When we look at the various forms of government implemented throughout history in various nations, we can come to but one conclusion: The type of government and economic scaffolding implemented, does not always determine the fate of a nation.
The most important factor in determining a nation's success or failure is culture. What does a nation's society value? How does it define right and wrong?
We have seen what happened in Russia and to some extent, other Eastern European countries when capatilism was implemented in a somewhat artificial and blanketed manner. Russia never fully removed itself from its old values. Corruption was and is accepted as the way things are done. As a collective people, Russians never arrived at the positions American's found themselves in 1776:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
These are the musings of aliens to the Russian. Therefore there can be no public will to stand behind a constitution similar to ours. Public will is the only thing that gives legs to any action of government.
As much as I believe that Adam Smith came as close as a human could to codifying a way to human happiness, I also know that without the proper cultural foundation, no color of State rule can lead to freedom and it's fruits.
Sunday, October 21, 2007
Friday, October 19, 2007
Thank you Peggy
"I think we've been through a period where too many people have been given to understand that if they have a problem, it's the government's job to cope with it. 'I have a problem, I'll get a grant.' 'I'm homeless, the government must house me.' They're casting their problem on society. And, you know, there is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women, and there are families. And no government can do anything except through people, and people must look to themselves first." ~ Margaret Thatcher
Winning in Iraq; losing the presidency
I posted a poll on my blog today. You'll find it in the upper-right corner. It asks if an American victory and withdrawal of troops from Iraq by 2008 damages the chances of a Democrat being elected president. Some may want me to define victory, but before I do, I want to remind you that there is a portion of the moonbats who would never recognise victory in any form. My definition would go like this: The present government maintains a stable democracy where rule of law is held in high esteem. Through law, insurgents, attempted coups and small scale invasions from Iran and Syria are promptly and strongly dealt with. It should also be noted that I don't think we'll be out of Iraq in 2008.
Iraq will probably, at least in my life, never be a pristine example of a democracy. Perhaps the best we can hope for is something like Pakistan. But that's a huge improvement on what was there six years ago.
Of course, most of the Dems voted to go to war. But then they discovered what a great weapon the war is against the Republican party. And they fully invested all of their rhetoric into defeat--because after the difficulties of dealing with the insurgency, they were sure we had lost. But we hadn't. Al-Qaeda, and you don't hear this much in the mainstream media, has been crushed. The worst defeat possible has befallen them: Rejection by the Muslim community. No longer is Al-Qaeda protected by frightened Muslims. These people want to live in peace, and they know that Al-Qaeda brings only death.
Iraq will probably, at least in my life, never be a pristine example of a democracy. Perhaps the best we can hope for is something like Pakistan. But that's a huge improvement on what was there six years ago.
Of course, most of the Dems voted to go to war. But then they discovered what a great weapon the war is against the Republican party. And they fully invested all of their rhetoric into defeat--because after the difficulties of dealing with the insurgency, they were sure we had lost. But we hadn't. Al-Qaeda, and you don't hear this much in the mainstream media, has been crushed. The worst defeat possible has befallen them: Rejection by the Muslim community. No longer is Al-Qaeda protected by frightened Muslims. These people want to live in peace, and they know that Al-Qaeda brings only death.
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Secularized, homogenized and moonbaterized
Children in King Middle School in Portland Maine will be popping contraceptive pills if officials at the Portland School Committee have their way. The committee's proposal will give students in grades 6-8 access to a full spectrum of contraceptives, including a morning after pill. Condoms are already available.
Our schools have failed us--because we gave them to government. Instead of representing our core beliefs, the schools now shape our beliefs. We took out God, we told the children the evils of Christopher Columbus and about bad white men like George Washington. Oh, and don't forget what Hernan Cortez did to the wondrous Aztec Empire--yes the same Aztecs that ate the hearts of their human-sacrifice victims. Everything that Little Johnny learned was good and proper back in 1950 has been turned upside down. It is clear what happens when we give any portion of our well-being to the state
Humans are unhappy on the inside. We fall off the proverbial horse, get back up to ride again, and fall off the other side. Humanity is like a person who rearranges the furniture once a week. If only they can get the set-up just right, they'll feel better. But we can't get the outside just right. Only the inside matters in the end.
It's ironic that the Left, which has trivialized sex, wants to talk about it all the time, everywhere and to everyone. Let's face it--sex is a powerful force. It is not a toy. It can destroy a person, both physically and psychologically. Like all powerful forces--it can be used for good or bad. To hand our children such a weapon in hopes that it will be properly used is like handing Johnny a gun and telling him where the safety is. Sex is more powerful than either the religious or secular care to admit. The religious fear its power because they are constantly wrestling with temptation. The secularists fear the power of sex because should they admit sex's true importance, they would have to treat it with respect. It has even been said that the power of sex is such, that a person's nature can be gleaned merely from observing the type of person he or she sleeps with.
Until we remember sex's power, and respect it, our children will continue to become courser creatures; and more and more 13 year old girls will make the F-Bomb part of their lexicon.
Our schools have failed us--because we gave them to government. Instead of representing our core beliefs, the schools now shape our beliefs. We took out God, we told the children the evils of Christopher Columbus and about bad white men like George Washington. Oh, and don't forget what Hernan Cortez did to the wondrous Aztec Empire--yes the same Aztecs that ate the hearts of their human-sacrifice victims. Everything that Little Johnny learned was good and proper back in 1950 has been turned upside down. It is clear what happens when we give any portion of our well-being to the state
Humans are unhappy on the inside. We fall off the proverbial horse, get back up to ride again, and fall off the other side. Humanity is like a person who rearranges the furniture once a week. If only they can get the set-up just right, they'll feel better. But we can't get the outside just right. Only the inside matters in the end.
