Wahoo!! Look at the tea party candidates go! Much to the chagrin of the Republican establishment. I recently discovered an old war horse radio talk show host named Bob grant from WABC in New York. From what I understood with what I heard, he was a staunch conservative. Well, the first show I listened to, he was going on about the fact that if he lived in Delaware, he would've voted for Mike Castle over Christine ODonnell. I was devastated. He threw in with Karl Rove and the rest of the liberal media. This was the moment everyone knew that Karl Rove was a Republican more than he was a conservative. A distinction without a difference you ask? n n n n nooo.
Big difference. Just take a look at John McCain. Liberals and progressives, (what the hey, we'll just call them socialists shall we?) insist on making the distinction the difference between D and R. THIS is more a distinction without a difference. Why? Just take a look at how just about everyone running for any election runs to the right (conservative) or at least to the middle (spineless). Very few will run on out and out socialism. Why? Well I'll let you figure it out.
I'll tell you that the more I follow politics, and learn, and absorb the processes, I learn to recognize more quickly aspects and seeds of a progressive agenda. I've Expanded my awareness. I can see that the progressives constantly have the ball in motion. They are constantly running plays in the form of focus groups, the use of the (complicit) media to disseminate info supportive of the agenda. Leaving out anything that would make it look bad. Ordinarily, that would be where the media would investigate and report. Instead, they let it stand. Diversion, distraction, and outright deceit.
I also think a growing number of people realize the outright instigation of class warfare. Forget for a moment (for those who care) the tenth Commandment:
'You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor's.'
Then there is what's known as "The Golden rule": "Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them." (Matthew 7:12, see also Luke 6:31) The common English phrasing is "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you".
If you have less than someone else and you covet what they have to the extent that you vote into office a politician who will legislate the taking from said folk and redistributing it to you, keep in mind, you are not the only one getting redistributed to. how much will that really benefit you? After everyone else gets a few pennies, you'll get your few pennies. yay. Now, extend it down to those with less than you. They're looking at what you have with a dribble of spittle emerging from the corner of their mouth.....Get it? It will never end. The bar will continue to change levels until everyone fits the system.
What I find reprehensible are the ones who wish to wield this power of redistribution, pointing out differences in people and groups of people instigating this envy because that's what will get them elected. Examples of this abound in the media. Most recently in the form of calling income earners of 250K millionaires and billionaires. Putting aside the fact that individuals in the 250K category are mall shop owners, franchise owners, 2 income families, gas station owners, otherwise small business owners. I can't think of very many positions where someone else will put someone on payroll at 250K compared to the number of 100K or 150K positions. That's why the categories with income of 250K or more contain the word "owner". This title comes with responsibility and risk. Those 2 items need to be rewarded.
Other examples are references to "fat-cat bankers" (Obama). What about the media outrage over the big 3 auto execs flying in private jets to testify before congress. They were so emasculated that they then all carpooled in a hybrid to the next visit. The point of this is the incitement to envy and covet. Does pointing out what someone else has compared to what you have really accomplish anything? Other than making a few "feel better"?
aaahhh....
Emotion.
Appealing to the lowest emotions is the easiest way to garner support and get votes.
It's a little more work, but the opposite can be accomplished also by changing the frame of the issue. For instance: Let not him who is houseless pull down the house of another, but let him work diligently and build one for himself, thus by example assuring that his own shall be safe from violence when built.
Abraham Lincoln
In other words, Rich people can inspire that others may also be rich. However, demonizing and demoralizing the "rich" makes it less desirable to become rich in a sense. Not that being rich isn't the best revenge, but the opinions of others undulate and agitate creating discomfort amongst peers.
Other ways higher emotions can be appealed to is presenting successful (which needs to be defined on an individual basis) people and describing the level of self discipline it took to get there. Combine self discipline with passion and the ability to make decisions (as well as the ability to learn from incorrect decisions) and very literally anyone can become successful.
You will hear these kind of things only if the tea party continues in it's present form for another 50 to 80 years. The media hates this country as it was founded, Academia hates this country as it was founded, The media is being more and more ignored in favor of alternative media. So market forces may just solve this problem eventually. The next problem will be academia. Between tenure and unions, this is a much bigger problem that will take much longer to unravel.
I'm open to ideas but until the market - and this may also be the answer - basically defunds the major institutions in favor of patriotic American loving colleges, I don't know how to tackle this one.
In fact, my answer to folks who would tell me that because I didn't go to college, I just don't "get it", I say because I didn't go to college--I kept it!
Go Tea Party!!
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Freedom isn't Free
How many times have you heard this one?
Used frequently as an excuse for war. Soldiers dead or dismembered. Well it's true.
The Soldier has chosen that line of work and it's always in the back of their head.
This, however, is not the only price for freedom. Blood, I mean. No, there is an equally high* price demanded of people who don't choose to enlist to protect this Nation.
Responsibility and education. That might boil down into "awareness" but that excludes necessary action.
What do I mean by that? I mean your vote. Your EDUCATED vote. That vote comes with the responsibility of educating yourself at this point.
The media has proven incompetent.
No I take that back. The media has proven to be an enemy of liberty.
I'm not aware of anyone who would knowingly vote for straight up socialism. Maybe generational welfare recipients. But other than that, individuals have pride. They would like to support themselves and their families on their own. Not to say that if they need a hand through a rough patch they wouldn't take it if it was available, but for the most part, A person would like to make his or her own way.
The problem I see is that people absorbed with making their own way use the mainstream media for their education and awareness of political candidates. The media expresses disdain and distaste for ANY Conservative candidate. Ridicule, slam, discredit, anything they can do to to taint your impression.
Try and notice it, not only in the news, but more subtle in the programming. Remember shows like "The West Wing"? Or the other bomb with Gina Davis as President? "Commander In Chief"? I don't remember the name. But I did notice while watching it, back when I first began to notice liberal agenda in programming, The policy discussion regarding handling of criminals. It was something to the effect that rehabilitation instead of incarceration is the manner in which that administration deals with criminals. I stopped watching.
In any case, the media actively pushes an agenda toward....well, it used to be liberalism, now it resembles a lot more like socialism.
Polls are used by the media not to report the news, but to 'create' news and nudge opinions as well as desensitize attitudes regarding liberal and socializing ideas.
I remember watching a 'round table' discussion on this topic where the argument was "What's wrong with socialism? We've had socialism for years in the form of police, fire, garbage collecting, and public schools."
Well, the trouble with public schools are almost self evident. But, the police and fire, well, there is a service trade-off for tax money collected. No one argued in that round table discussion the difference between tax money collected to pay for services, and tax money collected for redistribution. Otherwise known as
welfare. "e n t i t l e m e n t s". What do we get in return for those taxes?
That's the difference.
Freedom isn't free.
Educate yourself by digging beyond what is spoon-fed to you by the main-stream media.
Used frequently as an excuse for war. Soldiers dead or dismembered. Well it's true.
The Soldier has chosen that line of work and it's always in the back of their head.
This, however, is not the only price for freedom. Blood, I mean. No, there is an equally high* price demanded of people who don't choose to enlist to protect this Nation.
Responsibility and education. That might boil down into "awareness" but that excludes necessary action.
What do I mean by that? I mean your vote. Your EDUCATED vote. That vote comes with the responsibility of educating yourself at this point.
The media has proven incompetent.
No I take that back. The media has proven to be an enemy of liberty.
I'm not aware of anyone who would knowingly vote for straight up socialism. Maybe generational welfare recipients. But other than that, individuals have pride. They would like to support themselves and their families on their own. Not to say that if they need a hand through a rough patch they wouldn't take it if it was available, but for the most part, A person would like to make his or her own way.
The problem I see is that people absorbed with making their own way use the mainstream media for their education and awareness of political candidates. The media expresses disdain and distaste for ANY Conservative candidate. Ridicule, slam, discredit, anything they can do to to taint your impression.
