"I feel pretty, oh so pretty. I feel pretty and witty and gay. And I pity any _________ who isn't me today."
MikeH.
MikeH.
30 June 2010
28 June 2010
Knowing The Rules
"The enemy, properly goaded and guided in his reaction, will be your major strength." - Saul Alinsky
If you are a frequent listener to Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck, you have no doubt heard them make reference to Saul Alinsky and his book, "Rules for Radicals." For the most part, the rules they speak about usually pertain to stratagem used by members of the current regime to help bring about a desired end by manipulating human behavior in opponents and the court of public opinion.
So, I decided it was time I learned more about Alinsky; to get inside his head so that I could better understand what his rules for radicals are, how many there are and why Alinsky had a desire to scrap truth, justice and the American way.
Prior to doing my homework for this posting, I had pretty much assumed that Saul Alinsky was an evil socialist son of a bitch and that his book, "Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals" was intended as a guide for all the evil socialist sons of bitches who are intent on the "fundamental transformation" of America. But, it seems I may have been wrong in my assumption.
Alinsky was an American community organizer and writer who died in 1972. He is generally considered to be the founder of modern community organizing. His organizing skills were focused on improving the living conditions of poor communities across North America, primarily in African-American ghettos. His ideas were later adapted by some U.S. college students and other young organizers in the late 1960s and formed part of their strategies for organizing on campus and beyond.
For Alinsky, organizing was the process of highlighting whatever he believed to be wrong and convincing people that they can actually do something about it. If people feel they don't have the power to change a situation, they stop thinking about it. (Note as a possible parallel: Alinsky was once ask, if because of his strict Jewish upbringing, he ever encountered anti-semitism while growing up in Chicago during the early 1900s. He replied, "it was so pervasive you really didn't even think about it; you just accepted it as a fact of life.")
During an interview, Alinsky was asked if he ever considered becoming a Communist party member and he replied, "not at any time. I've never joined any organization, not even the ones I've organized myself. I prize my own independence too much. I could never accept the rigid dogma or ideology, whether it's Christianity or Marxism." Playboy Magazine had compared Alinsky to Thomas Paine as "one of the great American leaders of the non-socialist left.
Alinsky was a Democrat (of the old school) who believed Americans, in the 1970s, were living in frustration and despair, worried about their future and ripe for a turn to radical social change and to become politically active citizens. He feared the middle class would be driven to a right wing viewpoint, "making them ripe for the plucking by some guy on horseback promising a return to the vanished verities of yesterday." His stated motive: "I love this goddamn country and we're going to take it back."
In the opening paragraph of chapter one of Rules for Radicals, Alinsky writes, "What follows is for those who want to change the world from what it is to what they believe it should be, The "Prince" was written by Machiavelli for the Haves, on how to hold power. Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots, on how to take it away.
Whether Alinsky was a bad guy with bad intentions or, a good guy whose ideas became little more than a useful tool from a useful idiot, to be used by evil, for evil, I'll leave for you to decide.
Alinsky's Rules: (He emphasizes these rules must be translated into real life tactics that are fluid and responsive to the situation at hand)
Rule 1: Power is not only what you have, but what an opponent thinks you have. If your organization is small, hide your numbers in the dark and raise a din that will make everyone think you have many more people than you do.
Rule 2: Never go outside the experience of your people. The result is confusion, fear and retreat.
Rule 3: Whenever possible, go outside the experience of an opponent. Here you want to cause confusion, fear and retreat.
Rule 4: Make opponents live up to their own book of rules. "You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity."
Rule 5: Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. It's hard to counterattack ridicule, and it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.
Rule 6: A good tactic is one your people enjoy. "If your people aren't having a ball doing it, there is something very wrong with the tactic."
Rule 7: A tactic that drags on for too long becomes a drag. Commitment may become ritualistic as people turn to other issues.
Rule 8: Keep the pressure on. Use different tactics and actions, and use all events of the period for your purpose. "The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition. It is this that will cause the opposition to react to your advantage."
Rule 9: The threat is more terrifying than the thing itself.
Rule 10: The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative. Avoid being trapped by an opponent or an interviewer who says, "Okay, what would you do?"
Rule 11: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it. Don't try to attack abstract corporations or bureaucracies. Identify a responsible individual. Ignore attempts to shift or spread the blame.
And that's it! Eleven simple rules that, when applied to nearly any confrontational interaction, can bring about, a somewhat predictable, desired end. However, in a separate chapter, Alinsky suggests that the perennial question, "does the end justify the means," is meaningless as it stands. The real and only question regarding the ethics of means and ends is, and always has been, "does this particular end justify this particular means?"
I believe it's important to know and understand these rules so that they can be recognized when put into play. This may allow for a non-predictable response to be given, turning their desired end into their failed end.
MikeH.
If you are a frequent listener to Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck, you have no doubt heard them make reference to Saul Alinsky and his book, "Rules for Radicals." For the most part, the rules they speak about usually pertain to stratagem used by members of the current regime to help bring about a desired end by manipulating human behavior in opponents and the court of public opinion.
So, I decided it was time I learned more about Alinsky; to get inside his head so that I could better understand what his rules for radicals are, how many there are and why Alinsky had a desire to scrap truth, justice and the American way.
Prior to doing my homework for this posting, I had pretty much assumed that Saul Alinsky was an evil socialist son of a bitch and that his book, "Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals" was intended as a guide for all the evil socialist sons of bitches who are intent on the "fundamental transformation" of America. But, it seems I may have been wrong in my assumption.
Alinsky was an American community organizer and writer who died in 1972. He is generally considered to be the founder of modern community organizing. His organizing skills were focused on improving the living conditions of poor communities across North America, primarily in African-American ghettos. His ideas were later adapted by some U.S. college students and other young organizers in the late 1960s and formed part of their strategies for organizing on campus and beyond.
For Alinsky, organizing was the process of highlighting whatever he believed to be wrong and convincing people that they can actually do something about it. If people feel they don't have the power to change a situation, they stop thinking about it. (Note as a possible parallel: Alinsky was once ask, if because of his strict Jewish upbringing, he ever encountered anti-semitism while growing up in Chicago during the early 1900s. He replied, "it was so pervasive you really didn't even think about it; you just accepted it as a fact of life.")
During an interview, Alinsky was asked if he ever considered becoming a Communist party member and he replied, "not at any time. I've never joined any organization, not even the ones I've organized myself. I prize my own independence too much. I could never accept the rigid dogma or ideology, whether it's Christianity or Marxism." Playboy Magazine had compared Alinsky to Thomas Paine as "one of the great American leaders of the non-socialist left.
Alinsky was a Democrat (of the old school) who believed Americans, in the 1970s, were living in frustration and despair, worried about their future and ripe for a turn to radical social change and to become politically active citizens. He feared the middle class would be driven to a right wing viewpoint, "making them ripe for the plucking by some guy on horseback promising a return to the vanished verities of yesterday." His stated motive: "I love this goddamn country and we're going to take it back."
In the opening paragraph of chapter one of Rules for Radicals, Alinsky writes, "What follows is for those who want to change the world from what it is to what they believe it should be, The "Prince" was written by Machiavelli for the Haves, on how to hold power. Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots, on how to take it away.
Whether Alinsky was a bad guy with bad intentions or, a good guy whose ideas became little more than a useful tool from a useful idiot, to be used by evil, for evil, I'll leave for you to decide.
Alinsky's Rules: (He emphasizes these rules must be translated into real life tactics that are fluid and responsive to the situation at hand)
Rule 1: Power is not only what you have, but what an opponent thinks you have. If your organization is small, hide your numbers in the dark and raise a din that will make everyone think you have many more people than you do.
Rule 2: Never go outside the experience of your people. The result is confusion, fear and retreat.
Rule 3: Whenever possible, go outside the experience of an opponent. Here you want to cause confusion, fear and retreat.
Rule 4: Make opponents live up to their own book of rules. "You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity."
Rule 5: Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. It's hard to counterattack ridicule, and it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.
Rule 6: A good tactic is one your people enjoy. "If your people aren't having a ball doing it, there is something very wrong with the tactic."
Rule 7: A tactic that drags on for too long becomes a drag. Commitment may become ritualistic as people turn to other issues.
Rule 8: Keep the pressure on. Use different tactics and actions, and use all events of the period for your purpose. "The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition. It is this that will cause the opposition to react to your advantage."
Rule 9: The threat is more terrifying than the thing itself.
Rule 10: The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative. Avoid being trapped by an opponent or an interviewer who says, "Okay, what would you do?"
Rule 11: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it. Don't try to attack abstract corporations or bureaucracies. Identify a responsible individual. Ignore attempts to shift or spread the blame.
And that's it! Eleven simple rules that, when applied to nearly any confrontational interaction, can bring about, a somewhat predictable, desired end. However, in a separate chapter, Alinsky suggests that the perennial question, "does the end justify the means," is meaningless as it stands. The real and only question regarding the ethics of means and ends is, and always has been, "does this particular end justify this particular means?"