It's ironic that the Left, which has trivialized sex, wants to talk about it all the time, everywhere and to everyone. Let's face it--sex is a powerful force. It is not a toy. It can destroy a person, both physically and psychologically. Like all powerful forces--it can be used for good or bad. To hand our children such a weapon in hopes that it will be properly used is like handing Johnny a gun and telling him where the safety is. Sex is more powerful than either the religious or secular care to admit. The religious fear its power because they are constantly wrestling with temptation. The secularists fear the power of sex because should they admit sex's true importance, they would have to treat it with respect. It has even been said that the power of sex is such, that a person's nature can be gleaned merely from observing the type of person he or she sleeps with.
Until we remember sex's power, and respect it, our children will continue to become courser creatures; and more and more 13 year old girls will make the F-Bomb part of their lexicon.
Monday, October 15, 2007
Collectivism and the destruction of the ego
Among the many motives that pulled humanity from its caves and jungles and into the enlightened era, there is one that stands prime: Human ego.
Ego and the sense of accomplishment, the destruction of one's obstacles and the overcoming of difficult situations. This is what causes, indeed forces, humanity to improve. Without these challenges, the individual mind stagnates, becomes lazy and flacid. I've seen it in my own life and it's evident in the portions of America that have been granted funding simply for having a certain skin color or possessing certain genes. These people have been told for decades that they are victims, and victims need help. The so-called saviors of these people are victims themselves: Of linear thinking.
The black community has gone backwards because they fell prey to the culture of victimhood that is so fashionable on the left. The crime rate amongst blacks is way up since the 1960s. A portion of my heritage is American Indian, and I can assure you that there are massive problems on the Indian Reservations in my homestate of Maine. All of these problems are attributable to collectivism. The natives that live on the tribal land are given free housing and per capita checks every year from the governement. They are given free college tuition too. But that which cost us nothing has little value to us. I know this myself as I've always had a problem in keeping track of my sunglasses. Then I payed $100 for a pair of Oakleys and kept them for longer than all my other pairs combined.
It is really a tragedy that Americans have not learned the attrocities commited on the human spirit by collectivism. First, it smashes competition. Competition is a driving force for good. In sports, baseball for instance, when the season homerun record was 12, everyone strove for 13. But when it was 61, the target number was 62. To remove competition is to destroy part of our humaness. Humans can overcome great barriers, but not when they are taken care of. Only when they can take care of themselves can we be great. Will our children drink milk forever? Will they always have training wheels?
Also on collectivism's hit-list is individuality. We all have strengths and weaknesses. Our mission here on Earth is to maximize the good and minimize the bad. Socialists tell us that for the most part we are all so bad that only a system can help society to reach its potential. But I say that only the individual can take us where we need to be. One person at a time must come to the conclusion that they themselves, without government, can make a difference.
If we want minorities to become successful, if we truly desire that the weak be made strong, we must challenge them. They must act, not with cliche'd picket signs, but by removing the brand of victimhood that is now burned into their souls by the left's pundits. The challenge does not guarantee that everyone will succeed, however it does give everyone a chance. The only chance that collectivism has been shown to grant is universal misery.
Ego and the sense of accomplishment, the destruction of one's obstacles and the overcoming of difficult situations. This is what causes, indeed forces, humanity to improve. Without these challenges, the individual mind stagnates, becomes lazy and flacid. I've seen it in my own life and it's evident in the portions of America that have been granted funding simply for having a certain skin color or possessing certain genes. These people have been told for decades that they are victims, and victims need help. The so-called saviors of these people are victims themselves: Of linear thinking.
The black community has gone backwards because they fell prey to the culture of victimhood that is so fashionable on the left. The crime rate amongst blacks is way up since the 1960s. A portion of my heritage is American Indian, and I can assure you that there are massive problems on the Indian Reservations in my homestate of Maine. All of these problems are attributable to collectivism. The natives that live on the tribal land are given free housing and per capita checks every year from the governement. They are given free college tuition too. But that which cost us nothing has little value to us. I know this myself as I've always had a problem in keeping track of my sunglasses. Then I payed $100 for a pair of Oakleys and kept them for longer than all my other pairs combined.
It is really a tragedy that Americans have not learned the attrocities commited on the human spirit by collectivism. First, it smashes competition. Competition is a driving force for good. In sports, baseball for instance, when the season homerun record was 12, everyone strove for 13. But when it was 61, the target number was 62. To remove competition is to destroy part of our humaness. Humans can overcome great barriers, but not when they are taken care of. Only when they can take care of themselves can we be great. Will our children drink milk forever? Will they always have training wheels?
Also on collectivism's hit-list is individuality. We all have strengths and weaknesses. Our mission here on Earth is to maximize the good and minimize the bad. Socialists tell us that for the most part we are all so bad that only a system can help society to reach its potential. But I say that only the individual can take us where we need to be. One person at a time must come to the conclusion that they themselves, without government, can make a difference.
If we want minorities to become successful, if we truly desire that the weak be made strong, we must challenge them. They must act, not with cliche'd picket signs, but by removing the brand of victimhood that is now burned into their souls by the left's pundits. The challenge does not guarantee that everyone will succeed, however it does give everyone a chance. The only chance that collectivism has been shown to grant is universal misery.
Saturday, October 13, 2007
Did you know...