Try and notice it, not only in the news, but more subtle in the programming. Remember shows like "The West Wing"? Or the other bomb with Gina Davis as President? "Commander In Chief"? I don't remember the name. But I did notice while watching it, back when I first began to notice liberal agenda in programming, The policy discussion regarding handling of criminals. It was something to the effect that rehabilitation instead of incarceration is the manner in which that administration deals with criminals. I stopped watching.
In any case, the media actively pushes an agenda toward....well, it used to be liberalism, now it resembles a lot more like socialism.
Polls are used by the media not to report the news, but to 'create' news and nudge opinions as well as desensitize attitudes regarding liberal and socializing ideas.
I remember watching a 'round table' discussion on this topic where the argument was "What's wrong with socialism? We've had socialism for years in the form of police, fire, garbage collecting, and public schools."
Well, the trouble with public schools are almost self evident. But, the police and fire, well, there is a service trade-off for tax money collected. No one argued in that round table discussion the difference between tax money collected to pay for services, and tax money collected for redistribution. Otherwise known as
welfare. "e n t i t l e m e n t s". What do we get in return for those taxes?
That's the difference.
Freedom isn't free.
Educate yourself by digging beyond what is spoon-fed to you by the main-stream media.
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
Demographics v Collectivism
Try to determine the time in your life when you went from craving individuality for yourself, to wanting collectivism.
Think back when young people (in your own awareness) would dress outrageous or pierce various parts of their body, or begin different behaviors trying to "find their place".
Now, however, let me nudge your awareness to notice the fact that everyone must think the same way or risk some sort of public humiliation. Oh sure, you can still dress weird or have unique behaviors, but your thought process....your thinking
must be in a certain direction.
I bring you "Man made global warming". I bring you "green jobs". I bring you the Prius. I bring you the "evil rich". I bring you any progressive idea.
I bring you Barak Obama "...our individual salvation depends on our collective salvation..." I bring you Hillary Clinton "It takes a village". I bring you any "progressive". Everyone must be on board for this idea to work. That's why it will never work. The human spirit yearns for freedom. Even in Iran there are millions in the street to protest rigged elections. They yearn for freedom.
What the whole idea is centered around is power. Power over the "masses". Me? I'm not like that. That's why I don't understand why some seem to "crave" it. I don't want power over you, Neither do I want you to have power over me. I want to choose what and to whom I give my power to.
The way I see it, the collective concept starts with the grouping of individuals.
Now, with sales, demographics is a valuable way to effectively market your product. No one who has developed a product or service doesn't ask the question of: who will most likely buy what I'm selling? Whether it's polling, surveys, focus groups or just plain common sense. The fact is that, if there is a group which will most likely buy more of what your selling, that's where your advertising dollars will be most effective. At least until your product is established within that market. Then maybe a few dollars to try to attract a slightly different market. This is all wonderful and wholesome. When it comes to demographics used in politics, it turns nasty. It turns almost nefarious when folks are shoved into a certain category that can then be pitted against another group. Each group is then turned into a victim that candidate X can then exploit. Each group is made to believe that candidate X is going to solve whatever problem was created that placed them in that category to begin with.
There are categories, and sub categories, and sub-sub categories. Think of it this way: Try to come up with as many dfferent groups there are in the category of "minorities". Once you get through all of the "hyphinations" (hyphinated Americans)you then get into where they live and how much money they make. So see? there can be a never-ending list of categories for politicians to shove individuals into.
Hundreds of thousands of dollars are spent on polling data, survey data, and the one that is the most distasteful for me, the "focus group". I don't know why I find this method so distasteful. Perhaps because I can now recognize what is commonly known as "the talking point". The speeches, phrasing, terminology, and even the order of words comes out of the focus group. The result is a sanitized phony pile of words and phrases strung together designed to weave in, out, and around the offending words and ideas that the focus group directed.
If you notice whenever an election approaches, the news becomes saturated with polling data. That's fine I guess, but what I notice is that they always seem to mention color, or race, or ethnicity. Once individuals allow themselves to be placed into some sort of "group", then the different groups can be pitted against each other. Don't give away your individuality. Don't participate. The Obama administration is a constant stream of pitting the blacks against whites, Latinos against whites, in overt ways as well as subtle. This is how he will stay in power.Then there's the class warfare, where the "poor" are instructed to despise the "rich". This is how he redistributes "wealth".
Don't play. Don't participate. Keep your individuality.
Collectivism or socialism is not new. All throughout history socialism has been tried and it inevitably ends up in despotism. Now, I've heard some of the weak liberal arguements for socialism in America. They (liberals) will argue that socialism has existed in America for a long time in the form of police and fire departments, libraries and other public funded establishments like government schools etc.
Well that's fine and no one doesn't want there to be no firemen when there's a fire needing to be put out. But that exactly is my point! They perform a service!
These "socialist" establishments perform a service! There is a return for what you pay in taxes to support these entities. The purpose of these "socialist" organizations is NOT to redistribute wealth!!!
Even the Native American, or the American Indians lived under different systems of socialism and that worked for them. The difference is that there was no concept of "private property" in their ideaological paradigm. And! The system was used primarily for survival and not to redistribute wealth! We live in a "civil society" We need laws and regulation only to the degree that it does not harm others, or take away their liberty, or hinder them in their pursuit of happiness.
Think back when young people (in your own awareness) would dress outrageous or pierce various parts of their body, or begin different behaviors trying to "find their place".
Now, however, let me nudge your awareness to notice the fact that everyone must think the same way or risk some sort of public humiliation. Oh sure, you can still dress weird or have unique behaviors, but your thought process....your thinking
must be in a certain direction.
I bring you "Man made global warming". I bring you "green jobs". I bring you the Prius. I bring you the "evil rich". I bring you any progressive idea.
I bring you Barak Obama "...our individual salvation depends on our collective salvation..." I bring you Hillary Clinton "It takes a village". I bring you any "progressive". Everyone must be on board for this idea to work. That's why it will never work. The human spirit yearns for freedom. Even in Iran there are millions in the street to protest rigged elections. They yearn for freedom.
What the whole idea is centered around is power. Power over the "masses". Me? I'm not like that. That's why I don't understand why some seem to "crave" it. I don't want power over you, Neither do I want you to have power over me. I want to choose what and to whom I give my power to.
The way I see it, the collective concept starts with the grouping of individuals.
Now, with sales, demographics is a valuable way to effectively market your product. No one who has developed a product or service doesn't ask the question of: who will most likely buy what I'm selling? Whether it's polling, surveys, focus groups or just plain common sense. The fact is that, if there is a group which will most likely buy more of what your selling, that's where your advertising dollars will be most effective. At least until your product is established within that market. Then maybe a few dollars to try to attract a slightly different market. This is all wonderful and wholesome. When it comes to demographics used in politics, it turns nasty. It turns almost nefarious when folks are shoved into a certain category that can then be pitted against another group. Each group is then turned into a victim that candidate X can then exploit. Each group is made to believe that candidate X is going to solve whatever problem was created that placed them in that category to begin with.
There are categories, and sub categories, and sub-sub categories. Think of it this way: Try to come up with as many dfferent groups there are in the category of "minorities". Once you get through all of the "hyphinations" (hyphinated Americans)you then get into where they live and how much money they make. So see? there can be a never-ending list of categories for politicians to shove individuals into.
Hundreds of thousands of dollars are spent on polling data, survey data, and the one that is the most distasteful for me, the "focus group". I don't know why I find this method so distasteful. Perhaps because I can now recognize what is commonly known as "the talking point". The speeches, phrasing, terminology, and even the order of words comes out of the focus group. The result is a sanitized phony pile of words and phrases strung together designed to weave in, out, and around the offending words and ideas that the focus group directed.
If you notice whenever an election approaches, the news becomes saturated with polling data. That's fine I guess, but what I notice is that they always seem to mention color, or race, or ethnicity. Once individuals allow themselves to be placed into some sort of "group", then the different groups can be pitted against each other. Don't give away your individuality. Don't participate. The Obama administration is a constant stream of pitting the blacks against whites, Latinos against whites, in overt ways as well as subtle. This is how he will stay in power.Then there's the class warfare, where the "poor" are instructed to despise the "rich". This is how he redistributes "wealth".