I believe it's important to know and understand these rules so that they can be recognized when put into play. This may allow for a non-predictable response to be given, turning their desired end into their failed end.
MikeH.
27 June 2010
GaGa, Zero And Facebook Fan Record
According to msnbc.com, there is a race on to see who will log ten million Facebook fans first, Lady GaGa or the Big Zero. Friday morning, His Zipness was leading by some 30,000 hits, reported CNN. (no bias there, right!!!) A short time later, Lady GaGa's numbers surged ahead to 9,162,832 to Zero's 9,122,063 hits.
Although I have no use for either, my money is on O to win by a landslide. Miss (or Ms. or Mr.) GaGa needs to understand; NaDa has the experience when it comes to voter fraud. As I type this, the new and improved ACORN, and SEIU, are busy "stuffing" the ballots.
MikeH.
26 June 2010
No Commentary Required
But if I did have something to say, I'd probably be required to change my URL to a .XXX address.
25 June 2010
More History Lessens
That good looking fella, in the photo above, is former Soviet Premier, Nikita Khrushchev. Way back on 18 Nov. 1956, he was addressing Western ambassadors at a reception at the Polish embassy in Moscow when he made the statement "My vas pokhoronim!" Generally, this is translated into English as "We will bury you!" However, that translation is somewhat distorted. The actual quote reads: "Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will dig you in!"
This was during the stupidly named period of time known as the "Cold War." It may have been "cold" in that neither the U.S. or the U.S.S.R. were actively engaged in a conventionally understood means of warfare, but it was a very hot war of wills and psychological browbeating. There was a recurring rattling of sabers and the very real threat of a possible all out nuclear exchange between the two countries. So, of course, that four word statement certainly seemed to be a serious threat suggesting the U.S. would surely fall, if or when, the nukes started dropping.
English musician Sting in his song "Russians" written in 1985 said:
Mr. Khrushchev said we will bury you
I don't subscribe to his point of view
It would be such an ignorant thing to do
If the Russians love their children too.
Some six years later, 24 Aug. 1963, Khrushchev remarked during his speech in Yugoslavia, "I once said 'We will bury you,' and I got into trouble with it. Of course we will not bury you with a shovel. Your own working class will bury you." This statement is understood to be a reference to the Marxist saying, "The proletariat is the undertaker of capitalism." (Proletariat: the social class who does unskilled manual labor)
To expand on this a bit further; written in chapter 1 of the Communist Manifesto: "What the bourgeoisie therefore produces, above all, are it's own gravediggers. It's fall and the victory of the proletariat are equally inevitable." (Bourgeoisie: the social class between the lower and upper classes)
To understand this thinking requires an understanding of the events that led to the Russian Revolutions, of which there were several in 1917. In my best attempt at a nutshell synopsis: Prior to and into World War I, the Russian people were increasingly ignored by the Russian Empire of Tsar Nicholas II. Living conditions were and continued to become more deplorable, especially as the Russian economy was depleted as a result of funding the war effort.
Russian soldiers were being sent to fight without uniforms or proper clothing for the conditions, food and, without firearms. Only five months into the war, some 390,000 Russian men had lost their lives and nearly 1,000,000 were injured. Soldiers didn't feel they were being treated as human beings, or even as valued soldiers, but rather as a raw material to be squandered for the purposes of the rich and powerful.
Back home, the main problems were food shortages and rising prices. Inflation pushed real incomes down at an alarmingly rapid rate and shortages made it difficult to buy even what one could afford. Strikes increased and so did crime; but, for the most part, people suffered and endured, scouring for food. Working class women in St. Petersburg spent up to forty hours per week standing in food lines. Many were forced to begging or turning to prostitution or crime and grumbling about the rich, and wondering when and how this would all come to an end.
Nicholas was blamed for all of the crises, and what little support he had left began to crumble. In November 1916, he was warned that a terrible disaster would grip the country unless a constitutional form of government was put in place. In typical fashion, Nicholas ignored the warnings and his regime collapsed a few months later during the February Revolution of 1917.
(For my own convenience and in an effort to keep this nutshelled, I am going to go hyper-simple)
Understanding that the masses of the time were poorly educated and unskilled, they were easily taken to the idea that the rich and powerful were bad and a government run by the working class would result in a better deal for the working masses. A government geared to social policies to benefit all of the people, and in a manner that put everyone into one social class. A class wherein the words of Karl Marx would be realized; "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need." In short... the redistribution of wealth.
Leon Trotsky said that the goal of socialism in Russia would not be fully realized without the success of the world revolution. And a revolutionary wave caused by the Russian Revolution lasted until 1923. Despite initial hopes for success in the German Revolution, in the short lived Hungarian Soviet Republic and others like it, no other Marxist movement succeeded in keeping power in it's hands.
Joseph Stalin later rejected this idea, stating that socialism was possible in one country. However, in 1924, Stalin reversed his position and used the argument that success of socialism does require the workers of other countries in order to make it happen. The thinking boiled down to, the more countries under communist rule, the less chance the masses might see and be swayed by that nasty old capitalism.
This was during the stupidly named period of time known as the "Cold War." It may have been "cold" in that neither the U.S. or the U.S.S.R. were actively engaged in a conventionally understood means of warfare, but it was a very hot war of wills and psychological browbeating. There was a recurring rattling of sabers and the very real threat of a possible all out nuclear exchange between the two countries. So, of course, that four word statement certainly seemed to be a serious threat suggesting the U.S. would surely fall, if or when, the nukes started dropping.
English musician Sting in his song "Russians" written in 1985 said:
Mr. Khrushchev said we will bury you
I don't subscribe to his point of view
It would be such an ignorant thing to do
If the Russians love their children too.
Some six years later, 24 Aug. 1963, Khrushchev remarked during his speech in Yugoslavia, "I once said 'We will bury you,' and I got into trouble with it. Of course we will not bury you with a shovel. Your own working class will bury you." This statement is understood to be a reference to the Marxist saying, "The proletariat is the undertaker of capitalism." (Proletariat: the social class who does unskilled manual labor)
To expand on this a bit further; written in chapter 1 of the Communist Manifesto: "What the bourgeoisie therefore produces, above all, are it's own gravediggers. It's fall and the victory of the proletariat are equally inevitable." (Bourgeoisie: the social class between the lower and upper classes)
To understand this thinking requires an understanding of the events that led to the Russian Revolutions, of which there were several in 1917. In my best attempt at a nutshell synopsis: Prior to and into World War I, the Russian people were increasingly ignored by the Russian Empire of Tsar Nicholas II. Living conditions were and continued to become more deplorable, especially as the Russian economy was depleted as a result of funding the war effort.
Russian soldiers were being sent to fight without uniforms or proper clothing for the conditions, food and, without firearms. Only five months into the war, some 390,000 Russian men had lost their lives and nearly 1,000,000 were injured. Soldiers didn't feel they were being treated as human beings, or even as valued soldiers, but rather as a raw material to be squandered for the purposes of the rich and powerful.
Back home, the main problems were food shortages and rising prices. Inflation pushed real incomes down at an alarmingly rapid rate and shortages made it difficult to buy even what one could afford. Strikes increased and so did crime; but, for the most part, people suffered and endured, scouring for food. Working class women in St. Petersburg spent up to forty hours per week standing in food lines. Many were forced to begging or turning to prostitution or crime and grumbling about the rich, and wondering when and how this would all come to an end.
Nicholas was blamed for all of the crises, and what little support he had left began to crumble. In November 1916, he was warned that a terrible disaster would grip the country unless a constitutional form of government was put in place. In typical fashion, Nicholas ignored the warnings and his regime collapsed a few months later during the February Revolution of 1917.
(For my own convenience and in an effort to keep this nutshelled, I am going to go hyper-simple)
Understanding that the masses of the time were poorly educated and unskilled, they were easily taken to the idea that the rich and powerful were bad and a government run by the working class would result in a better deal for the working masses. A government geared to social policies to benefit all of the people, and in a manner that put everyone into one social class. A class wherein the words of Karl Marx would be realized; "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need." In short... the redistribution of wealth.
Leon Trotsky said that the goal of socialism in Russia would not be fully realized without the success of the world revolution. And a revolutionary wave caused by the Russian Revolution lasted until 1923. Despite initial hopes for success in the German Revolution, in the short lived Hungarian Soviet Republic and others like it, no other Marxist movement succeeded in keeping power in it's hands.
Joseph Stalin later rejected this idea, stating that socialism was possible in one country. However, in 1924, Stalin reversed his position and used the argument that success of socialism does require the workers of other countries in order to make it happen. The thinking boiled down to, the more countries under communist rule, the less chance the masses might see and be swayed by that nasty old capitalism.
The number one country in the world, where one can bask in the warm rays of capitalism, is the United States. And for more than half a century, the U.S. has been the number one target of the communist's efforts to trash capitalism and bring about communist rule. And the entire time the cold war sabers were rattling, drawing all attention to bear on possible attacks by conventional means, the communists were busy with a far more unconventional plan. The infiltration of every segment of American society, including American politics, by American home grown communists.