That there have been 16,791 people to date killed by Islamic terrorist in Iraq since the invasion? 225 people have died from collateral damage from American operations(while Americans were fighting Islamic terrorists).
It's funny when people say that the Iraq war is being used as a recruiting tool by extremists. Yes, it is. And before the war they used other recruiting tools and will use still more when the war is done.
"Fight those who do not believe in Allah...nor follow the religion of truth...until they pay the tax in acknowledgement of superiority and they are in a state of subjection."~ The Koran.
It's funny when people say that the Iraq war is being used as a recruiting tool by extremists. Yes, it is. And before the war they used other recruiting tools and will use still more when the war is done.
"Fight those who do not believe in Allah...nor follow the religion of truth...until they pay the tax in acknowledgement of superiority and they are in a state of subjection."~ The Koran.
Friday, October 12, 2007
Just one question...
What the heck does global warming have to do with world peace? Wow. Al Gore receiving the Nobel Peace Prize is like me receiving the Pulitzer Prize for designing a new type of toilet paper. Books are made of paper after all.
Thursday, October 11, 2007
Inconvenient Truth is untrue according to British Court
A British court ruled that Al Gore's movie, "An Inconvenient Truth", is factually inaccurate and if shown to school children, must be balanced with the views more commonly held by the scientific community. It is sad that this movie gained so much attention, and only because Gore's name was involved.
The court sited eleven claims made in the film that have either been proven to be incorrect or controversial. Of particular note is the assertion that the icepack of Mt. Kilimanjaro is retreating because of global warming, that Hurricane Katrina was caused by global warming and that polar bears are dying because of global warming. All of these have been shown to be false or have no scientific link to warming. In fact, the polar bear population is on the rise, and there is no increase in the frequency or intensity of hurricanes.
This is one area in which clearer heads have won out. The issue of global warming is cooling. Strangely enough, a search of AP news articles in the last ten days shows no articles produced on this. There was an article in Reuters London though. Those journalists just KNOW we're all going to boil off the earth--and they just can't let you think any different.
The court sited eleven claims made in the film that have either been proven to be incorrect or controversial. Of particular note is the assertion that the icepack of Mt. Kilimanjaro is retreating because of global warming, that Hurricane Katrina was caused by global warming and that polar bears are dying because of global warming. All of these have been shown to be false or have no scientific link to warming. In fact, the polar bear population is on the rise, and there is no increase in the frequency or intensity of hurricanes.
This is one area in which clearer heads have won out. The issue of global warming is cooling. Strangely enough, a search of AP news articles in the last ten days shows no articles produced on this. There was an article in Reuters London though. Those journalists just KNOW we're all going to boil off the earth--and they just can't let you think any different.
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Face it
Face it America. You're not tired of our soldiers dying; you're tired of the news telling you the same stories everyday. But the media has slowed on its Iraq reporting. Why? Because we've won. Yep. I'm declaring a US victory. And now the war is no longer a Democrat talking point. A win in Iraq simply doesn't help them gain power--only bad news does. Car bombings could occur from now until the cows come home--but we've still won. Our soldiers are the best in the world, folks. All of the mall shopping in the world, carried on by our nation's people, won't change the fact that our military is great. We shop; our soldiers fight. We complain; our soldiers win. We are pundits; our soldiers are champions. This battle has been carried on long enough, I admit. But we won, because will is the prime factor in all of humanity's struggle to relieve itself of the pain inflicted by tyrants--and the will of our volunteers far outstrips that of the undergrads discussing International Relations at Starbucks.
Now I ask a difficult thing of the Democrats. Admit that you have been defeated by an American victory. Admit that the world is better without Saddam, and that within a few years, all of the hyperbolic rhetoric will be forgotten--not by Islamic extremists; they can never be sated by anything but death--but by the squawkers within our own borders; by the European countries who are changing their tone before our eyes, each of them I'm sure, somewhat embarrassed for being bullied by Neo-Facsist Russia. So, secure in your defeat and secure in the fact that your country still loves you despite your years of slandering and calling its leader Hitler, find something real in your life to hold on to. It can't be God, I know. Al Gore maybe? He's up for the Nobel Prize, even with his error-ridden film.
As I've admitted defeat in the arena of American culture, so should the left admit defeat in Iraq.
Now I ask a difficult thing of the Democrats. Admit that you have been defeated by an American victory. Admit that the world is better without Saddam, and that within a few years, all of the hyperbolic rhetoric will be forgotten--not by Islamic extremists; they can never be sated by anything but death--but by the squawkers within our own borders; by the European countries who are changing their tone before our eyes, each of them I'm sure, somewhat embarrassed for being bullied by Neo-Facsist Russia. So, secure in your defeat and secure in the fact that your country still loves you despite your years of slandering and calling its leader Hitler, find something real in your life to hold on to. It can't be God, I know. Al Gore maybe? He's up for the Nobel Prize, even with his error-ridden film.
As I've admitted defeat in the arena of American culture, so should the left admit defeat in Iraq.
Monday, October 8, 2007
The police, force and the media
On Glenn Beck's radio show this morning, he was speaking about the Florida police officer who hit the 15 yr old girl in the face after she bit him. Yup--that's what happens when you bite people.
The longer I worked at the job of police officer (That's all it is to me--a job. Not a calling or something sacred) the more I realized that I did not possess the same rights as the average citizen. For the most part I had far less. Each year, I noticed that officers were under more scrutiny. The stress from this alone was enough for many to wish that they had followed other career paths. The second guessing was incessant. Most of the officers, including myself, found that it was better to do nothing. Avoiding trouble was rewarded in that there were no complaints filed, no lawyers knocking on the door with a civil-suit and no injuries from fighting with out-of-control drunks.