Don't play. Don't participate. Keep your individuality.
Collectivism or socialism is not new. All throughout history socialism has been tried and it inevitably ends up in despotism. Now, I've heard some of the weak liberal arguements for socialism in America. They (liberals) will argue that socialism has existed in America for a long time in the form of police and fire departments, libraries and other public funded establishments like government schools etc.
Well that's fine and no one doesn't want there to be no firemen when there's a fire needing to be put out. But that exactly is my point! They perform a service!
These "socialist" establishments perform a service! There is a return for what you pay in taxes to support these entities. The purpose of these "socialist" organizations is NOT to redistribute wealth!!!
Even the Native American, or the American Indians lived under different systems of socialism and that worked for them. The difference is that there was no concept of "private property" in their ideaological paradigm. And! The system was used primarily for survival and not to redistribute wealth! We live in a "civil society" We need laws and regulation only to the degree that it does not harm others, or take away their liberty, or hinder them in their pursuit of happiness.
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
Islam does NOT mean peace
That's right boys and girls, islam doesn't mean peace.
"Salam" means peace. Maybe us westerners can't be bothered enough to differentiate. After all, "Salam" kinda sounds like "islam".
So, what does "Islam" translate to you ask as you lean forward in your seat? Eyes wide? Heart pumping? both knees jumping up and down at a hundred miles an hour?
Well,....
Islam, means "submission". Submission to Allah. Submission to Sharia law. These 2 items are virtually one and the same. If you fully submit to Allah, you're bound by all the rules set by Muhammad who got them from Allah. If you submit to sharia,.....
then you're all set with Allah.
I noticed the media will trot out muslims, after a terrorist attack of some sort, who will go on and on about how Islam is a religion of peace. "Islam means peace."
They know deep down it's a lie because first: A muslim will never speak ill of another muslim.
second: as long as no muslims were killed, they don't disparage another's jihad.
Third: They are forgiven that lie due to the law of "Kithman" or the principle of "taqqiya".
Oh! what's this?!
That's right! Any lie told knowingly is forgiven so long as said lie perpetuates and assists the spread of islam.
Keep this in mind the next time you see a muslim on American Media saying that Islam is a religion of peace.
That's that person's form of jihad. See, jihad isn't "inner struggle", as one of those liars put out there when that word first became a household word.
There are so many forms of jihad. In fact, anything that furthers the cause of islam or otherwise brings the world closer to caliphate, or global islamic rule.
Deception, coersion, terrorism, influence peddling, the end justifies the means. And there is no shame because caffirs (that's us) don't need to be bargained with. We don't need to be reasoned with. You don't reason with your dog, you just train it. To the hard line muslim, we are second class citizens, unworthy of having traits like honor or honesty wasted upon.
As far as I know, "caffir" means simply: non-believer.
"Salam" means peace. Maybe us westerners can't be bothered enough to differentiate. After all, "Salam" kinda sounds like "islam".
So, what does "Islam" translate to you ask as you lean forward in your seat? Eyes wide? Heart pumping? both knees jumping up and down at a hundred miles an hour?
Well,....
Islam, means "submission". Submission to Allah. Submission to Sharia law. These 2 items are virtually one and the same. If you fully submit to Allah, you're bound by all the rules set by Muhammad who got them from Allah. If you submit to sharia,.....
then you're all set with Allah.
I noticed the media will trot out muslims, after a terrorist attack of some sort, who will go on and on about how Islam is a religion of peace. "Islam means peace."
They know deep down it's a lie because first: A muslim will never speak ill of another muslim.
second: as long as no muslims were killed, they don't disparage another's jihad.
Third: They are forgiven that lie due to the law of "Kithman" or the principle of "taqqiya".
Oh! what's this?!
That's right! Any lie told knowingly is forgiven so long as said lie perpetuates and assists the spread of islam.
Keep this in mind the next time you see a muslim on American Media saying that Islam is a religion of peace.
That's that person's form of jihad. See, jihad isn't "inner struggle", as one of those liars put out there when that word first became a household word.
There are so many forms of jihad. In fact, anything that furthers the cause of islam or otherwise brings the world closer to caliphate, or global islamic rule.
Deception, coersion, terrorism, influence peddling, the end justifies the means. And there is no shame because caffirs (that's us) don't need to be bargained with. We don't need to be reasoned with. You don't reason with your dog, you just train it. To the hard line muslim, we are second class citizens, unworthy of having traits like honor or honesty wasted upon.
As far as I know, "caffir" means simply: non-believer.
Friday, June 4, 2010
American Exceptionalism
America is the best because we have the most to lose if we never defeated an enemy. On the flip side, we have the bright hope of (pure) freedom and individual liberty to gain (keep) at the other end of the conflict, from a victory.
We have the carrot and the stick.
See, there are two Americas. Left and Right. What the rest of the world sees and all they really have to go by is what the media shows them. Well what is that? Debauchery in prime time. As of this posting, I can count on one hand the number of "family" programs during prime time on the major networks. After that, you get into cable programming which can in most cases be far more risky. Even Cartoon network and Nickelodian have shows that my kids don't need to see.
The other thing that the rest of the world goes by is not only what the polititians have to say, but what left wing pundits have to say about what they say. Well what is that?
Harry Ried: "This war is lost"
Obama: "America at times has been ... arrogant."
I don't need to list all the quotes or I'll never get to the other side of this coin.
The other America is fighting tooth and nail to push back against what the President and media is saying.
The left worries about what the rest of the world thinks of us.
If we're so bad why don't they leave?
Why are so many people breaking to make it to America?
The right is waiting for a President who will look enemies in the eye and call them out.
Someone who can tell the criticizers outside this country that until they have freedom of press and speech, that they don't get to criticize.
We have the carrot and the stick.
See, there are two Americas. Left and Right. What the rest of the world sees and all they really have to go by is what the media shows them. Well what is that? Debauchery in prime time. As of this posting, I can count on one hand the number of "family" programs during prime time on the major networks. After that, you get into cable programming which can in most cases be far more risky. Even Cartoon network and Nickelodian have shows that my kids don't need to see.
The other thing that the rest of the world goes by is not only what the polititians have to say, but what left wing pundits have to say about what they say. Well what is that?
Harry Ried: "This war is lost"
Obama: "America at times has been ... arrogant."
I don't need to list all the quotes or I'll never get to the other side of this coin.
The other America is fighting tooth and nail to push back against what the President and media is saying.
The left worries about what the rest of the world thinks of us.
If we're so bad why don't they leave?
Why are so many people breaking to make it to America?
The right is waiting for a President who will look enemies in the eye and call them out.
Someone who can tell the criticizers outside this country that until they have freedom of press and speech, that they don't get to criticize.
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
moderate muslim? religion of peace?
Moderate muslim.
They do exist.
My research from a few different sources indicates that the purpose of islam is to spread islam across the earth.
Now according to history, even recent history of muslims, not everyone needs to actually convert to islam to have world peace. That's right!
Muslims and non-muslims live peacefully side by side throughout the centuries.
Of course there can be peaceful co-existence between muslims and non-muslims. Don't be silly!
Only, non-muslims are prohibited from building houses above muslims.
Non-muslims must pay a tax for simply being non-muslim. (jizya tax)
Peaceful coexistence demands that all non-muslims must submit to "second class" status.
Well there you go!
What's the problem?
Well, other than the fact that that's never going to happen, moderate muslims may also be required to submit to the same. If your moderation doesn't include the belief that islam should be spread by the "sword".
Do you think for a minute that the head cutting throwbacks will overlook a "muslim" who doesn't support them? Who doesn't support their methods and tactics? Of course not. After all, once islam is spread worldwide, it will become a contest as to which group worships allah the right way.
