" by pushing it over on top of him, think again.  The mantra of the boomers was "if if feels good, DO it" and though it may FEEL great to knock that old hippie over on his ass and crush him under his own scooter, don't DO it.  In that way, you're REJECTING his entire philosophy of life, and only by doing THAT can we hope to being to clean up the MESS left to us by our WORST generation and restore this country to it's natural state of FREEDOM and PROSPERITY!

Friday, June 4, 2010

An Open Letter to All Celebutards!!!

Dear Celebutards: (And you KNOW who you are)

Have any of you ever heard the phrase "biting off the hand that's feeding you?" Well, that is exactly what you're doing when you consistently attack this country's free market capital economy, for it is only THAT economy that makes your pampered, privileged, and overindulgent lifestyles possible. At the risk of breaching that dreaded "separation of church and state" you have been endowed by your creator with a gift. Whether that gift is a talent, athletic ability, the ability to string words together, or even just the vicissitude of good genes that makes you look good in jeans or a bikini, that "gift" together with some action on your part, enables you to live the lifetstyle and have the fame and adulation you now enjoy. It is that adulation that enables you to command attention when you speak. Sadly, most people don't actually LISTEN when you speak because they are too busy either mentally undressing you, or wishing that they WERE you to hear what you're saying. That enraptured state means that whatever you say will permeate the brains of your fans without any critical thinking intervention on their part so they will parrot what you say as if it were some kind of gospel.

To quote one of your own, the great Stan Lee, "with great power comes great responsibility" In case you don't recognize it, that was the sage Uncle Ben to the young Peter Parker, aka Spiderman. I realize that many of you did not ASK to be role models, and that you would probably rather NOT have gaggles of teenaged boys and girls aping your every move and hanging on your every word. In a perfect world that would not happen, but in THIS one, alas, it DOES. In a PERFECT world your drug and booze fueled exploits wouldn't get found the clock attention from tabloid press and the networks whose sole reason for existence is to expose us to what you do when you're not doing your so-called JOBS, bur without the Lindsey Lohan's of the world, where would the tabloids, the paparazzi, and shows like Entertainment Tonight, Access Hollywood, or the entire E network be? But, because of the aforementioned entities, things you do and say are exposed to young and old alike so for God's sake please THINK before you speak.

Then there are the real hypocrites, like Michael Moore and Al Gore, who reap for themselves the benefits of free market capitalism while advocating for a form of governance that will effectively deny those same benefits to those who come after them. Michael Moore is the worst for he KNOWS that if he achieves the world he claims to want, he will have no place in it. It is only through free market capitalism and free enterprise that he enjoys the lifestyle and menu choices that he has clearly enjoyed with great relish. Hypocrites like these who talk the talk, but don't walk the walk make me ill. Though I totally disagree with the "greenies" like Leonardo DiCaprio, Ed Begley, Jr, Darryl Hannah, Matthew Modine, etc. I can at least respect them because unlike Moore and Gore, they PRACTICE what they preach. But Leo, you can only drive that Tessla sportscar and live in that green condo because people are willing to invest their hard-earnred GREEN so the studios can make your movies and people can buy tickets to SEE those movies. Again, I applaud you for your commitment to the environment, but remember that not everyone can AFFORD to do what you do. Same with Brad and Angie and all the other celebs that have helped out in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina and again in Haiti. I applaud your generosity and your selflessness. But again remember that you could only DO those things because of the free market and capitalism.

The reason I chose the Sean Penn/Harvey Milk caricature as the illustration for this essay was that he and others in hollywood LIKE him bring to mind the old commercial that starts out with a soap opera actor saying "I'm not a Doctor, but I play one on TV" and then proceeds to advise us to buy some over the counter antacid.  What does he know?  He flat out said he's NOT a Doctor. At least that commercial was honest enough to give you a disclaimer so you could take the "doctor's" advice for what it was worth.  Sadly, actors like Sean Penn, Tim Robbins, Natalie Potman, etc. do NOT give you that disclaimer before they proceed to give political advice or speeches but c'mon, this is Jeff Spicoli we're talkin' about.  Just cuz he's PLAYED politicians doesn't he he KNOWS politics.  In fact he and his ilk are so far removed from the real world consequences of politics they have no business EVER getting involved in them, but thanks to Frank Sinatra and the Rat Pack and their involvement the Kennedy campaign, there's been an unholy alliance between the fantasy merchants of Hollywood, and the political fantasies of Washington, DC.  Problem is that WE in the REAL world have to LIVE with those politics, Hollywood is, for the most part, insulated by layers of wealth and privilege and therefore do NOT experience the horrors they inflict on us by virtue of helping elect "Stuart Smalley" to the United States Senate.

It's not at all surprising to me that more and more celebrity types seem to embrace the "total government" concept of Marxism.  If they're under the age of 40 and attended public school, they've been indoctrinated by left leaning teachers and school administrators since pre-school.  If they went on to attend college, as many actors and athletes did, the indoctrination went into overdrive.  If they never got out of the protected bubble envicornment of academia and into the REAL world prior to achieving their "celebrity" status, they've never had a chance to learn the way th world REALLY works for themselves.  I had the same public school education.indoctrination and also attended a very liberal univeristy, but it was my military service and business entrepreneurial  adventures that taught me (the HARD way) that everything I had been taught to believe in was a crock of SAND.  Today's youg people are having the same realizations I did, but sadly, thanks to liberal thinking a social experimentation, the lack the coping mechanisms to deal with their disappointments.  This is the reason for the phenomenon known as the "quarter life crisis."  In Hollywood, it's what happens when a child star can't make the transition to adult actor cuz he's no longer the cherubic cutie pie he was when he was six.  In sports, it's when an athlete peaks in high school or college and never quite makes it to the big game.  In business, it's when you realize there's no such thing as a participation triphy, and that if you mess up, you don't see a purple pen mark, you grt a PINK SLIP!  If you've never been allowed to fail before, how can you be expected to handle a failure in later life?