Is this what you want from your police force? That's what America is getting, because, as with a nation's government, America gets the police it deserves. America wanted me to drive around in a cruiser with a cup of coffee looking really serious, wearing body armor, carrying a gun. I wore the garb of a warrior, but needed the politeness of a Wal Mart greeter. I saw officers spit on, have bones broken, stabbed, exposed to deadly diseases--but in almost 8 years of work, rarely saw a criminal go to the hospital because of injuries incurred while battling police. They kicked the windows out of our cruisers, screamed the most vile words of abuse at us and we took it like professionals in the vast majority of instances.
More and more, crime IS paying. When a nation fails to protect its police, it is undermining the very foundation of all democracies--rule of law. And that's what is occuring at multiple levels; a complete disrespect for the law and its arm--the police.
Our children should be taught in high school civics their "rights", so police won't have to hear "I know my rights." No, you don't son, you really don't.
In the last few weeks, we have the taser incident at Florida University, and we have
the incident of the officer slapping the 15 yr. old. In both cases the police are presented as abusive. But it just isn't so. Here's something that needs to be taught in civics: The police use of force continuum. Its goes like this:
1) Police Presence. Officer simply shows up at the scene. Hopefully people stop acting like idiots.
2) Verbal Commands. Officer tells the drunk guy at the bar to leave and reminds him to take a cab.
3) Hands-On. The police officer can grab a person to enforce a lawful order, such as, "Sir, leave the bar now."
4) Non-Lethal striking and weapons. Police CAN hit. If someone struggles, the officer can strike with baton, he can kick to large muscle groups, he can pepper-spray or taser. So now you know that Taser Boy got what was coming. The officers asked him to leave. He didn't. They grabbed him by the arms. He struggled and broke loose. They wrestled him to the ground where he continued to struggle. He rode the lightning. That's the way it works. Sorry
5) Lethal force. The police can shoot anyone posing the threat of serious bodily injury or death. Many, many people that the police could legally shoot, are subdued by other means.
The longer I worked at the job of police officer (That's all it is to me--a job. Not a calling or something sacred) the more I realized that I did not possess the same rights as the average citizen. For the most part I had far less. Each year, I noticed that officers were under more scrutiny. The stress from this alone was enough for many to wish that they had followed other career paths. The second guessing was incessant. Most of the officers, including myself, found that it was better to do nothing. Avoiding trouble was rewarded in that there were no complaints filed, no lawyers knocking on the door with a civil-suit and no injuries from fighting with out-of-control drunks.
Is this what you want from your police force? That's what America is getting, because, as with a nation's government, America gets the police it deserves. America wanted me to drive around in a cruiser with a cup of coffee looking really serious, wearing body armor, carrying a gun. I wore the garb of a warrior, but needed the politeness of a Wal Mart greeter. I saw officers spit on, have bones broken, stabbed, exposed to deadly diseases--but in almost 8 years of work, rarely saw a criminal go to the hospital because of injuries incurred while battling police. They kicked the windows out of our cruisers, screamed the most vile words of abuse at us and we took it like professionals in the vast majority of instances.
More and more, crime IS paying. When a nation fails to protect its police, it is undermining the very foundation of all democracies--rule of law. And that's what is occuring at multiple levels; a complete disrespect for the law and its arm--the police.
Our children should be taught in high school civics their "rights", so police won't have to hear "I know my rights." No, you don't son, you really don't.
In the last few weeks, we have the taser incident at Florida University, and we have
the incident of the officer slapping the 15 yr. old. In both cases the police are presented as abusive. But it just isn't so. Here's something that needs to be taught in civics: The police use of force continuum. Its goes like this:
1) Police Presence. Officer simply shows up at the scene. Hopefully people stop acting like idiots.
2) Verbal Commands. Officer tells the drunk guy at the bar to leave and reminds him to take a cab.
3) Hands-On. The police officer can grab a person to enforce a lawful order, such as, "Sir, leave the bar now."
4) Non-Lethal striking and weapons. Police CAN hit. If someone struggles, the officer can strike with baton, he can kick to large muscle groups, he can pepper-spray or taser. So now you know that Taser Boy got what was coming. The officers asked him to leave. He didn't. They grabbed him by the arms. He struggled and broke loose. They wrestled him to the ground where he continued to struggle. He rode the lightning. That's the way it works. Sorry
5) Lethal force. The police can shoot anyone posing the threat of serious bodily injury or death. Many, many people that the police could legally shoot, are subdued by other means.
Sunday, October 7, 2007
PHONY SOLDIERS!!!
I'm hoping my words will bring me as much fame as they have Rush Limbaugh. Yes that's right. Soldiers, such as Jesse Macbeth aka~Jesse Adam Al-Zaid~ who claim to have served, but did not are PHONY SOLDIERS. This is exactly what Limbaugh was saying and it's exactly what I'm saying. These PHONY SOLDIERS are the ones that the weird left props up as heroes for supporting the "America is Bad--Bad I say!" ideology.
Look--anyone who knows me knows that I would myself denounce Limbaugh for calling a soldier "phony" for disagreeing with the war. I may disagree with this soldier, for there are far more soldiers that agree that our efforts have been worth our blood, but I would respect him for his service. If you fought, you are not phony. But Limbaugh simply did not say that veteran dissenters are phony. This whole thing is simply chilling to me. It alarms me to the type of world we now live in. Some 40 senators signing a letter to Clear Channel calling for his punishment? And he didn't even say what they are alleging! And the spin placed by media outlets is surreal. They begin their stories with something like: "Senators are denouncing radio personality Rush Limbaugh for his statements that soldiers who disagree with the Iraq War are phony." Again--it is plain that he didn't say that.