Through the many sayings and examples in the history of islam, here is one that struck me as very telling: My brother and I against my cousin. My cousin and I against my enemy. In other words, my cousin and I will put aside our differences to ally against a larger threat. (whatever it takes to spread islam around the world).
So, what happens after the main goal is accomplished? I guess it's back to fighting with the cousin. Taking that as a metaphor, then it's down to fighting over who worships allah the right way.
In the end there are no and will never be moderate muslims. (according to the radicals)
The Qur'an states clearly that those who go back from Islam are to be punished by death: "But if they turn renegades seize them and slay them wherever ye find them and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks. Al-Nisaa 4:89." Muhammad also said, as narrated by Al-Bukhari, "If somebody - a Muslim - discards his religion, kill him."
Religion of peace - ....
They do exist.
My research from a few different sources indicates that the purpose of islam is to spread islam across the earth.
Now according to history, even recent history of muslims, not everyone needs to actually convert to islam to have world peace. That's right!
Muslims and non-muslims live peacefully side by side throughout the centuries.
Of course there can be peaceful co-existence between muslims and non-muslims. Don't be silly!
Only, non-muslims are prohibited from building houses above muslims.
Non-muslims must pay a tax for simply being non-muslim. (jizya tax)
Peaceful coexistence demands that all non-muslims must submit to "second class" status.
Well there you go!
What's the problem?
Well, other than the fact that that's never going to happen, moderate muslims may also be required to submit to the same. If your moderation doesn't include the belief that islam should be spread by the "sword".
Do you think for a minute that the head cutting throwbacks will overlook a "muslim" who doesn't support them? Who doesn't support their methods and tactics? Of course not. After all, once islam is spread worldwide, it will become a contest as to which group worships allah the right way.
Through the many sayings and examples in the history of islam, here is one that struck me as very telling: My brother and I against my cousin. My cousin and I against my enemy. In other words, my cousin and I will put aside our differences to ally against a larger threat. (whatever it takes to spread islam around the world).
So, what happens after the main goal is accomplished? I guess it's back to fighting with the cousin. Taking that as a metaphor, then it's down to fighting over who worships allah the right way.
In the end there are no and will never be moderate muslims. (according to the radicals)
The Qur'an states clearly that those who go back from Islam are to be punished by death: "But if they turn renegades seize them and slay them wherever ye find them and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks. Al-Nisaa 4:89." Muhammad also said, as narrated by Al-Bukhari, "If somebody - a Muslim - discards his religion, kill him."
The Qur'an not only ordered the killing of those who embraced Islam and afterwards decided to renegade, but also commanded the followers to fight all nations until they either believe in it, pay the Jizya or face death:
- "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the last day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and his apostle nor acknowledge the religion of truth of the people of the Book (the Jews and the Christians) until they pay the Jizya with willing submission and feel themselves subdued. Surat At-Tauba 9:29"
And in the same Sura, verse 5, the Qur'an also states: "Fight and slay the pagans wherever ye find them and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem ..." (Bassam Darwich)
Religion of peace - ....
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Political correctness
This post is a continuation from the patriotic song post.
What can be done to inject some more patriotism into our kids' childhood while they're at school? Maybe the music dept could write some songs to help teach kids to love their Country. Or at least that it's okay to. Leave out any God reference if that's the offending term.
Was someone "offended" at patriotic themes taught in schools? If that's true, then I'm offended that you're offended. Which one of us is right? Who will take on my case? The ACLU? Doubtful.
Political correctness (which is way out of control by the way) ends up being the voluntary surrendering of your freedom. When it's forced on you,it's not surrendering anymore is it? It's not voluntary anymore is it? I realize it's a razors edge at times. But let's make sure that that school policies are based on "laws" and not some sort of "voluntary" compliance that will make 1 person feel better while making the rest of us inconvenienced, uncomfortable, or miserable. Let's find out who's making the complaints, Find out why. Make them say it so they have to hear how ridiculous it sounds. Offer an alternative for them. In other words, decisions should be made based on documentation and not rumor. And that the person making the complaint is directly involved or effected and not just some busybody trying to make themselves feel good or important.
Political correctness is PHONY! It's a CANCER! A "never-satisfied" drug addiction. It knows no end because it hasn't yet has it?
Common sense, honesty, and respect are genuine! Positive emotions all day every day was never guaranteed when I came into this world. How about I counter all that child psychology that teaches to protect children's' self esteem by giving everyone a trophy and we don't want any child to ever feel bad, with the idea that the emotions little Sally is experiencing now are the ones she needs to deal with and learn from for future success. Negative emotions can be very self instructing regarding how to deal with future situations.
If someone steps up and claims to take offense at what would otherwise be normal cultural occurrences, well that can be "too bad", but nothing need be apologized for.
("well he never went to college so....he just doesn't get it.")
My response to you is: Because I never went to college, I KEPT IT!
Don't call it a 'Christmas play'. You can't say that. You have to call it a holiday play. It's not Christmas vacation anymore, it's winter break!
Separation of Church and State. Fine. That's where one can't tell the other what to or what not to do or say.
IT DOES NOT SAY ONE MUSN'T ACKNOWLEDGE THE OTHER!!!
It's political correctness saying that. A passing reference to God or religion does not equal the school teaching about God or religion. A moment of silence isn't the end of the world for someone who doesn't believe in God.
Civil liberties. Fine. No one begrudges you your religious or social choices. Just simply opt out so the rest of us can enjoy our traditions and customs. And opting out doesn't mean that you weren't included. You opted out.
This is America! We have developed, invented or adopted traditions. This is what WE do. Who's looking out for us anymore??
I do realize there's more to it than me just writing. But maybe we can stop just saying "okay" to whatever the next PC thing is.
I'm standing up for us Americans. I'm stepping up to the line that continues it's approach. Hopefully, I can stop the advance of PC.
Are you with me?!
If you're sitting there thinking "wow! where did all that come from?" I assure you, it's not hatred. Quite the contrary, I love my country. I love my Country and I'm terrified of the Country my kids will have to grow up in.
The debt, the corruption, the socialization and nationalization of as much as possible and as fast as possible.
Don't be cowed by political correctness.
Thanks!
What can be done to inject some more patriotism into our kids' childhood while they're at school? Maybe the music dept could write some songs to help teach kids to love their Country. Or at least that it's okay to. Leave out any God reference if that's the offending term.
Was someone "offended" at patriotic themes taught in schools? If that's true, then I'm offended that you're offended. Which one of us is right? Who will take on my case? The ACLU? Doubtful.
Political correctness (which is way out of control by the way) ends up being the voluntary surrendering of your freedom. When it's forced on you,it's not surrendering anymore is it? It's not voluntary anymore is it? I realize it's a razors edge at times. But let's make sure that that school policies are based on "laws" and not some sort of "voluntary" compliance that will make 1 person feel better while making the rest of us inconvenienced, uncomfortable, or miserable. Let's find out who's making the complaints, Find out why. Make them say it so they have to hear how ridiculous it sounds. Offer an alternative for them. In other words, decisions should be made based on documentation and not rumor. And that the person making the complaint is directly involved or effected and not just some busybody trying to make themselves feel good or important.
Political correctness is PHONY! It's a CANCER! A "never-satisfied" drug addiction. It knows no end because it hasn't yet has it?
Common sense, honesty, and respect are genuine! Positive emotions all day every day was never guaranteed when I came into this world. How about I counter all that child psychology that teaches to protect children's' self esteem by giving everyone a trophy and we don't want any child to ever feel bad, with the idea that the emotions little Sally is experiencing now are the ones she needs to deal with and learn from for future success. Negative emotions can be very self instructing regarding how to deal with future situations.
If someone steps up and claims to take offense at what would otherwise be normal cultural occurrences, well that can be "too bad", but nothing need be apologized for.
("well he never went to college so....he just doesn't get it.")
My response to you is: Because I never went to college, I KEPT IT!