So, that's it, in a nutshell. Everything wrong that is going on in America today is pretty much a direct result of communist influence, working to transform or destroy us from within. And they go by different names to baffle and befuddle us, like "progressives." And they use any means necessary to drive us apart and keep us a fragmented society, like race, religion and their old favorite, social status (class warfare). And if the Communist Manifesto and Nikita Khrushchev have the final say, it will be the highly disgruntled proletariat in America who will be digging the grave to bury capitalism.
I encourage you to do your own research into the Russian Revolution and get into the heads of the communists so that you can explain to others the whys and the hows that are conveniently being left out of history classes in schools throughout our country. It is the deliberate dumbing down and re-education of our younger generations; the ones undereducated and unskilled who will eagerly accept socialism.
MikeH.
So, that's it, in a nutshell. Everything wrong that is going on in America today is pretty much a direct result of communist influence, working to transform or destroy us from within. And they go by different names to baffle and befuddle us, like "progressives." And they use any means necessary to drive us apart and keep us a fragmented society, like race, religion and their old favorite, social status (class warfare). And if the Communist Manifesto and Nikita Khrushchev have the final say, it will be the highly disgruntled proletariat in America who will be digging the grave to bury capitalism.
I encourage you to do your own research into the Russian Revolution and get into the heads of the communists so that you can explain to others the whys and the hows that are conveniently being left out of history classes in schools throughout our country. It is the deliberate dumbing down and re-education of our younger generations; the ones undereducated and unskilled who will eagerly accept socialism.
MikeH.
24 June 2010
NOTICE OF IMPORTANCE:
Jennifer III, over at the "I'll Take Liberty" blog has important news in her post "The Plan" It is well worth your attention.
MikeH.
UPDATE: It appears she has changed the plan, or at least removed it.
MikeH.
UPDATE: It appears she has changed the plan, or at least removed it.
23 June 2010
Can You Say "Outed"
From an msnbc.com report, The Louisiana judge who struck down the Big Zero administration's six month ban on deep-water oil drilling in the Gulf Of Mexico has reported extensive investments in the oil and gas industry, according to financial disclosure reports.
OK, with a year and a half into Zero's regime, it has become common knowledge that one is likely to be publicly coated in a thick layer of schmooze should one openly oppose the regime. Such is now the case of Judge Martin Feldman, a 1983 appointee of President Ronald Reagan.
Extensive Investments: In a 2008 financial disclosure report, Feldman claimed owning less than $15,000 worth of stocks in Transocean Ltd., the company that owned the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig. The report further showed investments in Ocean Energy, Quicksilver Resources, Prospect Energy, Peabody Energy, HALLIBURTON, Penworth Energy Trust, Atlas Energy Resources, Parker drilling and others. Halliburton was also involved in the doomed Deepwater Horizon project.
Well, now we know His Honor lacks honor... he has money in the ultra evil conglomerate, Halliburton!!!
He is one of many federal judges across the Gulf Coast region with money in oil and gas. Several have disqualified themselves from hearing spill related lawsuits and others have sold their holdings so they can preside over some of the 200-plus cases.
I think I see a pattern emerging here. Gulf Coast region + oil and gas industry + investing in said industries = judges on the take.
Although Feldman ruled in favor of oil interests Tuesday, one expert said his reasoning appeared sound because the six month ban was overly broad. "There's been some concerns that he is biased toward the industry, but I don't see it in his opinion," said Tim Howard, a Northwestern University law professor who also represents business and people claiming economic losses in several spill related lawsuits. "They (Zilch & pals) overreacted and just shut down the industry rather than focusing on where the problems are.
So, we have a law expert who says the judge made a sound decision. But we must note the fact that the expert has a vested interest in spill related matters. I could be wrong here, but I'll venture a prediction that there are probably several legal experts with a vested interest in the spill related matters.
Josh Reichert, [on the other hand] managing director of the Pew Environment Group, said the ruling should be rescinded if Feldman still has investments in companies that could benefit. "If Judge Feldman has any investments in oil and gas operators in the Gulf, it represents a flagrant conflict of interest," Reichert said.
I wonder if the job prerequisites for the managing director's position at Pew Environment Group includes a degree in law? Or is this guy just another greenie (read: green-weenie) who has his own greenie agenda to push?
Alrighty then. We have the basic drift. Judge Feldman is a crooked S.O.B who invests his money into those evil conglomerates. He only ruled against Zip's drilling ban to insure he and his big business buds will continue to rake in the big bucks. But wait!!! There's more.
... Feldman frequently jokes with lawyers before his court about his friendship with Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, known for his strict interpretation of the Constitution as written more than 200 years ago.
THAT'S IT!!! He's a subversive cork-sucker who is dead set on keeping Americans lock in the yoke of archaic ideas from a band of rebellious bastards from 200-plus years ago. And, he makes jokes in his court proceedings. What more could he possibly be up to?
(uh oh, here it is) Feldman was appointed in May to a seven year term on the "secret" Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, according to court records. The court meets "secretly" to consider requests for wire taps in national security cases, such as those involving foreign terrorist groups.
I suppose my first question would have to be; Who appointed Judge Feldman to the F.I.S Court? My second question may seem a wee tad trivial but, I'm gonna go for it regardless. How does one (such as a reporter) obtain access to court records that provide information on judges appointed to a secret court that decides matters of national security? If it doesn't already, shouldn't such reporting fall under the heading of seditious? It's certainly more of a seditious act than what we bloggers, of the patriotic faith, are doing.
Of course, the article didn't bother to mention the fact that Zero's ban, which suspended operations on 33 drilling rigs, put hundreds of oil worker's (est. at around 1,200) jobs on the endangered list, which in turn, would have caused an economic dip for the entire Gulf region. Sure... I can see where Judge Feldman had only his interests in mind when he made his ruling.
Folks, it was only a few years ago that the former administration received severe and prolonged political fire, from the democretins, over the "outing" of C.I.A super spy, Valerie Plame. Will anyone, on either side of the political aisle, grow a set of central dangling extremities and bring this "outing" to the forefront of the people's minds? (especially those who still believe in the hope and change bull-schmooze, as promised by His Nada-ness) It's early yet but I kinda think this won't see much light of day.
OH, by the way... did anyone happen to hear the report that BP had donated a million dollars to Big O's presidential campaign fund? And now you see how he rewards his friends.
MikeH.
OK, with a year and a half into Zero's regime, it has become common knowledge that one is likely to be publicly coated in a thick layer of schmooze should one openly oppose the regime. Such is now the case of Judge Martin Feldman, a 1983 appointee of President Ronald Reagan.
Extensive Investments: In a 2008 financial disclosure report, Feldman claimed owning less than $15,000 worth of stocks in Transocean Ltd., the company that owned the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig. The report further showed investments in Ocean Energy, Quicksilver Resources, Prospect Energy, Peabody Energy, HALLIBURTON, Penworth Energy Trust, Atlas Energy Resources, Parker drilling and others. Halliburton was also involved in the doomed Deepwater Horizon project.
Well, now we know His Honor lacks honor... he has money in the ultra evil conglomerate, Halliburton!!!
He is one of many federal judges across the Gulf Coast region with money in oil and gas. Several have disqualified themselves from hearing spill related lawsuits and others have sold their holdings so they can preside over some of the 200-plus cases.
I think I see a pattern emerging here. Gulf Coast region + oil and gas industry + investing in said industries = judges on the take.
Although Feldman ruled in favor of oil interests Tuesday, one expert said his reasoning appeared sound because the six month ban was overly broad. "There's been some concerns that he is biased toward the industry, but I don't see it in his opinion," said Tim Howard, a Northwestern University law professor who also represents business and people claiming economic losses in several spill related lawsuits. "They (Zilch & pals) overreacted and just shut down the industry rather than focusing on where the problems are.
So, we have a law expert who says the judge made a sound decision. But we must note the fact that the expert has a vested interest in spill related matters. I could be wrong here, but I'll venture a prediction that there are probably several legal experts with a vested interest in the spill related matters.
Josh Reichert, [on the other hand] managing director of the Pew Environment Group, said the ruling should be rescinded if Feldman still has investments in companies that could benefit. "If Judge Feldman has any investments in oil and gas operators in the Gulf, it represents a flagrant conflict of interest," Reichert said.
I wonder if the job prerequisites for the managing director's position at Pew Environment Group includes a degree in law? Or is this guy just another greenie (read: green-weenie) who has his own greenie agenda to push?
Alrighty then. We have the basic drift. Judge Feldman is a crooked S.O.B who invests his money into those evil conglomerates. He only ruled against Zip's drilling ban to insure he and his big business buds will continue to rake in the big bucks. But wait!!! There's more.
... Feldman frequently jokes with lawyers before his court about his friendship with Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, known for his strict interpretation of the Constitution as written more than 200 years ago.
THAT'S IT!!! He's a subversive cork-sucker who is dead set on keeping Americans lock in the yoke of archaic ideas from a band of rebellious bastards from 200-plus years ago. And, he makes jokes in his court proceedings. What more could he possibly be up to?