George Orwell's 1984 was wrong. It isn't the government that is the big problem. It's all of the other entities that form our thoughts and control what we believe. The left has infiltrated and now controls our universities, the media and to some extant, the scientific community. The guns of all of these institutions have been brought to bear on what has been held sacred on this country since its independence. Science is the blade that severed our faith. Through the universities and the media, the ideology of leftists is spread upon the masses. Everyday is an assault upon our conscious of what it means to be an American. I remember being taught in grade school, and seeing for myself that America is the best place in the world to be. No such thing reaches our children's ears now.
Truly, I wonder if the battle is lost. I'll go down with this ship, my friends. I can only be what I am and what I believe. And I believe in God and Country. But where is God? He's dead--and we've killed him.
Look--anyone who knows me knows that I would myself denounce Limbaugh for calling a soldier "phony" for disagreeing with the war. I may disagree with this soldier, for there are far more soldiers that agree that our efforts have been worth our blood, but I would respect him for his service. If you fought, you are not phony. But Limbaugh simply did not say that veteran dissenters are phony. This whole thing is simply chilling to me. It alarms me to the type of world we now live in. Some 40 senators signing a letter to Clear Channel calling for his punishment? And he didn't even say what they are alleging! And the spin placed by media outlets is surreal. They begin their stories with something like: "Senators are denouncing radio personality Rush Limbaugh for his statements that soldiers who disagree with the Iraq War are phony." Again--it is plain that he didn't say that.
George Orwell's 1984 was wrong. It isn't the government that is the big problem. It's all of the other entities that form our thoughts and control what we believe. The left has infiltrated and now controls our universities, the media and to some extant, the scientific community. The guns of all of these institutions have been brought to bear on what has been held sacred on this country since its independence. Science is the blade that severed our faith. Through the universities and the media, the ideology of leftists is spread upon the masses. Everyday is an assault upon our conscious of what it means to be an American. I remember being taught in grade school, and seeing for myself that America is the best place in the world to be. No such thing reaches our children's ears now.
Truly, I wonder if the battle is lost. I'll go down with this ship, my friends. I can only be what I am and what I believe. And I believe in God and Country. But where is God? He's dead--and we've killed him.
Saturday, October 6, 2007
Political Realism
As you can probably tell from reading my posts, the proper name for my political perspective could be termed Political Realism.
This is how I see things:
1) There is no global power that regulates the authority of individual states. All states to some degree are different from one to another, holding to ideals that others do not. The failures of entities such as The League of Nations and The United Nations clearly displays this fact. It cannot be expected that multiple nations will agree on anything, and to allow the worst of the lot to dictate what the most competent nations are allowed to do is a recipe for disaster.
2) The number one interest of any state is its own national security. To expect more than that is foolish. A state is the collective conscious of its people, and all peoples are driven by the survival instinct, above all else.
3) Only through superior military and economic power can a nation further its chances of survival. Nations do not survive because of the goodwill of others. Goodwill is a side-effect of building a strong economic base, fostered by a liberal free market. Only under these conditions is goodwill possible.
4) All nations at all times are struggling to reach the top of the international food chain. Weaker nations, either in military terms or economic terms are devoured by the stronger nations. Jealousy, strife and war are unavoidable evils in a world such as this. This is not to say that a nation must always attempt to dominate another. I only say that the natural order of things causes one nation to fall behind another, and just as an animal becomes predatory when hungry or lashes out when cornered, said nation will find it necessary to commit to either violence or improve its economic function in order to maintain relevance. Otherwise revolution or annexation will occur.
5) A nation either decays or is destroyed in one of three ways: 1) It's economic base becomes so weak as to cause its people to starve, suffer disease or commit to revolt. 2) It's military becomes so weakened that it becomes a target for stronger enemies seeking its resources or seeking to punish it for past wrong-doings. 3) A general internal malaise occurs amongst the populace. A depression of sorts in which a nation's people lose their will to exist. This could be seen in the Roman Empire at its end and there are signs of this occurring in all of the West. The third listed here will eventually result in one of the first two occurring.
Harsh? Yes. Difficult to deny though.
This is how I see things:
1) There is no global power that regulates the authority of individual states. All states to some degree are different from one to another, holding to ideals that others do not. The failures of entities such as The League of Nations and The United Nations clearly displays this fact. It cannot be expected that multiple nations will agree on anything, and to allow the worst of the lot to dictate what the most competent nations are allowed to do is a recipe for disaster.
2) The number one interest of any state is its own national security. To expect more than that is foolish. A state is the collective conscious of its people, and all peoples are driven by the survival instinct, above all else.
3) Only through superior military and economic power can a nation further its chances of survival. Nations do not survive because of the goodwill of others. Goodwill is a side-effect of building a strong economic base, fostered by a liberal free market. Only under these conditions is goodwill possible.
4) All nations at all times are struggling to reach the top of the international food chain. Weaker nations, either in military terms or economic terms are devoured by the stronger nations. Jealousy, strife and war are unavoidable evils in a world such as this. This is not to say that a nation must always attempt to dominate another. I only say that the natural order of things causes one nation to fall behind another, and just as an animal becomes predatory when hungry or lashes out when cornered, said nation will find it necessary to commit to either violence or improve its economic function in order to maintain relevance. Otherwise revolution or annexation will occur.