Don't call it a 'Christmas play'. You can't say that. You have to call it a holiday play. It's not Christmas vacation anymore, it's winter break!
Separation of Church and State. Fine. That's where one can't tell the other what to or what not to do or say.
IT DOES NOT SAY ONE MUSN'T ACKNOWLEDGE THE OTHER!!!
It's political correctness saying that. A passing reference to God or religion does not equal the school teaching about God or religion. A moment of silence isn't the end of the world for someone who doesn't believe in God.
Civil liberties. Fine. No one begrudges you your religious or social choices. Just simply opt out so the rest of us can enjoy our traditions and customs. And opting out doesn't mean that you weren't included. You opted out.
This is America! We have developed, invented or adopted traditions. This is what WE do. Who's looking out for us anymore??
I do realize there's more to it than me just writing. But maybe we can stop just saying "okay" to whatever the next PC thing is.
I'm standing up for us Americans. I'm stepping up to the line that continues it's approach. Hopefully, I can stop the advance of PC.
Are you with me?!
If you're sitting there thinking "wow! where did all that come from?" I assure you, it's not hatred. Quite the contrary, I love my country. I love my Country and I'm terrified of the Country my kids will have to grow up in.
The debt, the corruption, the socialization and nationalization of as much as possible and as fast as possible.
Don't be cowed by political correctness.
Thanks!
spread the wealth around=trickle up poverty
Dear President Obama,
How is that “spread the wealth around” thing going for you? I’m convinced by now that it’s going just fine for you -- but what about us little people? The only thing being spread around is poverty!
I never went to college and even I can understand a model of economic success.
A twice-proven-in-America model of lowering taxes during recession. Against a twice-failed-in-America model of raising taxes during recession.
The arithmetic is proved. The ability to grow a business provides more jobs. More jobs creates more taxpayers. More taxpayers generates lots more tax revenue. Math is a universal constant. That is, until one injects emotion. Then it’s called “new math”. How does emotion stack up as a constant? Try saying one thing to two people. One may laugh while the other gets angry. Emotion cannot be counted on as a constant. Not to discount it totally, it certainly has it’s place. But not with math or economics. Politicians bemoan “tax cuts for the wealthy” with quips like “They’re rich, they should pay more because they can afford more.
First of all, with very few exceptions (e.g. Paris Hilton etc.), People convicted of being “wealthy” can also be described as “producers”. Producers create wealth. Wealth creates jobs (have you ever gotten hired by a poor person?). Jobs provide income. Income allows for the consumption of goods and services. This circles around to reward the producer who took the risk in the first place. Politicians have developed this warped idea that people go into business in order to create jobs. After all, that’s the platform both party candidates ran on (create or save 2 million jobs etc.). Since when is it government’s job to create jobs? Government creating jobs creates government jobs. 2 million new government jobs. Let’s think about that for a moment.
Government’s job is to stay out of the way of the private sector so Americans can grow the economy. There are corruption laws to protect the innocent, they just need to be enforced.
So, here’s a news flash: Americans don’t go into business to create jobs. Americans go into business to make money!
Success is defined in many ways and to varying degrees. Success is directly related to the varied degrees of: Passion, Motivation, and Self Discipline one has. Self discipline defined as: Doing what you know needs to be done weather you feel like it or not. Now, to “spread the wealth around” because some feel that it’s more fair is a moral judgment by those less motivated or disciplined.
Fair. For whom?
More fair to the individual who makes a decision on what they would like to do? More fair for the individual who follows a passion? More fair for the individual who sacrifices time from family? More fair for the individual who invests money (for education) time (60-70 hrs/wk etc.) and energy to build their business? These are positive moral and social values that should yield reward. A sense of entitlement seems to be the prevailing sentiment in this country. Why is anyone owed anything who hasn’t earned it?
I/we are not without empathy for folks who have fallen on hard times. I don’t mind helping said people for a period of time. But forever? For generations? What happens to their spirit? Don’t people who support themselves and their families genuinely feel better about themselves?
When people get addicted to the drug of permanent assistance they allow their soul to be sucked out of them by the drug pushers that is government.
It starts slow…..Heating oil. One has to heat the home. They can have it for free this year. They can have it for free next year too. Next, they can check their eligibility for food stamps. Maybe then they can have their child diagnosed with some sort of disability or other.
Then, after a while they’re hooked. How can they possibly be expected to support themselves and/or their family now? With the lifestyle they’ve become accustomed to? Especially not after having five kids so they can get a raise.
They’re hooked. And now, in classic drug dealer form, it’s time to pay the piper. What’s the cost?
Votes.
Very few politicians truly want to help people or to really really represent the people. They want power.
Just like those who are addicted to “assistance”, politicians in the afore mentioned category, are addicted to power. I submit that anyone addicted to power should lose it immediately. But, they look out for each other. And, after all, who will vote them out? The masses that they’ve hooked and are dependent on government? Who, in their right mind, would kill the goose that lays the golden egg?
Maybe, and I’m just floating this (although it makes sense) votes should count only for taxpayer citizens who contribute to society in a positive manner.
What’s that you say? Who will make the moral judgment as to which are contributing in a positive manner?
Well. President Obama, as such an eloquent speaker, your message and rhetoric could shift from “disaster, crisis, and catastrophe” to one of inspiration, motivation, and personal responsibility. Encourage entrepreneurs. Create incentives for success instead of punishing it. Target incentives to your base if you want. I don’t care. More people creating wealth is only good for the economy. If one continues to look for what’s wrong with the economy, one misses what’s right with it. If you truly want to repair the economy it would take little more than a snap of the fingers in the form of a couple amazing speeches. But why do that when you have this glorious crisis that you can milk for all it’s worth. After all, one never wants a good crisis go to waste right? And, “if used the right way” you can get legislation passed that you would not normally be able to pass. This crisis is being exploited!
I, for one, am not dazed or sucked in by soaring speech rhetoric. I have personal experience with the term “We’ll see what we can do” (said to Jorje regarding McDonald’s benefit pkg). That phrase in particular means (to any that have used it) “nothing can be done but I want you to feel better “ and “I want you to remember who made you feel better about this“.
The same goes for phrases like “I’ll do everything I can” or “I’ll continue to fight for you.” (to the U.A.W.)
People don’t listen to what you say. They (most of them) only feel your intent. If folks actually listened to the words they’d hear things like what John McCain caught in the presidential debate regarding offshore drilling. McCain would drill….Obama will “look at” drilling.
Another phrase is “Some say…..” or “Some would argue….” . This is a “straw man” argument. Who? When? What was the context? But when one is “feelin’ ya” these go right through unchallenged.
What if, for example, there were some more difficult emotions to connect to people with? Emotions like self esteem. Who has a higher self esteem, the person who lines up every day for their fish? Or the person who has taken fishing lessons and can catch their own fish.
Connect with useful emotions (useful to the individual) like self esteem, self reliance, and self confidence.
Instead of trying to be all things to all people, taking care of them, inspire them to take care of themselves.
Individuals are not helpless. And a person is smart.
When people get categorized into groups and such, that group can be told that their helpless. And with no one to argue the point, folks in that group feel that some if not all in the group feel that way so then they do too. Well they must! They’re in that group aren’t they? They’ve been put into a group. Weather they agree with …
But………wait…….. Ohh……… I get it. That’s why the sense of entitlement is promoted by the left. They’re helpless because they’ve been told they are. They’re helpless because of all the assistance given them by the government. They get assistance because they’re helpless. They’re helpless because…
In closing, a campaign promise was to go through the budget line by line and eliminate items deemed ineffective…. Never mind.
Please examine objectively the results of liberal “entitlements” and not just the intentions. Also, ask what are the unintended consequences of the same.
Thanks for your time,
Dave the small biz owner/rural mail carrier/karate teacher
How is that “spread the wealth around” thing going for you? I’m convinced by now that it’s going just fine for you -- but what about us little people? The only thing being spread around is poverty!
I never went to college and even I can understand a model of economic success.