(uh oh, here it is) Feldman was appointed in May to a seven year term on the "secret" Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, according to court records. The court meets "secretly" to consider requests for wire taps in national security cases, such as those involving foreign terrorist groups.
....................
I suppose my first question would have to be; Who appointed Judge Feldman to the F.I.S Court? My second question may seem a wee tad trivial but, I'm gonna go for it regardless. How does one (such as a reporter) obtain access to court records that provide information on judges appointed to a secret court that decides matters of national security? If it doesn't already, shouldn't such reporting fall under the heading of seditious? It's certainly more of a seditious act than what we bloggers, of the patriotic faith, are doing.
Of course, the article didn't bother to mention the fact that Zero's ban, which suspended operations on 33 drilling rigs, put hundreds of oil worker's (est. at around 1,200) jobs on the endangered list, which in turn, would have caused an economic dip for the entire Gulf region. Sure... I can see where Judge Feldman had only his interests in mind when he made his ruling.
Folks, it was only a few years ago that the former administration received severe and prolonged political fire, from the democretins, over the "outing" of C.I.A super spy, Valerie Plame. Will anyone, on either side of the political aisle, grow a set of central dangling extremities and bring this "outing" to the forefront of the people's minds? (especially those who still believe in the hope and change bull-schmooze, as promised by His Nada-ness) It's early yet but I kinda think this won't see much light of day.
OH, by the way... did anyone happen to hear the report that BP had donated a million dollars to Big O's presidential campaign fund? And now you see how he rewards his friends.
MikeH.
22 June 2010
Consumer Group Vs. Happy Meal Toys
From an msnbc.com report, a Washington-based consumer advocacy group has threatened to file a lawsuit against McDonald's, charging the fast food chain is "unfairly and deceptively" marketing toys to children through it's Happy Meals.
"McDonald's marketing has the effect of conscripting America's children into an unpaid drone army of word-of-mouth marketers, causing them to nag their parents to bring them to McDonald's," Stephen Gardner of the Center For Science In The Public Interest wrote to the heads of the chain in a letter announcing the lawsuit.
In 2007, McDonald's made a pledge to advertise only two types of Happy Meals to children under age 12. They both meet the company set requirement of less than 600 calories, with no more than 35 percent of calories from fat, 10 percent from saturated fat or 35 percent total sugar by weight.
CSPI argues that even if those happy meals appear in advertisements, kids order the unhealthier meals most of the time. (but, doesn't the toy only come with the Happy Meal, thus the "happy" designation?)
Some may accuse the group of extremism, arguing that it is the parent's responsibility to monitor what their children eat, not the restaurant's. Michael Jacobson, executive director of CSPI, says it's the parent's responsibility too, but he equates the toy giveaways to a door to door salesman coming to a family's house and asking to privately speak with the children.
"At some point parents get worn down. They don't always want to be saying no to their children. We feel like an awful lot of parents would be relieved if this one pressure was removed from them."
Well, I'm confused!!! Is it about the toys, the meals, McDonald's, the parents or the linoleum lizards yammering a psychotic breakdown on mom and dad? And who died, leaving this crew of Bozo nanny wannabes in charge of this dog and pony show, anyway?
Folks, there are way too many people wanting to stick their noses into our skivvies, to see if it's time for a change. From "do gooders" outside of government to nary do gooders in government, they all have some ignorantly misguided idea their way is better than our way when it comes to living our lives.
Well, I am ready for a change. Just say NO to nannies.
MikeH.
"McDonald's marketing has the effect of conscripting America's children into an unpaid drone army of word-of-mouth marketers, causing them to nag their parents to bring them to McDonald's," Stephen Gardner of the Center For Science In The Public Interest wrote to the heads of the chain in a letter announcing the lawsuit.
In 2007, McDonald's made a pledge to advertise only two types of Happy Meals to children under age 12. They both meet the company set requirement of less than 600 calories, with no more than 35 percent of calories from fat, 10 percent from saturated fat or 35 percent total sugar by weight.
CSPI argues that even if those happy meals appear in advertisements, kids order the unhealthier meals most of the time. (but, doesn't the toy only come with the Happy Meal, thus the "happy" designation?)
Some may accuse the group of extremism, arguing that it is the parent's responsibility to monitor what their children eat, not the restaurant's. Michael Jacobson, executive director of CSPI, says it's the parent's responsibility too, but he equates the toy giveaways to a door to door salesman coming to a family's house and asking to privately speak with the children.
"At some point parents get worn down. They don't always want to be saying no to their children. We feel like an awful lot of parents would be relieved if this one pressure was removed from them."
....................
Well, I'm confused!!! Is it about the toys, the meals, McDonald's, the parents or the linoleum lizards yammering a psychotic breakdown on mom and dad? And who died, leaving this crew of Bozo nanny wannabes in charge of this dog and pony show, anyway?
Folks, there are way too many people wanting to stick their noses into our skivvies, to see if it's time for a change. From "do gooders" outside of government to nary do gooders in government, they all have some ignorantly misguided idea their way is better than our way when it comes to living our lives.
Well, I am ready for a change. Just say NO to nannies.
MikeH.
State Of Emergency
"State Of Emergency - When The Wrongs Of The Few Outweigh The Rights Of The Many"
The Delaware County, Pa. delawareonline has reported the City of Chester, Pa. (pop. about 36,000) is under a state of emergency following a fourth killing in eight days. This includes the death of a 2 year old boy, a week ago.
Chester Mayor Wendell Butler Jr. proclaimed the state of emergency on Saturday, to begin that night and run through Thursday morning, and he plans to ask the City Council to extend it for a month. During that time, no one is allowed on the street from 9:00 p.m. until 6:00 a.m. and, no assembly of three or more persons is allowed without a permit. However, this is only in effect over four areas of the city that cover a few blocks of territory each.
The Delaware County, Pa. delawareonline has reported the City of Chester, Pa. (pop. about 36,000) is under a state of emergency following a fourth killing in eight days. This includes the death of a 2 year old boy, a week ago.
Chester Mayor Wendell Butler Jr. proclaimed the state of emergency on Saturday, to begin that night and run through Thursday morning, and he plans to ask the City Council to extend it for a month. During that time, no one is allowed on the street from 9:00 p.m. until 6:00 a.m. and, no assembly of three or more persons is allowed without a permit. However, this is only in effect over four areas of the city that cover a few blocks of territory each.
....................
Is it just me or does this seem like a rather ignorant, if not discriminatory, reaction to events that can not possibly be controlled by such a measure? It almost seems to ring of, "out of sight, out of mind", suggesting the idea that if you can't be seen, you can't do evil?
The fact that the S.O.E. and it's rules are in place over the four areas of town, and not the entire town, will bring protests of discrimination, I'm sure, at least from those four areas. How can the citizens of those areas be forced into curfews, or denied the right to assemble, while the remainder of the city can enjoy liberty?
The fact that the S.O.E. and it's rules are in place over the four areas of town, and not the entire town, will bring protests of discrimination, I'm sure, at least from those four areas. How can the citizens of those areas be forced into curfews, or denied the right to assemble, while the remainder of the city can enjoy liberty?
Those other folks, the remainder of the city, should be thinking long and hard about this "S.O.E." and the implications it presents. They should be outraged. And they should be taking that outrage straight to Mayor Butler with demands he lift this declaration of emergency and put city resources to better use. Otherwise, he may not feel any compunction in suspending the rights of citizens in larger areas of the city, when he can't come up with proper, long sighted answers to short sighted events.
MikeH.
MikeH.
19 June 2010
Is This A Sick Joke!!!
A news item put out by MSNBC this morning, "U.S. buys Russian choppers for Afghan military", has got to be the absolute summit of government insanity... at least for this week.
According to the report, the Pentagon has spent $648 million to buy or refurbish 31 Russian built Mi-17 transport helicopters for the Afghan National Army Air Corps. The Defense Department is seeking to buy 10 more Mi-17s next year and dozens more over the next decade. Some legislators say the Pentagon never considered alternatives to the Mi-17 and, that a lack of competition has enabled Russian defense contractors to gouge on prices. (say it isn't so)
The U.S. has purchased Mi-17s for other allies as well. The Pentagon bought 8 for the Iraqi air force and has purchased or leased 14 for Pakistan, although Islamabad recently returned some after a crash raised questions about their safety. Pentagon officials say the newer Mi-17s retail for about $15 million.
So, let me get this straight; The U.S. once supplied Stinger Missiles to Afghan rebels to shoot down Soviet helicopters, back when the Russians invaded Afghanistan. Now, the U.S. is supplying Afghanistan with Russian made helicopters? And (AND) at the same time, the U.S. government would rather prop up the Russian economy than pump our tax dollars into our own economy and possibly create some jobs, right here in the U.S., in the process.
What ever happened to that motto, "America First."
MikeH.