The older hollywood liberal/radical types like Sean Penn are the product of indoctrination both in schools, and in their day to day acting experiences.  They were first the protegees of actors from the Boomer generation, many of whom were the drug addled hippies of Woodstock, and they've become drug and alcohol addled themselves.  Add to that a steady diet of memorizing lines written by writers who are (for the most part) to the left of Nikiti Sruschev going back to the days of the early twentieth century when Communism and Progressivism were hip, slick, and cool and attracted the likes of playwright Eugene O'Neil and Hollywood Ten writer, Ring Landner, Jr. and you can see how the post boomers come to think as they do.  As many actors become producers, again due to the beuefit of free market capitalism, the cycle is perpetuated from mentors to protegees.  Notwithstanding all the foregoing, Hollywood is a BIG Union controlled town, and all know where UNIONS come from.  I'm sure that most of this is new information to you, and it's an arrogant person indeed that doesn't think he or she still has much to learn in this life.   The reason the celebutards do not know these things is because they have not been permitted to LEARN them.  Our history and the true nature of what it means to be an AMERICAN has been stolen from several generations of our citizens and it is only NOW that we're starting to realize this and seeking to regain that knowledge for ourselves.

"The problem with socialism is that sooner or later, you run out of OTHER people's money."  That's a quote from the "Iron Lady"  herself, Britain's Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher.  So my dear celebutard, if yiou think your lifestyle will not be affected if the government you champion gets the total control it's craving, think again.  If we are no longer a free marked capitalist economy, where will the money come from for YOU?  There will only be ONE patron left that can afford you, and that patron will be the government.  Evern wonder what it was like to be an enetertainment or sports celebrity in Nazi Germany?  Wonder what it was like for Max Schmelling to return to Gernmany and face the likes of Hermann Goering and Adolf Hitler after getting his butt beat by a black man?  I sure it was NOT a pleasant experience for him.  And I have first hand knowledge of what it was like to be a dancer in the Moscow Ballet back in the days of Leonid Brezhnev cuz I met a woman who used to be one and subsequently became the mistress of the said Leonid Breznev, a man who was about as attractive to her as a bullfrog, but who was able to give her a nicer apartnment, better clothes, jewelry, etc. until he tired of her and moved on to a younger woman.  She fell from grace almost as quickly and found herself in her middle aged years working in a factory that produced parts for tanks.  It was NOT a glorious existence.  Think it can't happen to you?  You're too young to remember the days of the studio bosses, but how about the child stars of Different Strokes?  Their fortunes were stolen out from under them and they turned to lives of prostitution, pornography and crime.  They all DIED well before their time, too.  Think it can't happen to you?  If we get a Totalitarian government that craves money, how long do you think it'll be fore it wans YOURS?  After all, when asked why he robbed banks, famed bank robber Willie Sutton replied, "cuz that's where the money is."

As a small business entrepreneur and free market capitalist, I don't begrudge you your success.  I understand that your pretty face, hot body, talent pool, ability to punt, hit, or catch a ball, are your stock in trade.  Unlike the President you so giddily supported in the last election, I don't think there ever comes a time that "You've made enough money." because I understand that as long as people are willing to buy what you sell, you're entitled to be paid.  If you likeness sells tickets, DVDs, sports drinks, cereal, sneakers, etc., you're entitled to a share in that revenue and it should only be the free market itself that places a cap upon your earnings, not a governmental entity.  I'm sure you see it the same way now that we're talking about YOUR money don't you?  But if that government you champion takes away OURS, then we won't be able to hire people so neither we nor they will be able to buy those things, or tickets to see your movies, concerts, or sporting events.  Should that happen, you won't have the millions to party with, either.  And if that government chooses to increase the taxes you pay, how many of you will keep company with Wesley Snipes in federal court trying to protect what is YOURS from a greedy, grapsing, intrusive federal government.  How long do you think it will be before that same government tells you what kind of content you can produce, or how much skin you can show, etc.  Where does it end?  The reality is, that it DOESN'T end.  Power and control only create a desire for MORE power and control.  If you think your parents and coaches are bad, try a nanny state GOVERNMENT on for size.  I've SEEN what kind of government can do, and it's not pretty.  I've walked in the ruins of the former Soviet Union and belive me, you don't want THAT here.

So, in conclusion, Dear Celebutard, SHUT UP and sing, act, dance, and hit, bounce, or kick that ball, or do whatever it is that you do to deserve your celebrity and notoriety (and believe me when I say for MANY of you, I have no CLUE what that is) secure in the knowledge that, unless we actually GET the government you champion, life will be wonderful for you.  But leave the politics to those of us who live the REAL world and do the things that make your fairytale existence possible.  If you continue to bite the hands that are feeding you, one day there might not be anyone left to do so.  Can you imagine Michael Moore on a DIET?  Unless you want to go back to waiting tables, digging ditches, or flipping burgers, be careful what you wish for because in the words of Founding Father Thomas Jefferson, "that government that is big enough to give you anything you want is also strong enough to take away EVERYTHING you have."


Silence Dewgoode (GOOGLE HER)
Flyover Country,(what the glitteratti refer to as the land between Hollywood and New York or Washington, DC)  USA