A twice-proven-in-America model of lowering taxes during recession. Against a twice-failed-in-America model of raising taxes during recession.
The arithmetic is proved. The ability to grow a business provides more jobs. More jobs creates more taxpayers. More taxpayers generates lots more tax revenue. Math is a universal constant. That is, until one injects emotion. Then it’s called “new math”. How does emotion stack up as a constant? Try saying one thing to two people. One may laugh while the other gets angry. Emotion cannot be counted on as a constant. Not to discount it totally, it certainly has it’s place. But not with math or economics. Politicians bemoan “tax cuts for the wealthy” with quips like “They’re rich, they should pay more because they can afford more.
First of all, with very few exceptions (e.g. Paris Hilton etc.), People convicted of being “wealthy” can also be described as “producers”. Producers create wealth. Wealth creates jobs (have you ever gotten hired by a poor person?). Jobs provide income. Income allows for the consumption of goods and services. This circles around to reward the producer who took the risk in the first place. Politicians have developed this warped idea that people go into business in order to create jobs. After all, that’s the platform both party candidates ran on (create or save 2 million jobs etc.). Since when is it government’s job to create jobs? Government creating jobs creates government jobs. 2 million new government jobs. Let’s think about that for a moment.
Government’s job is to stay out of the way of the private sector so Americans can grow the economy. There are corruption laws to protect the innocent, they just need to be enforced.
So, here’s a news flash: Americans don’t go into business to create jobs. Americans go into business to make money!
Success is defined in many ways and to varying degrees. Success is directly related to the varied degrees of: Passion, Motivation, and Self Discipline one has. Self discipline defined as: Doing what you know needs to be done weather you feel like it or not. Now, to “spread the wealth around” because some feel that it’s more fair is a moral judgment by those less motivated or disciplined.
Fair. For whom?
More fair to the individual who makes a decision on what they would like to do? More fair for the individual who follows a passion? More fair for the individual who sacrifices time from family? More fair for the individual who invests money (for education) time (60-70 hrs/wk etc.) and energy to build their business? These are positive moral and social values that should yield reward. A sense of entitlement seems to be the prevailing sentiment in this country. Why is anyone owed anything who hasn’t earned it?
I/we are not without empathy for folks who have fallen on hard times. I don’t mind helping said people for a period of time. But forever? For generations? What happens to their spirit? Don’t people who support themselves and their families genuinely feel better about themselves?
When people get addicted to the drug of permanent assistance they allow their soul to be sucked out of them by the drug pushers that is government.
It starts slow…..Heating oil. One has to heat the home. They can have it for free this year. They can have it for free next year too. Next, they can check their eligibility for food stamps. Maybe then they can have their child diagnosed with some sort of disability or other.
Then, after a while they’re hooked. How can they possibly be expected to support themselves and/or their family now? With the lifestyle they’ve become accustomed to? Especially not after having five kids so they can get a raise.
They’re hooked. And now, in classic drug dealer form, it’s time to pay the piper. What’s the cost?
Votes.
Very few politicians truly want to help people or to really really represent the people. They want power.
Just like those who are addicted to “assistance”, politicians in the afore mentioned category, are addicted to power. I submit that anyone addicted to power should lose it immediately. But, they look out for each other. And, after all, who will vote them out? The masses that they’ve hooked and are dependent on government? Who, in their right mind, would kill the goose that lays the golden egg?
Maybe, and I’m just floating this (although it makes sense) votes should count only for taxpayer citizens who contribute to society in a positive manner.
What’s that you say? Who will make the moral judgment as to which are contributing in a positive manner?
Well. President Obama, as such an eloquent speaker, your message and rhetoric could shift from “disaster, crisis, and catastrophe” to one of inspiration, motivation, and personal responsibility. Encourage entrepreneurs. Create incentives for success instead of punishing it. Target incentives to your base if you want. I don’t care. More people creating wealth is only good for the economy. If one continues to look for what’s wrong with the economy, one misses what’s right with it. If you truly want to repair the economy it would take little more than a snap of the fingers in the form of a couple amazing speeches. But why do that when you have this glorious crisis that you can milk for all it’s worth. After all, one never wants a good crisis go to waste right? And, “if used the right way” you can get legislation passed that you would not normally be able to pass. This crisis is being exploited!
I, for one, am not dazed or sucked in by soaring speech rhetoric. I have personal experience with the term “We’ll see what we can do” (said to Jorje regarding McDonald’s benefit pkg). That phrase in particular means (to any that have used it) “nothing can be done but I want you to feel better “ and “I want you to remember who made you feel better about this“.
The same goes for phrases like “I’ll do everything I can” or “I’ll continue to fight for you.” (to the U.A.W.)
People don’t listen to what you say. They (most of them) only feel your intent. If folks actually listened to the words they’d hear things like what John McCain caught in the presidential debate regarding offshore drilling. McCain would drill….Obama will “look at” drilling.
Another phrase is “Some say…..” or “Some would argue….” . This is a “straw man” argument. Who? When? What was the context? But when one is “feelin’ ya” these go right through unchallenged.
What if, for example, there were some more difficult emotions to connect to people with? Emotions like self esteem. Who has a higher self esteem, the person who lines up every day for their fish? Or the person who has taken fishing lessons and can catch their own fish.
Connect with useful emotions (useful to the individual) like self esteem, self reliance, and self confidence.
Instead of trying to be all things to all people, taking care of them, inspire them to take care of themselves.
Individuals are not helpless. And a person is smart.
When people get categorized into groups and such, that group can be told that their helpless. And with no one to argue the point, folks in that group feel that some if not all in the group feel that way so then they do too. Well they must! They’re in that group aren’t they? They’ve been put into a group. Weather they agree with …
But………wait…….. Ohh……… I get it. That’s why the sense of entitlement is promoted by the left. They’re helpless because they’ve been told they are. They’re helpless because of all the assistance given them by the government. They get assistance because they’re helpless. They’re helpless because…
In closing, a campaign promise was to go through the budget line by line and eliminate items deemed ineffective…. Never mind.
Please examine objectively the results of liberal “entitlements” and not just the intentions. Also, ask what are the unintended consequences of the same.
Thanks for your time,
Dave the small biz owner/rural mail carrier/karate teacher
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Patriotic songs at school
Great news!
Since I plead my case in the last blog to the PTA, there was a school concert. My second grader performed "My Country 'Tis Of Thee" and "You're a Grand Ole Flag". I was delighted!
Also, the concert opened with "The Star Spangled Banner"!
I don't know if it was a result of my speaking up or coincidence, but I'm glad they did it anyway.
Since I plead my case in the last blog to the PTA, there was a school concert. My second grader performed "My Country 'Tis Of Thee" and "You're a Grand Ole Flag". I was delighted!
Also, the concert opened with "The Star Spangled Banner"!
I don't know if it was a result of my speaking up or coincidence, but I'm glad they did it anyway.
Monday, May 17, 2010
flag, Patriotism, songs in school,
I asked my son, who is a 9 yr old 4th grader, if he knew the song 'My Country 'tis of Thee'. No. America the Beautiful?........No. He said "Dad, we barely say the Pledge of Allegiance!"
I asked him why and he said "...because we forget."
I can remember by the third grade at least 2 concerts where we performed these and other patriotic songs. I uh, have no video proof........sorry.
I love my Country.
The NPR/PBS liberal would believe that:
I must hate every minority in the world. I don't
I must be a "war-monger". I'm not
I must love oil billionaires. I'm broke!
I must be a "gun toting Jesus freak. I own a 12g single shot I got when I was about 17 and I haven't seen it or touched it for about 25 yrs. I believe in God, but I'm not a freak. You can believe what you want.
I love my Country.
Is my neck a little red? Well, one tries to keep the toilet seats off one's front lawn.
Am I a "mouth breather"? When my nose is clogged....yeah.
Neither of these makes me as stupid as I'm portrayed in the liberal media for saying that I love my Country.