According to the report, the Pentagon has spent $648 million to buy or refurbish 31 Russian built Mi-17 transport helicopters for the Afghan National Army Air Corps. The Defense Department is seeking to buy 10 more Mi-17s next year and dozens more over the next decade. Some legislators say the Pentagon never considered alternatives to the Mi-17 and, that a lack of competition has enabled Russian defense contractors to gouge on prices. (say it isn't so)
The U.S. has purchased Mi-17s for other allies as well. The Pentagon bought 8 for the Iraqi air force and has purchased or leased 14 for Pakistan, although Islamabad recently returned some after a crash raised questions about their safety. Pentagon officials say the newer Mi-17s retail for about $15 million.
So, let me get this straight; The U.S. once supplied Stinger Missiles to Afghan rebels to shoot down Soviet helicopters, back when the Russians invaded Afghanistan. Now, the U.S. is supplying Afghanistan with Russian made helicopters? And (AND) at the same time, the U.S. government would rather prop up the Russian economy than pump our tax dollars into our own economy and possibly create some jobs, right here in the U.S., in the process.
What ever happened to that motto, "America First."
MikeH.
17 June 2010
History Lessens
History is like a crystal ball. It can show us where we have been, how we got here, and where we are going.
(1) It leaves them a lot less people to control initially.
(2) It eliminates all members of the community who are looked upon as leaders.
(3) It dumbs down the present, and all following generations, so they are forced to believe everything they are taught by their new masters.
When I think back on it, I absolutely hated history classes. I had pretty much assumed the attitude that history, all those dry studies of a long ago past, couldn't possibly benefit me in my adulthood future. I suppose what I hated most was the tests based on putting together dates, names of people, names of places and the particular events that granted it all a place in history. I guess the fact that most of my teachers took little or no interest in making history, well... interesting, didn't help much to pique my interest in the subject.
Of course, years later, I began to see things a lot differently. That's primarily due to the fact that I was seeing things in my present that were mirrored by those old, dry events from long ago. I was beginning to see that the age old adage, "history repeats itself" is true. Certain types of events are like a sku tag on a new tire; it just keeps going around and around and...
As a perfect example of this, let's consider the history of Vietnam during the 1960's. At that time, Vietnam was two, separate, countries; the communist ruled North Vietnam and the democratic ruled South Vietnam. The North, not being satisfied with what they already had, decided they wanted to overthrow the government in the South and invite it's people to join the communist party. A slight problem ensued when the people from the South, having a real good idea regarding the quality of life under communist rule, declined the invite.
The North, now feeling a tad scarred by this rejection, decided to initiate plan "B"; the taking over of the South by force. This plan involved sending troops across the border and laying siege to acreage, villages and towns as they went. To be sure, there was resistance. But the North had the numbers and better equipment (provided by their communist pals in Soviet Russia) and squashed the resistance. These were the first to be eliminated.
To win the hearts and minds of their new subjects, the North systematically executed all local government officials. This included village elders in the rural tribal areas and town mayors and lower ranking bureaucrats in town and cities. The concept behind this action comes in two parts. First, the people are demoralized when they are forced to watch as their accepted leadership is deposed by an AK-47. Secondly, this opens the opportunity for the North to install their own person (read: puppets) into office. So then, the government was second to be eliminated.
To prevent the new subjects from seeking guidance through their religious conviction, the North ordered all religious leaders murdered, in public of course. The third group to go.
Next on the list to be penciled in for a visit by the angel of death were the educators. From village one room school teachers to university professors, they all had to go in order to prevent the people from being educated. Call it a method of dumbing down the people. Educators then are group four to take a bullet.
OK, how does all this killing benefit the North:Of course, years later, I began to see things a lot differently. That's primarily due to the fact that I was seeing things in my present that were mirrored by those old, dry events from long ago. I was beginning to see that the age old adage, "history repeats itself" is true. Certain types of events are like a sku tag on a new tire; it just keeps going around and around and...
As a perfect example of this, let's consider the history of Vietnam during the 1960's. At that time, Vietnam was two, separate, countries; the communist ruled North Vietnam and the democratic ruled South Vietnam. The North, not being satisfied with what they already had, decided they wanted to overthrow the government in the South and invite it's people to join the communist party. A slight problem ensued when the people from the South, having a real good idea regarding the quality of life under communist rule, declined the invite.
The North, now feeling a tad scarred by this rejection, decided to initiate plan "B"; the taking over of the South by force. This plan involved sending troops across the border and laying siege to acreage, villages and towns as they went. To be sure, there was resistance. But the North had the numbers and better equipment (provided by their communist pals in Soviet Russia) and squashed the resistance. These were the first to be eliminated.
To win the hearts and minds of their new subjects, the North systematically executed all local government officials. This included village elders in the rural tribal areas and town mayors and lower ranking bureaucrats in town and cities. The concept behind this action comes in two parts. First, the people are demoralized when they are forced to watch as their accepted leadership is deposed by an AK-47. Secondly, this opens the opportunity for the North to install their own person (read: puppets) into office. So then, the government was second to be eliminated.
To prevent the new subjects from seeking guidance through their religious conviction, the North ordered all religious leaders murdered, in public of course. The third group to go.
Next on the list to be penciled in for a visit by the angel of death were the educators. From village one room school teachers to university professors, they all had to go in order to prevent the people from being educated. Call it a method of dumbing down the people. Educators then are group four to take a bullet.
(1) It leaves them a lot less people to control initially.
(2) It eliminates all members of the community who are looked upon as leaders.
(3) It dumbs down the present, and all following generations, so they are forced to believe everything they are taught by their new masters.
After that, the North only needed to control the media, communications, food distribution and medical services to insure the masses would lock into a dependence upon the North.
As a "history repeating itself" type of event, one would only have to look back a few years in history to the early 1950's when communist North Korea attempted to take over democratic South Korea in the exact same manner. Murder off the leadership, dumb down the people and force those people into servitude. Fortunately for South Korea, the North was stopped in a stalemate that has remain through today. Vietnam, on the other hand, is now one country and under communist rule.
But the sku tag on the tire is coming around again... right here in the United States Of America. All you have to do is observe current events and process the information you collect in order to realize this to be true.
But first, a little more history: Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, the Commander-in-Chief of the Imperial Japanese Navy during World War II, is reputed to have stated, "I would never invade the (main land) United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass." Yamamoto had lived in the U.S. while he attended the U.S. War College and Harvard University. Through this, as the story goes, he was aware of the fact that gun ownership in America was like a right of passage. After all, the right to keep and bear arms made private ownership legal. And a lot of Americans owned guns.
Due to that very fact, a direct attack to force America into communism would meet heavy resistance and result in a bloodbath. So the communists had devised and initiated plan "C" for the U.S. takeover. It equates to; if you can't beat them by armed force, infiltrate and conquer them through "passive force". I'll grant that plan "C" moves at a snail's pace but, it does move non the less.
Taking out the government: No shots needed when you advertise yourself as something your not and can win election into the government.
Eliminate religion: No shots needed when you can manipulate the law to help you remove all public reference to God. Or use ridicule to shame people into denouncing God and religion.
Dumbing down: Save those bullets and infiltrate the education system. Change books, change facts, change the way it's done and keep those young minds on the mentality level of a radish. And get them chanting praises to the puppet-in-chief.
As a "history repeating itself" type of event, one would only have to look back a few years in history to the early 1950's when communist North Korea attempted to take over democratic South Korea in the exact same manner. Murder off the leadership, dumb down the people and force those people into servitude. Fortunately for South Korea, the North was stopped in a stalemate that has remain through today. Vietnam, on the other hand, is now one country and under communist rule.
But the sku tag on the tire is coming around again... right here in the United States Of America. All you have to do is observe current events and process the information you collect in order to realize this to be true.
But first, a little more history: Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, the Commander-in-Chief of the Imperial Japanese Navy during World War II, is reputed to have stated, "I would never invade the (main land) United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass." Yamamoto had lived in the U.S. while he attended the U.S. War College and Harvard University. Through this, as the story goes, he was aware of the fact that gun ownership in America was like a right of passage. After all, the right to keep and bear arms made private ownership legal. And a lot of Americans owned guns.
Due to that very fact, a direct attack to force America into communism would meet heavy resistance and result in a bloodbath. So the communists had devised and initiated plan "C" for the U.S. takeover. It equates to; if you can't beat them by armed force, infiltrate and conquer them through "passive force". I'll grant that plan "C" moves at a snail's pace but, it does move non the less.
Taking out the government: No shots needed when you advertise yourself as something your not and can win election into the government.
Eliminate religion: No shots needed when you can manipulate the law to help you remove all public reference to God. Or use ridicule to shame people into denouncing God and religion.
Dumbing down: Save those bullets and infiltrate the education system. Change books, change facts, change the way it's done and keep those young minds on the mentality level of a radish. And get them chanting praises to the puppet-in-chief.
Control the media: The lame stream media is already on-board with the agenda. One talking head even get's "a tingle up his leg" just thinking about the president.
Control communications: It's bad enough there has been talk of bringing back the "Fairness Doctrine" in a very patent attempt to scare less supportive media outlets to either fall in line or face hefty fines but, Congress wants to pass a bill that will give the ass-hat the power to cutoff the internet.