5) A nation either decays or is destroyed in one of three ways: 1) It's economic base becomes so weak as to cause its people to starve, suffer disease or commit to revolt. 2) It's military becomes so weakened that it becomes a target for stronger enemies seeking its resources or seeking to punish it for past wrong-doings. 3) A general internal malaise occurs amongst the populace. A depression of sorts in which a nation's people lose their will to exist. This could be seen in the Roman Empire at its end and there are signs of this occurring in all of the West. The third listed here will eventually result in one of the first two occurring.
Harsh? Yes. Difficult to deny though.
The future president has a hard road
"There is no avoiding war; it can only be postponed to the advantage of others."~Niccolo Machiavelli
The Democratic candidates have a difficult future to face. All except Hillary, fail to see this. Hillary knows that sometimes you have to fight, but she lies to get what she desires most--power. Obama and Edwards live in a world that holds little resemblance to this reality. A world where conflict can be abated, if only we would talk and understand--and give up.
In everyday life, victory never comes. There is not a day that we wake up and say: "I've won!" No, life is maintenance. Life requires endurance. Those who endure can appear to have triumphed, yet even they must face each day with determination lest what they have accomplished suddenly vanish.
And so it is in international relations throughout the lifespan of a nation. We may win a battle, our economy may thrive for a time, but that will never relieve us of the responsibility to carry on. There is little time to relax, unless one doesn't mind seeing what made his country great slip away or stolen by cultures with a stronger will.
Americans, should they again begin to study history, will see that cultures clash. We will continue to clash, to spill blood from now until this generation has passed away and then we will clash some more. There is no easy road. The Democrats will continue to lie to get votes. They will continue to tell the American people that war need never happen. That Saddam should have remained in containment. That Iran will submit to embargoes and diplomatic pressures. Only time will tell, but history shows that these actions rarely work. We are making crime pay by negotiating too much and this process is enabling more and more rogue states to hold the world as an atomic hostage, demanding huge ransoms. That's exactly what Saddam did with the Oil for Food deal, and it's exactly what Kim Jung-Il has done; demand goods and services in exchange for not making nukes. My guess is that these regimes will continue in their nuclear ambitions even after the accords are signed. This is what Saddam did and the UN refused to act.
As I said earlier, of all the Democratic candidates, only Hillary understands the place that war has. But if she is to follow in the footstep of her husband, she'll neglect and procrastinate so that the next president will have to march our troops into danger. We should know now that that president will receive as much hatred as George Bush has. He or she will be accused of being a fascist. He or she will be accused of being the worst president in history.
If the next president does the right thing he will remember the words of the Gaulic leader, Brennus. When Rome was sacked and occupied, the Romans agreed to pay a ransom of 1000 lbs of gold. As the Romans complained that the Gaulic scales were unfairly balanced, Brennus threw his sword onto the scales, announcing: "Vae Victus!" ~Woe to the Defeated! Indeed, woe to the world should America be defeated.
The Democratic candidates have a difficult future to face. All except Hillary, fail to see this. Hillary knows that sometimes you have to fight, but she lies to get what she desires most--power. Obama and Edwards live in a world that holds little resemblance to this reality. A world where conflict can be abated, if only we would talk and understand--and give up.
In everyday life, victory never comes. There is not a day that we wake up and say: "I've won!" No, life is maintenance. Life requires endurance. Those who endure can appear to have triumphed, yet even they must face each day with determination lest what they have accomplished suddenly vanish.
And so it is in international relations throughout the lifespan of a nation. We may win a battle, our economy may thrive for a time, but that will never relieve us of the responsibility to carry on. There is little time to relax, unless one doesn't mind seeing what made his country great slip away or stolen by cultures with a stronger will.
Americans, should they again begin to study history, will see that cultures clash. We will continue to clash, to spill blood from now until this generation has passed away and then we will clash some more. There is no easy road. The Democrats will continue to lie to get votes. They will continue to tell the American people that war need never happen. That Saddam should have remained in containment. That Iran will submit to embargoes and diplomatic pressures. Only time will tell, but history shows that these actions rarely work. We are making crime pay by negotiating too much and this process is enabling more and more rogue states to hold the world as an atomic hostage, demanding huge ransoms. That's exactly what Saddam did with the Oil for Food deal, and it's exactly what Kim Jung-Il has done; demand goods and services in exchange for not making nukes. My guess is that these regimes will continue in their nuclear ambitions even after the accords are signed. This is what Saddam did and the UN refused to act.
As I said earlier, of all the Democratic candidates, only Hillary understands the place that war has. But if she is to follow in the footstep of her husband, she'll neglect and procrastinate so that the next president will have to march our troops into danger. We should know now that that president will receive as much hatred as George Bush has. He or she will be accused of being a fascist. He or she will be accused of being the worst president in history.
If the next president does the right thing he will remember the words of the Gaulic leader, Brennus. When Rome was sacked and occupied, the Romans agreed to pay a ransom of 1000 lbs of gold. As the Romans complained that the Gaulic scales were unfairly balanced, Brennus threw his sword onto the scales, announcing: "Vae Victus!" ~Woe to the Defeated! Indeed, woe to the world should America be defeated.
Thursday, October 4, 2007
Awesome article
Here is a piece written by Robert Kaplan which holds closely to my views on where our national media is taking us. The media with its odd mingling of self-awarded virtue and lust for billions in cold, hard cash. Since some won't read the article, I must place a part of it here that is very important:
"The first Medal of Honor in the global war on terror was awarded posthumously to Army Sgt. First Class Paul Ray Smith of Tampa, Fla., who was killed under withering gunfire protecting his wounded comrades outside Baghdad airport in April 2003.