I LOVE MY COUNTRY AND I'M NOT EMBARRASSED BY IT!
This is the greatest Country in the world!
Why is that bad? I should feel guilty for this? What did I really have to do with it anyway?
My Father and Mother took my older brothers and I down to main street every time there was a parade. My Father would bring our big flagpole (6 footer), then he would buy us each a small American flag to wave during the parade. We were instructed to never let it droop past horizontal but to hold it upright and proud. We would hold it up and wave it as the bands and soldiers and other groups marched by. Then, as all small children whose attention span was short or something else distracted us, the flag would inevitably begin to droop and sometimes point down toward the ground. And even though he was very gentle about it and was never angry, we would get embarrassed if we didn't correct it on our own before he would gently reach down and nudge it back to the upright position.
I love my Country.
I asked him why and he said "...because we forget."
I can remember by the third grade at least 2 concerts where we performed these and other patriotic songs. I uh, have no video proof........sorry.
I love my Country.
The NPR/PBS liberal would believe that:
I must hate every minority in the world. I don't
I must be a "war-monger". I'm not
I must love oil billionaires. I'm broke!
I must be a "gun toting Jesus freak. I own a 12g single shot I got when I was about 17 and I haven't seen it or touched it for about 25 yrs. I believe in God, but I'm not a freak. You can believe what you want.
I love my Country.
Is my neck a little red? Well, one tries to keep the toilet seats off one's front lawn.
Am I a "mouth breather"? When my nose is clogged....yeah.
Neither of these makes me as stupid as I'm portrayed in the liberal media for saying that I love my Country.
I LOVE MY COUNTRY AND I'M NOT EMBARRASSED BY IT!
This is the greatest Country in the world!
Why is that bad? I should feel guilty for this? What did I really have to do with it anyway?
My Father and Mother took my older brothers and I down to main street every time there was a parade. My Father would bring our big flagpole (6 footer), then he would buy us each a small American flag to wave during the parade. We were instructed to never let it droop past horizontal but to hold it upright and proud. We would hold it up and wave it as the bands and soldiers and other groups marched by. Then, as all small children whose attention span was short or something else distracted us, the flag would inevitably begin to droop and sometimes point down toward the ground. And even though he was very gentle about it and was never angry, we would get embarrassed if we didn't correct it on our own before he would gently reach down and nudge it back to the upright position.
I love my Country.
Sunday, May 16, 2010
creeping incrementalism, muslim brotherhood, socialism
Islamic Sharia law is simply incompatible with freedom.
A bold statement to be sure, but let's cut to the chase. I'm an impatient individual. I don't want things slipping in over a long period of time. Get to the end game and let's have it out!
How many people would want to live in a socialistic society? Well guess what? You kinda are. And they're not done. If you were presented with what we now have (as the end game) as an agenda, you wouldn't go for it. They know that. That's why Obama didn't run on the socialist party ticket.
There is one.
He could have.
He knows that wouldn't get him elected. He also knows that (and the people around him do too) that people will reject things changed by revolution or rapid change. That is why we are the frog that has been put into cold water and cooked. Seriously, who has the time to keep up with all this stuff when there's work and family and life in general. Oh sure, once in a while an issue comes up that gets you hot and you pay attention, maybe even make a call to the congress, but it soon fades. I'm glad there are people who do it for a living because I don't like to read papers. I have a half a dozen pundits who's shows I try to catch as often as I can. (hint:a $30 mp3 player allows you to listen to podcasts downloaded)
The fundamental Islamists who bomb people and things, while waging war on the surface (revolutionary change) are slowly creeping into society and incrementally imposing whatever they can get away with. Pressure....always pressure, pushing here - pushing there. You see it when an airport installs foot washing basins for Muslims. You see it when a college has separate gymnasium use for boys and girls because Muslim girls can't cover completely while using the gym. And now, with one of what they would consider to be the greatest victory so far: A giant 13 story mosque 2 blocks from ground zero! These guys don't worry about politics. They'll take it any way they can get it. Fast or slow. They won't stop until the entire world is an Islamic state.
The Muslim Brotherhood developed a top secret 100 year plan of cultural invasion (discovered to be 20 years old when the Swiss uncovered it during a raid in November of 2001). A 25 point plan that is "comprehensive" and all encompassing. So they still have 70 years - and I'd say they are ahead of schedule. They probably didn't consider that "political correctness" would do all the heavy lifting for them.
Let's review the list shall we?
A bold statement to be sure, but let's cut to the chase. I'm an impatient individual. I don't want things slipping in over a long period of time. Get to the end game and let's have it out!
How many people would want to live in a socialistic society? Well guess what? You kinda are. And they're not done. If you were presented with what we now have (as the end game) as an agenda, you wouldn't go for it. They know that. That's why Obama didn't run on the socialist party ticket.
There is one.
He could have.
He knows that wouldn't get him elected. He also knows that (and the people around him do too) that people will reject things changed by revolution or rapid change. That is why we are the frog that has been put into cold water and cooked. Seriously, who has the time to keep up with all this stuff when there's work and family and life in general. Oh sure, once in a while an issue comes up that gets you hot and you pay attention, maybe even make a call to the congress, but it soon fades. I'm glad there are people who do it for a living because I don't like to read papers. I have a half a dozen pundits who's shows I try to catch as often as I can. (hint:a $30 mp3 player allows you to listen to podcasts downloaded)
The fundamental Islamists who bomb people and things, while waging war on the surface (revolutionary change) are slowly creeping into society and incrementally imposing whatever they can get away with. Pressure....always pressure, pushing here - pushing there. You see it when an airport installs foot washing basins for Muslims. You see it when a college has separate gymnasium use for boys and girls because Muslim girls can't cover completely while using the gym. And now, with one of what they would consider to be the greatest victory so far: A giant 13 story mosque 2 blocks from ground zero! These guys don't worry about politics. They'll take it any way they can get it. Fast or slow. They won't stop until the entire world is an Islamic state.
The Muslim Brotherhood developed a top secret 100 year plan of cultural invasion (discovered to be 20 years old when the Swiss uncovered it during a raid in November of 2001). A 25 point plan that is "comprehensive" and all encompassing. So they still have 70 years - and I'd say they are ahead of schedule. They probably didn't consider that "political correctness" would do all the heavy lifting for them.
Let's review the list shall we?
1. Networking and coordinating actions between like-minded Islamists organizations;
2. Avoiding open alliances with known terrorist organizations and individuals to maintain the appearance of "moderation"; (Who is CAIR?)
3. Infiltrating and taking over existing Muslim organizations to realign them towards the Muslim Brotherhood's collective goals;
4.using deception to mask the intended goals of Islamist actions, as long as it doesn't conflict with Shari'a law;
5. Avoiding social conflicts with Westerners locally, nationally or globally, that might damage the long-term ability to expand the Islamist power base in the West, including the support of full-time administrators and workers;
6. Conducting surveillance, obtaining data, and establishing collection and data storage capabilities;
7. Putting into place a watchdog system for monitoring Western media to warn Muslims of "international plots fomented against them";
8. Cultivating an Islamist intellectual community, including the establishment of think-tanks and advocacy groups, and publishing "academic" studies, to legitimize Islamist positions and to chronicle the history of Islamist movements;
9. Developing a comprehensive 100-year plan to advance Islamist ideology throughout the world;
10. Balancing international objectives with local flexibility;
11. Building extensive social networks of schools, hospitals and charitable organizations dedicated to Islamist ideals so that contact with the movement for Muslims in the West is constant;
12. Involving ideologically committed Muslims in democratically-elected institutions on all levels in the West, including government, NGOs, private organizations and labor unions;
13. Instrumentally using existing Western institutions until they can be converted and put into service of Islam;
14. Drafting Islamic constitutions, laws and policies for eventual implementation;
15. Avoiding conflict within the Islamist movements on all levels, including the development of processes for conflict resolution;
16. Instituting alliances with Western "progressive" organizations that share similar goals;
17. Creating autonomous "security forces" to protect Muslims in the West;
18. Inflaming violence and keeping Muslims living in the West "in a jihadframe of mind";
19. Supporting jihad movements across the Muslim world through preaching, propaganda, personnel, funding, and technical and operational support;
20. Making the Palestinian cause a global wedge issue for Muslims;
21. Adopting the total liberation of Palestine from Israel and the creation of an Islamic state as a keystone in the plan for global Islamic domination;
22. Instigating a constant campaign to incite hatred by Muslims against Jews and rejecting any discussions of conciliation or coexistence with them;
23. Actively creating jihad terror cells within Palestine;
24. Linking the terrorist activities in Palestine with the global terror movement;
25. Collecting sufficient funds to indefinitely perpetuate and support jihad around the world;
You gotta admit, it's fully thought out and very thorough.