Control communications: It's bad enough there has been talk of bringing back the "Fairness Doctrine" in a very patent attempt to scare less supportive media outlets to either fall in line or face hefty fines but, Congress wants to pass a bill that will give the ass-hat the power to cutoff the internet.
Control health care: I think I can rest my case.
It's here folks. Whether you want to believe it or not. All you have to do is remember your history lessens... it lessens the ignorance of where we've been, how we got here and, the bad stuff that is coming our way.
MikeH.
It's here folks. Whether you want to believe it or not. All you have to do is remember your history lessens... it lessens the ignorance of where we've been, how we got here and, the bad stuff that is coming our way.
MikeH.
16 June 2010
What's The Answer
My usual morning routine includes reading through the posts of seventeen different bloggers. In today's edition of Crusader Rabbit, there was a post that included a video of Big Zero's various failures to prove his eligibility, professionally and legally, to take up space in the oval office. In the comments section, a blog team member (who I believe is Australian) posed the question, "Why don't the Americans do something?" I, in turn, got a tad tweaked and posed my own question, "What can we Americans do?"
So what exactly CAN we do?
In my opinion, the only way to stop the political insanity in America today would involve a full blown revolution and taking all control away from the government. Assuming it happened and assuming we won... now what? How would this "win" save America and benefit the world at large? We may have won a battle but, the big war would still rage on. We have to realize there is a bigger picture that needs to be looked at and considered.
Folks, I will be the first to admit, I am not the brightest bulb in the crayon box. I could be so far off base here that a long range space shuttle mission, lead by a champion Bloodhound, would play hell trying to find me. Now, with my official disclaimer of intellectual thinking (or lack thereof) in prominent display, let's get to it.
I tend to think the political events going on here are way out of our control and, that it is all part of a more global manipulation for control. However, we seem to be pin point focused on the Big O, and his socialist buds in Washington, for all of our woes. So, let's assume we take it to the streets, kick ass, prosecute and hang all the treasonous socialist bastards / bitches. Now what?
We will repeal ObamaCare, lift the moratoriums on shallow water drilling and exploration, screw cap and trade and maybe even create a political reform wherein all politicians, for centuries to come, will quake in fear at the mere thought of doing bad. But what are we going to do about the economy? How are we going to create jobs for the millions out of work? And for the $64,000.00 question: How do we pay off all that debt we owe to China? (read: COMMUNIST China) Tell me that, should we default on THAT loan, China will resort to having a call center in Bangladesh harass us three time a day for a partial payment with a late fee. We have to remember the big picture.
We are the absolute last, so if we fall under socialist rule, will the rest of the world fall too? Considering most of the world is already under the leadership of socialist governments, I sort of tend to think that's not the case. But America does have to fall IF there is some grandiose plan for a one world government. And the only way to stop it is for a worldwide revolution. A joint effort by all the people on Earth to take back their countries, their lives and eradicate the evil that's trying to control it all.
If that were to happen, perhaps we could all forgive most, if not all, of the trillions in debt that's floating around. If not resolved real soon, one way or another, that in and of itself will most likely be the catalyst for a third world war. And I think it reasonable to assume that if it happens, it will not be fought in the "old version" conventional style. (big badda booms)
The problems in America today are a slice of pie out of a global pie. One way or another it's all interconnected to, what I believe to be, a plan that will, in the end, be a worldwide problem. For those in other countries who ask, "why don't the Americans do something", my reply is: Why aren't you seeing the the big picture and realizing... YOU need to do something as well.
MikeH.
So what exactly CAN we do?
In my opinion, the only way to stop the political insanity in America today would involve a full blown revolution and taking all control away from the government. Assuming it happened and assuming we won... now what? How would this "win" save America and benefit the world at large? We may have won a battle but, the big war would still rage on. We have to realize there is a bigger picture that needs to be looked at and considered.
Folks, I will be the first to admit, I am not the brightest bulb in the crayon box. I could be so far off base here that a long range space shuttle mission, lead by a champion Bloodhound, would play hell trying to find me. Now, with my official disclaimer of intellectual thinking (or lack thereof) in prominent display, let's get to it.
I tend to think the political events going on here are way out of our control and, that it is all part of a more global manipulation for control. However, we seem to be pin point focused on the Big O, and his socialist buds in Washington, for all of our woes. So, let's assume we take it to the streets, kick ass, prosecute and hang all the treasonous socialist bastards / bitches. Now what?
We will repeal ObamaCare, lift the moratoriums on shallow water drilling and exploration, screw cap and trade and maybe even create a political reform wherein all politicians, for centuries to come, will quake in fear at the mere thought of doing bad. But what are we going to do about the economy? How are we going to create jobs for the millions out of work? And for the $64,000.00 question: How do we pay off all that debt we owe to China? (read: COMMUNIST China) Tell me that, should we default on THAT loan, China will resort to having a call center in Bangladesh harass us three time a day for a partial payment with a late fee. We have to remember the big picture.
We are the absolute last, so if we fall under socialist rule, will the rest of the world fall too? Considering most of the world is already under the leadership of socialist governments, I sort of tend to think that's not the case. But America does have to fall IF there is some grandiose plan for a one world government. And the only way to stop it is for a worldwide revolution. A joint effort by all the people on Earth to take back their countries, their lives and eradicate the evil that's trying to control it all.
If that were to happen, perhaps we could all forgive most, if not all, of the trillions in debt that's floating around. If not resolved real soon, one way or another, that in and of itself will most likely be the catalyst for a third world war. And I think it reasonable to assume that if it happens, it will not be fought in the "old version" conventional style. (big badda booms)
The problems in America today are a slice of pie out of a global pie. One way or another it's all interconnected to, what I believe to be, a plan that will, in the end, be a worldwide problem. For those in other countries who ask, "why don't the Americans do something", my reply is: Why aren't you seeing the the big picture and realizing... YOU need to do something as well.
MikeH.
13 June 2010
Who Do You Trust
In his posting of Friday 11 June 2010, "What More Motivation Do You Need?", Chief Instructor at Accept The Challenge blog site noted how a lot of people take on the attitude that they don't feel a need for self preparations because, "the government will take care of things" in the event of some catastrophic event.
If Chief Instructor will allow me, I'd like to expand on that idea a bit.
Personally, I'd like to think that our goofy ass Uncle Sammy would come charging in to support us after the SHTF or, we face TEOTWAWKI. (especially since they should have done their best to shield us from such an event to begin with) It just seems to stand to reason that our elected public servants would be falling all over themselves to insure that the public they serve is, well, being served. That's why we are paying those big bucks for big government... right?
Ladies and gentlemen, please assume your crash positions now by bending forward, placing your head between your knees, and kissing your (soon to be left on it's own) ass bye bye.
As far back as the 1950's, Big Gov was working on an emergency action plan for that "extra special just in case scenario" that would likely change the face of everything. Of course, back then, that scenario was pretty much centered around the fear of an all out nuclear exchange between the U.S. and the former Soviet Union. (no one was putting much thought into the concept of meteor strikes, solar storm EMPs or Deepwater Horizon oil spills)
So, Big Gov rolled up it's sleeves and took on the arduous task of spending big bucks on big bunkers built deep underground. And they paid extra big bucks so those bunkers would have a minor spartan accessory or two... like independent electrical power plants, air filtration systems, water filtration systems, furnished dorms, staffed emergency medical services, kitchens, dining halls and food supplies to feed the masses!!! That is, of course, referring to the masses that make up the executive and legislative branches of Big Gov.
For an online bunker tour and an interesting story click here.
Big Gov had a slightly different plan for us peon (read: pee-on) masses, though. If given the signal, we were instructed to "head for the nearest fallout shelter", usually found in the basements of schools or other public buildings. And Big Gov spared no expense to insure our safety and comfort... NO independent power plants, NO air or water filtration systems, NO furnished anything, NO protective clothing, NO blast proof doors, NO... (perhaps it would be easier to list what you would find in these "shelters" and that would be damned little) Spartan would have been a two star upgrade.
Imagine, if you will, that sweet scent of dank, mold encrusted basements found in any third world country on planet Earth. (France immediately comes to mind) Add to that the sudden crush of an undetermined, unregulated number of human beings and the inevitable not so sweet scents they will emit and / or become encrusted with during those fun filled days "in shelter". Now, add to that, the aroma coming from the "sanitation system". (a paper board drum with a clip on toilet seat, lined with a plastic sheet and most often separated from public viewing by little more than a couple of blankets suspended from the ceiling)
Shelters administered by state Civil Defense offices did in fact stock public shelters with these highly innovative schmooze receptacles in a drum, along with water in a drum and food in a drum. The number of drums allocated to each shelter was determined by the number of "shelterees" these basement "radiological safe zones" could "reasonably" accommodate. (an estimated figure decided by a low level bureaucrat and which, in reality, could not factor in any of several possible causes for shelter overcrowding)
Breakfast from the drum consisted of crackers or wafers and hard candy as a carbohydrate supplement. (yumm!!!) Lunch... see breakfast. Supper... well, you guessed it. At this point, it would not require a doctorate in human plumbing to understand the most likely consistency and odor quality from the stuff soon to be filling those "crappers in a can". After a few days in shelter, I could easily suspect shelterees would throw all caution to the wind and gladly embrace the radioactive glow found outside of shelter.