According to LexisNexis, by June 2005, two months after his posthumous award, his stirring story had drawn only 90 media mentions, compared with 4,677 for the supposed Quran abuse at Guantanamo Bay, and 5,159 for the court-martialed Abu Ghraib guard Lynndie England. While the exposure of wrongdoing by American troops is of the highest importance, it can become a tyranny of its own when taken to an extreme."
So, so true. Cut and paste this to your browswer to read the article: http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110010686
"The first Medal of Honor in the global war on terror was awarded posthumously to Army Sgt. First Class Paul Ray Smith of Tampa, Fla., who was killed under withering gunfire protecting his wounded comrades outside Baghdad airport in April 2003.
According to LexisNexis, by June 2005, two months after his posthumous award, his stirring story had drawn only 90 media mentions, compared with 4,677 for the supposed Quran abuse at Guantanamo Bay, and 5,159 for the court-martialed Abu Ghraib guard Lynndie England. While the exposure of wrongdoing by American troops is of the highest importance, it can become a tyranny of its own when taken to an extreme."
So, so true. Cut and paste this to your browswer to read the article: http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110010686
Wednesday, October 3, 2007
Culture Slaves
Americans, particularly the younger generation, is a slave of the left's holy word: Culture. In a country constructed to limit government power, to enable its people to find their way, guaranteeing in our sacred documents the right to pursue your dreams--hit or miss--we are now beholden to the private sector's power. Ambushed, caught unaware by entities who promised that they were the watchdog of government, the protectors of liberties and the criers of truth, the masses now nod their heads in sacrosanct unison to the preachings of Keith Olbermann and John Stewart. Masking their hate with sarcastic half-truths, Olbermann and Stewart and their simulacrums are leading a new revolution in news media: Satirical Journalism. Under this banner, they are able to make any allusion they wish, any statement however untrue or perverse. Behind the buckler of comedy, they are protected from libel and political backlash.
Also recruited to do the left's bidding: Actors, musician and various other pretenders, striving hard to sound important and to convince themselves that their lives are more than make-believe. And no matter the ignorance contained in their words, no matter how empty their "ideas", young people love them. And if one of their number should stand on the side of conservative values, be sure that well-trained character-assassins are close by, ready to unsheathe skeletons in closets and sling hyperbolic accusations.
Two points to illuminate:
1) Most of the actors and musicians, the Cheryl Crows of the world, are less informed then the average blogger.
2) The media gets far more stories wrong than the public is aware of.
On both counts, most people would probably agree. And yet they go on listening to the lies, inuendo and over-simplified notions. I myself did not realize how incompetent the media is until I became a police officer. As a cop, I had inside knowledge on many of the cases that the local news papers reported on. All of the men that I worked with experienced great frustration in the lack of candor and accuracy presented in various articles. And now this Rush Limbaugh thing. That cemented it with me. I heard the whole show in which he is accused of calling our military's dissenters " phony soldiers". Only he didn't say that. There was never any question in my mind about what he was saying until I heard the next day that the aforementioned character assassins were doing their work with the usual efficiency. Rush has stated repeatedly that he did not mean every soldier, but one in particular, who is part of a group of other soldiers who claim to have been in Iraq and never were. Since Rush has stated he did not mean every soldier, why is there even a story anymore? His usual enemies took their shots at him, so why should he be offended? He takes shots from them everyday. He simply didn't say what they said he said. It's maddening. I know for a fact that most of the people who are critical of Fox News and Rush haven't watched or listened to a whole block of their product. They're scared of the product. It may disrupt their belief system.
Americans must shut their televisions off. They must read history books. The life-disasters of Britney Spears and Paris Hilton must become unimportant if we are to survive as a great nation. We must learn from ancient codices--not so much from current events which are cloudy because of their nearness. Anyone not afraid of reality, anyone who knows that tough times require tough choices, should turn off the television, cancel their subscription to the New York Times, go to their local library, and check out a copy of Thucydides' History of the Peloponnesian War. In that book, you'll find why wars really begin and why the winners are the winners.
Also recruited to do the left's bidding: Actors, musician and various other pretenders, striving hard to sound important and to convince themselves that their lives are more than make-believe. And no matter the ignorance contained in their words, no matter how empty their "ideas", young people love them. And if one of their number should stand on the side of conservative values, be sure that well-trained character-assassins are close by, ready to unsheathe skeletons in closets and sling hyperbolic accusations.
Two points to illuminate:
1) Most of the actors and musicians, the Cheryl Crows of the world, are less informed then the average blogger.
2) The media gets far more stories wrong than the public is aware of.
On both counts, most people would probably agree. And yet they go on listening to the lies, inuendo and over-simplified notions. I myself did not realize how incompetent the media is until I became a police officer. As a cop, I had inside knowledge on many of the cases that the local news papers reported on. All of the men that I worked with experienced great frustration in the lack of candor and accuracy presented in various articles. And now this Rush Limbaugh thing. That cemented it with me. I heard the whole show in which he is accused of calling our military's dissenters " phony soldiers". Only he didn't say that. There was never any question in my mind about what he was saying until I heard the next day that the aforementioned character assassins were doing their work with the usual efficiency. Rush has stated repeatedly that he did not mean every soldier, but one in particular, who is part of a group of other soldiers who claim to have been in Iraq and never were. Since Rush has stated he did not mean every soldier, why is there even a story anymore? His usual enemies took their shots at him, so why should he be offended? He takes shots from them everyday. He simply didn't say what they said he said. It's maddening. I know for a fact that most of the people who are critical of Fox News and Rush haven't watched or listened to a whole block of their product. They're scared of the product. It may disrupt their belief system.