Although to me, Extremely diabolical.
Have a nice day :)
Saturday, May 15, 2010
letter to Obama
Mr. President,
Please stop trying to transform America into your image. Your image has nothing to do with the reasons this country was founded. In fact, I believe that your image of America was included in the reasons we separated from England!
1. The Constitution was set up to apply to government more so than citizens.
2. The Declaration of Independence guarantees "Life, Liberty, and The Pursuit of happiness.
Your interpretation to the second one is "equal health and income" . I suppose it kind of sounds the same....
in other words, you would feel better if everyone had the same things. You would feel better if you could take care of 'your people' by giving them everything that 'should' make them happy. You would feel better if you could take care of 'your people' by doing for them everything that will make their lives easier. So folks should be happy with what you think we should be happy with.
In order to do that, you're pushing past the constraints of the Constitution that were specifically put there to prevent government from getting so involved in the private sector.
This has become such a game of paying off people who contributed and donated and it's going to come to a stop.
This Nov. If you could be voted out you would. Every incumbent who voted socialist*, WILL BE REPLACED!!
*Bailouts
Wall st
Banks
Insurance Cos.
Autos
Stimulus
Porkulous
healthcare
Thursday, May 13, 2010
Skin in the game!
Following my last post, I also wanted to mention that quote from both Obama and Biden.
Regarding the raising of taxes as being "patriotic" and the need to have "skin in the game", let me ask which actually has more skin in the game: The person who now has to empty their own trash and clean their own toilets at work in order to cover the added overhead (more on that later) of higher taxes? Or, the person who used to do that work and is now sitting on the couch collecting another 99 weeks of unemployment?!! Who really has skin in the game?!
Business now needs to produce 3 times as much to produce income for half the people. See, the problem is, that government sees the purpose of starting a business as to create jobs. That's the problem! The purpose of starting a business is to make money! Then, if business is good, there's room for expansion - job creation.
The other implied assumption is that companies will take the extra overhead of higher taxes out of profits. No! The extra overhead will simply be passed on to you - the moron consumer.
Unless they can guarantee that the overhead will be absorbed from profits. Do you really want the government to go there? They do! Who's salaries are being capped? Who is Kenneth Feinberg?!
So play it out - A company has to absorb from profits higher taxes. Or, a company needs to pass the overhead on to the consumer.
The first way, maybe they can keep the prices competative, but with les cash flow people need to be layed off to maintain staying in business. And, more people out of work, less disposable income available so volume is down and the business begins to lag.
The other way, more people get to stay working, but the price is so high that fewer people can afford the product. Business lags and you get layed off anyway. Good for you! Feel better?!
Regarding the raising of taxes as being "patriotic" and the need to have "skin in the game", let me ask which actually has more skin in the game: The person who now has to empty their own trash and clean their own toilets at work in order to cover the added overhead (more on that later) of higher taxes? Or, the person who used to do that work and is now sitting on the couch collecting another 99 weeks of unemployment?!! Who really has skin in the game?!
Business now needs to produce 3 times as much to produce income for half the people. See, the problem is, that government sees the purpose of starting a business as to create jobs. That's the problem! The purpose of starting a business is to make money! Then, if business is good, there's room for expansion - job creation.
The other implied assumption is that companies will take the extra overhead of higher taxes out of profits. No! The extra overhead will simply be passed on to you - the moron consumer.
Unless they can guarantee that the overhead will be absorbed from profits. Do you really want the government to go there? They do! Who's salaries are being capped? Who is Kenneth Feinberg?!
So play it out - A company has to absorb from profits higher taxes. Or, a company needs to pass the overhead on to the consumer.
The first way, maybe they can keep the prices competative, but with les cash flow people need to be layed off to maintain staying in business. And, more people out of work, less disposable income available so volume is down and the business begins to lag.
The other way, more people get to stay working, but the price is so high that fewer people can afford the product. Business lags and you get layed off anyway. Good for you! Feel better?!
crisis created.
Rahm Emmanuel said (along with Hillary and others) that "..you never want to let a crisis go to waste...it gives you a chance to pass legislation that you would normally not be able to get through."
Who thinks like that?!
Why would someone think like that?!
Now, if there isn't sufficient crisis, crisis can be created. For instance, what about "class envy"?
How can you raise taxes on everyone and make the majority think it's only going to be for the "rich"? Just wait until whatever you earn is considered "rich". And what about the redistributive justification by saying it's a more "fair" philosophy? Fair to whom? Fair to the person who first makes a decision regarding their future? Fair to the person who then invests in an education, sacrifices time from earning, sacrifices time from or postponing family? All to then be stigmatized and demonized for earning more than those who do none of that. Cream rises to the top, and there is always more milk than cream.
People (in the milk category) who buy into that idea don't realize that it's the "rich" people who are now taxed oppressively to make you feel better.....except now, you're out of a job! The "rich" had to lay you off to preserve their own livelihood. And why shouldn't they? Can you think of a reason someone should put someone else's job over the survival of, for instance, a business that not only took considerable start up investment, but also all the investment of time and money to get to that point. Not to mention massive personal sacrifice made by the owner to grow to a point of creating jobs for others. Only to have it snatched away to make people whom they don't know and don't know them feel better.
What about racial tensions?
What about ....well maybe that's another post.
Who thinks like that?!
Why would someone think like that?!
Now, if there isn't sufficient crisis, crisis can be created. For instance, what about "class envy"?
How can you raise taxes on everyone and make the majority think it's only going to be for the "rich"? Just wait until whatever you earn is considered "rich". And what about the redistributive justification by saying it's a more "fair" philosophy? Fair to whom? Fair to the person who first makes a decision regarding their future? Fair to the person who then invests in an education, sacrifices time from earning, sacrifices time from or postponing family? All to then be stigmatized and demonized for earning more than those who do none of that. Cream rises to the top, and there is always more milk than cream.
People (in the milk category) who buy into that idea don't realize that it's the "rich" people who are now taxed oppressively to make you feel better.....except now, you're out of a job! The "rich" had to lay you off to preserve their own livelihood. And why shouldn't they? Can you think of a reason someone should put someone else's job over the survival of, for instance, a business that not only took considerable start up investment, but also all the investment of time and money to get to that point. Not to mention massive personal sacrifice made by the owner to grow to a point of creating jobs for others. Only to have it snatched away to make people whom they don't know and don't know them feel better.
What about racial tensions?
What about ....well maybe that's another post.
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
"Entitlements"?
What if a leader spoke up and said "Look at Greece, look at Europe, look at California. Can we deduce the lesson that liberalism is a failed ideology?" What would happen if those words were uttered by a credible source? Could it follow that entitlements should be rolled back considerably? I'm sure the criticism would be from those receiving said entitlements. I'm sure whoever would take the political risk in making such statements would incur the wrath of the media, liberals, and the like.
My question would then be: Whom should people be more angry at? The person threatening to roll back entitlements? Or, the ones who hooked the people on the narcotic to begin with - - just to get elected?
My question would then be: Whom should people be more angry at? The person threatening to roll back entitlements? Or, the ones who hooked the people on the narcotic to begin with - - just to get elected?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)