And back then, they were thinking a post nuke shelter stay in terms of days... not weeks, not months or even years. DAYS!!! (nuke stuff had a much shorter half-life in those days?)
If you think for one nanosecond I'm spreading it on a tad toward the thick side, click here for a Civil Defense Museum story and photo gallery. Click back and forth between this link and the one above for a serious blood shooting from your eyes experience.
And when members of Big Gov felt compelled to explain the logic behind their survival needs over the survival needs of the people: "In the aftermath, the people (read: mutants and zombies still alive, if any) will need their government, in tact, to lead them through the period of national recovery." (sure... that make perfect sense to me)
For all of those folks who believe the government is here to help you, I have some good news and I have some bad news. The good news is, you won't have to worry about a stay in a Civil Defense "suite" anytime soon. The Civil Defense program was phased out a few years back, along with all those shelters.
And now, the bad news, folks. Think Superdome, 2005, and the lavish service all those Hurricane Katrina refugees received (read: were subjected to) at the hands of local, state, federal governments AND their neighbors since none of the government entities were providing any real security measures. AGAIN, there are no dedicated, well stocked public shelters in America. (not that there ever were, for us anyway)
And so I ask you. With some very real potential for any number of far reaching catastrophic events looming on the horizon, who do you trust to help you survive? In my shelter, it's God and me. And I'm kind of insisting, God will have to bring his own MRE's.
MikeH.
If Chief Instructor will allow me, I'd like to expand on that idea a bit.
Personally, I'd like to think that our goofy ass Uncle Sammy would come charging in to support us after the SHTF or, we face TEOTWAWKI. (especially since they should have done their best to shield us from such an event to begin with) It just seems to stand to reason that our elected public servants would be falling all over themselves to insure that the public they serve is, well, being served. That's why we are paying those big bucks for big government... right?
Ladies and gentlemen, please assume your crash positions now by bending forward, placing your head between your knees, and kissing your (soon to be left on it's own) ass bye bye.
As far back as the 1950's, Big Gov was working on an emergency action plan for that "extra special just in case scenario" that would likely change the face of everything. Of course, back then, that scenario was pretty much centered around the fear of an all out nuclear exchange between the U.S. and the former Soviet Union. (no one was putting much thought into the concept of meteor strikes, solar storm EMPs or Deepwater Horizon oil spills)
So, Big Gov rolled up it's sleeves and took on the arduous task of spending big bucks on big bunkers built deep underground. And they paid extra big bucks so those bunkers would have a minor spartan accessory or two... like independent electrical power plants, air filtration systems, water filtration systems, furnished dorms, staffed emergency medical services, kitchens, dining halls and food supplies to feed the masses!!! That is, of course, referring to the masses that make up the executive and legislative branches of Big Gov.
For an online bunker tour and an interesting story click here.
Big Gov had a slightly different plan for us peon (read: pee-on) masses, though. If given the signal, we were instructed to "head for the nearest fallout shelter", usually found in the basements of schools or other public buildings. And Big Gov spared no expense to insure our safety and comfort... NO independent power plants, NO air or water filtration systems, NO furnished anything, NO protective clothing, NO blast proof doors, NO... (perhaps it would be easier to list what you would find in these "shelters" and that would be damned little) Spartan would have been a two star upgrade.
Imagine, if you will, that sweet scent of dank, mold encrusted basements found in any third world country on planet Earth. (France immediately comes to mind) Add to that the sudden crush of an undetermined, unregulated number of human beings and the inevitable not so sweet scents they will emit and / or become encrusted with during those fun filled days "in shelter". Now, add to that, the aroma coming from the "sanitation system". (a paper board drum with a clip on toilet seat, lined with a plastic sheet and most often separated from public viewing by little more than a couple of blankets suspended from the ceiling)
Shelters administered by state Civil Defense offices did in fact stock public shelters with these highly innovative schmooze receptacles in a drum, along with water in a drum and food in a drum. The number of drums allocated to each shelter was determined by the number of "shelterees" these basement "radiological safe zones" could "reasonably" accommodate. (an estimated figure decided by a low level bureaucrat and which, in reality, could not factor in any of several possible causes for shelter overcrowding)
Breakfast from the drum consisted of crackers or wafers and hard candy as a carbohydrate supplement. (yumm!!!) Lunch... see breakfast. Supper... well, you guessed it. At this point, it would not require a doctorate in human plumbing to understand the most likely consistency and odor quality from the stuff soon to be filling those "crappers in a can". After a few days in shelter, I could easily suspect shelterees would throw all caution to the wind and gladly embrace the radioactive glow found outside of shelter.
And back then, they were thinking a post nuke shelter stay in terms of days... not weeks, not months or even years. DAYS!!! (nuke stuff had a much shorter half-life in those days?)
If you think for one nanosecond I'm spreading it on a tad toward the thick side, click here for a Civil Defense Museum story and photo gallery. Click back and forth between this link and the one above for a serious blood shooting from your eyes experience.
And when members of Big Gov felt compelled to explain the logic behind their survival needs over the survival needs of the people: "In the aftermath, the people (read: mutants and zombies still alive, if any) will need their government, in tact, to lead them through the period of national recovery." (sure... that make perfect sense to me)
For all of those folks who believe the government is here to help you, I have some good news and I have some bad news. The good news is, you won't have to worry about a stay in a Civil Defense "suite" anytime soon. The Civil Defense program was phased out a few years back, along with all those shelters.
And now, the bad news, folks. Think Superdome, 2005, and the lavish service all those Hurricane Katrina refugees received (read: were subjected to) at the hands of local, state, federal governments AND their neighbors since none of the government entities were providing any real security measures. AGAIN, there are no dedicated, well stocked public shelters in America. (not that there ever were, for us anyway)
And so I ask you. With some very real potential for any number of far reaching catastrophic events looming on the horizon, who do you trust to help you survive? In my shelter, it's God and me. And I'm kind of insisting, God will have to bring his own MRE's.
MikeH.
10 June 2010
BPA In Food / Drink Cans
In 2008, health organizations in the U.S. and Canada were calling for bans in the use of the chemical BPA in the making of plastics that went into baby bottles, soft drink and water bottles after it was learned the BPA was leaching out of the plastic and into the bottle contents.
BPA, or Bisphenol A, is an industrial chemical and a carcinogen known to cause cancer in lab rats and, is a suspected cause in the onset of obesity, diabetes and heart disease.
Most recently, it was discovered BPA is used in the production of a polycarbonate plastic resin that, in turn, is used as a lining material inside "most of the cans" used by the canned foods and drinks industry.
The resin reportedly helps preserve foods longer and prevents the canned products from taking on a metallic taste imparted from the cans. However, it has been learned, over time the resin breaks down and releases the BPA directly into the food or drink product.
Folks, they know but they just don't care. Money is more important than human life.
For the full story read this.
MikeH.
BPA, or Bisphenol A, is an industrial chemical and a carcinogen known to cause cancer in lab rats and, is a suspected cause in the onset of obesity, diabetes and heart disease.
Most recently, it was discovered BPA is used in the production of a polycarbonate plastic resin that, in turn, is used as a lining material inside "most of the cans" used by the canned foods and drinks industry.
The resin reportedly helps preserve foods longer and prevents the canned products from taking on a metallic taste imparted from the cans. However, it has been learned, over time the resin breaks down and releases the BPA directly into the food or drink product.
Folks, they know but they just don't care. Money is more important than human life.
For the full story read this.
MikeH.
09 June 2010
An Urgent Alert From GOA
"Gun Owners Of America" has issued an urgent alert on a bill introduced in Congress, pushed by Obama, that will SILENCE gun groups and other political opponents. read
From paragraph 4 of the alert: "They only apply to groups which are not reliable Obama allies, like Gun Owners Of America."
Just to be clear, this would also include the NRA and the JPFO as well.
Let me try to understand this... a law that would give the government warrant-less powers to seize (otherwise private information) membership lists that include the name, address, city and state of people who subscribe to views the regime feels threatening to it's own views. Does that about sum it up?
MikeH.
From paragraph 4 of the alert: "They only apply to groups which are not reliable Obama allies, like Gun Owners Of America."
Just to be clear, this would also include the NRA and the JPFO as well.
Let me try to understand this... a law that would give the government warrant-less powers to seize (otherwise private information) membership lists that include the name, address, city and state of people who subscribe to views the regime feels threatening to it's own views. Does that about sum it up?
MikeH.
08 June 2010
Coincidental?
During an interview with Matt Lauer on NBC's "Today" broadcast, this morning, "His Zeroness" added his voice to calls for BP CEO Tony Hayward's resignation amid claims from a former EPA lawyer that BP is a recurring environmental criminal.