Americans must shut their televisions off. They must read history books. The life-disasters of Britney Spears and Paris Hilton must become unimportant if we are to survive as a great nation. We must learn from ancient codices--not so much from current events which are cloudy because of their nearness. Anyone not afraid of reality, anyone who knows that tough times require tough choices, should turn off the television, cancel their subscription to the New York Times, go to their local library, and check out a copy of Thucydides' History of the Peloponnesian War. In that book, you'll find why wars really begin and why the winners are the winners.
Monday, October 1, 2007
Pissing away an easy win
The Democrats had it in the bag. Six months ago, conservatives were storing up for the long winter of Democrat rule, both congressional and Whitehouse.
Then Democratic candidates made the mistake of answering specific questions. They revealed their future economic structures and ideas about troop withdrawal in Iraq. They wanted a six month time line for a pull-out. They shredded Patreaus to make themselves look smart. And the easy victory that they would have carried, sifted through Democrat fingers.
Hillary is a Socialist, plain and simple. Her codeword for socialist is Progressive. These are the same progressive thinkers that visited Stalin's regime in the 50s and decided that communal farms were the way to go. These were the useful idiots that the evil though thoroughly effective KGB recruited and planted. The same progressive thinkers it turns out that made Joseph McCarthy all too right. The Red Scare happened, not because McCarthy made it up, but because the leftists of the day made the same mistake that they make today--they coupled their thinking with that of despots.
So now Hillary has taken the New Deal and made a Newer Deal. Her proposal is one small step for a presidential candidate, and if it's implemented, will be the largest step backward for world-wide Democratic Capitalism since prior to WW I. America has become more mixed economy than true Laissez Faire capitalist state. Slowly, the government has assumed more responsibility for all facets of our life--but Hillary plans to make us a full-blown socialist state. Governmental control over the medical industry--already the most regulated industry in America--can be seen as nothing other than Marxist. Remember, the medical industry comprises 17% of the American economy.
Even given younger American's lust for a government that tucks them in at night, I think that there are enough Americans left over from the era that knew what truly made America great and different--and it sure wasn't socialism. Hillary has misjudged here. This, yoked with her unlikability, may yet be her undoing.
Had the Democrats continued to harp on Bush, ala Johnny Cochran in the OJ trial, there was no way they could lose. America hates this war; they don't understand it or the history of Iraq or the nature of fundamentalist Islam. Then came Patreaus' testimony before Congress. What to do? Here was a credible man that Congress unanimously approved of when he was appointed supreme commander in Iraq, and now he's telling us we're winning? Hillary and Barak want America to win, but they want America to win during their terms. So no Democrat at the recent debate would promise a withdrawal from Iraq before 2013! A win with Bush in office would be catastrophic to their political hopes.
Hillary now keeps pouring on the monetary promises, announcing $5000 baby-bonus checks to be doled out for every child born. Of course she announced this at the black caucus. I wonder why that is.
They had it, they really did. But it's an even race now because the Dems revealed their destructive ideologies.
Then Democratic candidates made the mistake of answering specific questions. They revealed their future economic structures and ideas about troop withdrawal in Iraq. They wanted a six month time line for a pull-out. They shredded Patreaus to make themselves look smart. And the easy victory that they would have carried, sifted through Democrat fingers.
Hillary is a Socialist, plain and simple. Her codeword for socialist is Progressive. These are the same progressive thinkers that visited Stalin's regime in the 50s and decided that communal farms were the way to go. These were the useful idiots that the evil though thoroughly effective KGB recruited and planted. The same progressive thinkers it turns out that made Joseph McCarthy all too right. The Red Scare happened, not because McCarthy made it up, but because the leftists of the day made the same mistake that they make today--they coupled their thinking with that of despots.
So now Hillary has taken the New Deal and made a Newer Deal. Her proposal is one small step for a presidential candidate, and if it's implemented, will be the largest step backward for world-wide Democratic Capitalism since prior to WW I. America has become more mixed economy than true Laissez Faire capitalist state. Slowly, the government has assumed more responsibility for all facets of our life--but Hillary plans to make us a full-blown socialist state. Governmental control over the medical industry--already the most regulated industry in America--can be seen as nothing other than Marxist. Remember, the medical industry comprises 17% of the American economy.
Even given younger American's lust for a government that tucks them in at night, I think that there are enough Americans left over from the era that knew what truly made America great and different--and it sure wasn't socialism. Hillary has misjudged here. This, yoked with her unlikability, may yet be her undoing.
Had the Democrats continued to harp on Bush, ala Johnny Cochran in the OJ trial, there was no way they could lose. America hates this war; they don't understand it or the history of Iraq or the nature of fundamentalist Islam. Then came Patreaus' testimony before Congress. What to do? Here was a credible man that Congress unanimously approved of when he was appointed supreme commander in Iraq, and now he's telling us we're winning? Hillary and Barak want America to win, but they want America to win during their terms. So no Democrat at the recent debate would promise a withdrawal from Iraq before 2013! A win with Bush in office would be catastrophic to their political hopes.
Hillary now keeps pouring on the monetary promises, announcing $5000 baby-bonus checks to be doled out for every child born. Of course she announced this at the black caucus. I wonder why that is.
They had it, they really did. But it's an even race now because the Dems revealed their destructive ideologies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