The BP executive last month complained about the amount of time he is spending dealing with the Deepwater Horizon disaster, saying "I would like my life back." Hayward has also been quoted as saying "The Gulf [of Mexico] was a very big ocean, the environmental impact of this disaster is likely to be very, very modest."
"He wouldn't be working for me after any of those statements," the "Big O" told Today. (should we take this to mean Hayward isn't a masterful enough bull schmooze artist to work in the Zero regime?)
In other news; the British news outlet, The Telegraph, has reported Hayward sold off 1.4 million U.K. pounds worth of his shares in BP one month before the Deepwater Horizon explosion. The Telegraph went on to report there is no suggestion Hayward acted improperly or had prior knowledge that the company was about to face the biggest setback in it's history. His decision, however, means he avoided losing more than 423,000 U.K. pounds when BP's share price plunged after the disaster began six weeks ago.
The Telegraph went on to report the amount of shares Hayward sold off amounted to about one third (223,288 shares) of his holdings and, he used the proceeds to pay off the mortgage on his mansion in Kent, which is estimated to be valued at 1.2 million pounds. Hayward's pay package is reported to be 4 million pounds per year. ($5.8 million USD)
The BP executive last month complained about the amount of time he is spending dealing with the Deepwater Horizon disaster, saying "I would like my life back." Hayward has also been quoted as saying "The Gulf [of Mexico] was a very big ocean, the environmental impact of this disaster is likely to be very, very modest."
"He wouldn't be working for me after any of those statements," the "Big O" told Today. (should we take this to mean Hayward isn't a masterful enough bull schmooze artist to work in the Zero regime?)
In other news; the British news outlet, The Telegraph, has reported Hayward sold off 1.4 million U.K. pounds worth of his shares in BP one month before the Deepwater Horizon explosion. The Telegraph went on to report there is no suggestion Hayward acted improperly or had prior knowledge that the company was about to face the biggest setback in it's history. His decision, however, means he avoided losing more than 423,000 U.K. pounds when BP's share price plunged after the disaster began six weeks ago.
The Telegraph went on to report the amount of shares Hayward sold off amounted to about one third (223,288 shares) of his holdings and, he used the proceeds to pay off the mortgage on his mansion in Kent, which is estimated to be valued at 1.2 million pounds. Hayward's pay package is reported to be 4 million pounds per year. ($5.8 million USD)
....................
So let me get this straight; the "Prodigal Kenyan" is more upset with Hayward's words rather than his (coincidental) pre-disaster actions? One would think (at least I am) the administration would be all over this like flies on the proverbial stinky stuff. For this is the stuff that conspiracy theory dreams are made from. In the words of Rahm Emanuel, "never let a crisis go to waste."
And speaking of crisis, as a result of this incident, the "Anointed One" has ordered all offshore oil drilling / exploration halted off the U.S. coast. I could be wrong but, I think this will equate to a lot of folks forced out of jobs in the oil industry and it's various support industries... world wide. (the trickle down paradigm)
But then, since the explosion, BP's share price has fallen by 30%, which has wiped out about 40 billion pounds of BP's total value. The fall has caused pain not just for BP shareholders, but also for millions of BP's pension funds. Certainly, that will have some ripple effect over the world's economy as well.
Jeez, I almost forgot!!! There are millions of gallons of oil and tar balls bobbing around the Gulf Of Mexico, and slowly making their way up the southern half of the Eastern seaboard, causing job and eco-damage in it path. I'm no "green" weenie but I can pull a couple of green leaning braincells together to come up with this prediction; There is going to be an epoch loss of sea life and the foods it supplies us.
Is it all just coincidental, or is it all TOO coincidental? Are we at the very ledge of the Biblical "End Of Days" or a man-planned totalitarian takeover? I don't have the answer to those speculations. However, I am sure we all need to be packing our shelves with bandages, beans, bullets and bullion for the extreme long haul.
MikeH.
And speaking of crisis, as a result of this incident, the "Anointed One" has ordered all offshore oil drilling / exploration halted off the U.S. coast. I could be wrong but, I think this will equate to a lot of folks forced out of jobs in the oil industry and it's various support industries... world wide. (the trickle down paradigm)
But then, since the explosion, BP's share price has fallen by 30%, which has wiped out about 40 billion pounds of BP's total value. The fall has caused pain not just for BP shareholders, but also for millions of BP's pension funds. Certainly, that will have some ripple effect over the world's economy as well.
Jeez, I almost forgot!!! There are millions of gallons of oil and tar balls bobbing around the Gulf Of Mexico, and slowly making their way up the southern half of the Eastern seaboard, causing job and eco-damage in it path. I'm no "green" weenie but I can pull a couple of green leaning braincells together to come up with this prediction; There is going to be an epoch loss of sea life and the foods it supplies us.
Is it all just coincidental, or is it all TOO coincidental? Are we at the very ledge of the Biblical "End Of Days" or a man-planned totalitarian takeover? I don't have the answer to those speculations. However, I am sure we all need to be packing our shelves with bandages, beans, bullets and bullion for the extreme long haul.
MikeH.
07 June 2010
Restore The Constitution Rally
A Restore The Constitution Rally will be held on 14 Aug. 10 in Greensboro, NC.
I'll be there... how about you?
For more information.
MikeH.
I'll be there... how about you?
For more information.
MikeH.
And The Richard Crainium Award Goes To...
Helen "The Icon" ThomasMonday 07 June 10
Iconic White House reporter Helen Thomas (a hard core leftest and dedicated socialist camp follower) was dropped by her speaking agency and booted as a high school commencement speaker, Sunday, following inflammatory remarks she made about Jews and Israel.
Although Thomas apologized, Nine Speakers Inc. dumped the octogenarian journalist over her videotaped declaration that Jews should "get the hell out of Palestine" and "go back to Germany and Poland".
*Italicized comment mine
Although Thomas apologized, Nine Speakers Inc. dumped the octogenarian journalist over her videotaped declaration that Jews should "get the hell out of Palestine" and "go back to Germany and Poland".
*Italicized comment mine
....................
So, I have to consider Helen's intended meaning when she specifically named Germany and Poland as the "go back to" locations for the Jews. According to recorded history; during World War II, Germany and Poland were home to some of the most ruthless Nazi death camps, wherein millions of Jews were subjected to the Third Reich's version of ethnic cleansing. A fact I'm sure is not lost on Helen. (Especially given that I have reason to suspect Helen may have been the illegitimate spawn donor of Dr. Josef Mengele, from back in her days as a fascist camp follower)
Although I could be ignorantly misguided, I can not recall "The Gargoyle" (er, ah) "Icon" having been quite so openly anti Semitic in years gone by. Not even during the Clinton regime. Whether she is now suffering the degradation of geriatric dementia or, she is taking liberal doses of socialized testosterone, by way of Obamacare, it's really obvious the old girl is no longer a useful and productive member of the journalistic community... or civilization.
It appears Helen has failed to remember that, in a world where America has damn few true allies, remarks like that from her and El Numero Zero, et al, are contrary to the Carnegie theory of how to make friends and influence people.
Helen, you've come a long way, Baby. Now turn around and crawl back into the depths of hell from which you mutated.
MikeH.
It appears Helen has failed to remember that, in a world where America has damn few true allies, remarks like that from her and El Numero Zero, et al, are contrary to the Carnegie theory of how to make friends and influence people.
Helen, you've come a long way, Baby. Now turn around and crawl back into the depths of hell from which you mutated.
MikeH.
Darker Days Ahead
This is, without doubt, a chilling wake-up to the bull schmooze the "El Numero Zero" administration would have us believe. Friends, I'm tellin ya, there are darker days ahead.
Animated National Unemployment Map
MikeH.
Animated National Unemployment Map
MikeH.
The Inaugural
Welcome to the kick off posting of Behind The Parapet.
I think my profile is a pretty fair indicator as to the course this blog will set. Make no mistake: if you are a leftest, Marxist, Leninist, socialist, collectivist, communist, progressive, liberal, atheist, anti Semite or radical Muslim... have a Coke and a smile, and shut the fuck up. You are not welcome here.
If, on the other hand, you believe the country / the world is in a serious world of schmooze, or that there is a nasty-bad awful storm looming on our horizon and you're looking for preparation suggestions to share or, if you are simply interested in comments and commentary that does not follow in the ideology of the lame stream media... I hope you can find some comfort here.
MikeH.
I think my profile is a pretty fair indicator as to the course this blog will set. Make no mistake: if you are a leftest, Marxist, Leninist, socialist, collectivist, communist, progressive, liberal, atheist, anti Semite or radical Muslim... have a Coke and a smile, and shut the fuck up. You are not welcome here.
If, on the other hand, you believe the country / the world is in a serious world of schmooze, or that there is a nasty-bad awful storm looming on our horizon and you're looking for preparation suggestions to share or, if you are simply interested in comments and commentary that does not follow in the ideology of the lame stream media... I hope you can find some comfort here.
MikeH.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
