Friday, October 30, 2009

Chapter 4. Socialism Doesn't Kill People, Socialists Do Part 1 Introduction

Socialist!  Such has become the epithet that makes some of the recent risen stars hurumph indignently.  "Name calling and mean-spiritedness will get us nowhere."  "Those are just words someone told you to say, you're just a right-wing parrot!"  Or, in the words of the Minnesota-born comedian cum statesman:  "That's just stinkin' thinkin'."

It also happens to be the inconvenient and dangerous truth.

Messrs. Merriam and Webster tell us that socialism has the following definitions:
  1. any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods;
  2. a system of society or group living in which there is no private property;
  3. a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state; and
  4. a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done.
The first three definitions allow us to determine whether or not certain current ideas, words and actions from certain folks today fit the definitions, or not.  They do, in fact.  Here are just a few examples:
  • On the campaign trail last year, on October 12, 2008, candidate Barack Obama was recorded famously telling plumber Joe Wurzelbacher, "I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."
  • In February 2009, during the speech in which he called Republicans "assholes," Green Jobs Czar Van Jones sarcastically asked a questioner, "how's that capitalism working for you this year?"  He also encouraged intimidation so that certain Senators begin to "act right."  Of course, Jones has since resigned in deserved disgrace.
  • Rep. Barney Frank, in March 2009, regarding AIG:  "We own the company.  We are the majority owners.  I think the federal government should now step in as the owner, and say to these employees, our employees, bonus my foot!"
  • March 30, 2009, President Obama announced that General Motors Chairman Rick Wagoner would "step aside," not as a condemnation of Wagoner, but rather a recognition that it will "take new vision and new direction to create the GM of the future."
  • Outgoing Bank of America CEO Kenneth Lewis has just agreed to abide by the "request" of Pay Czar Kenneth Feinberg, to take no salary or bonus for 2009 because it was "not in the best interests of Bank of America to get into a dispute with the paymaster."
  • The six other major corporations that accepted bailout money face similar control under the watchful eye of the paymaster.
  • Government and government-secured lender ownership in Chrysler:  10%
  • Government ownership of General Motors:  70%
  • Government ownership of AIG:  79%
  • Government share of spending on health care in the U.S. (pre-health care bill):  56%
  • President Obama has stated emphatically on more than one occasion that he wants a single-payer, government run health care system in America.  He is pleased to tell you in his own words:
  • On October 29, House Speaker Pelosi made public the 1900+ page proposed health care bill that will cost over $1,000,000,000,000; will expand the (bankrupt) Medicaid program; and includes a nonsensical provision that does not allow private insurers to deny coverage of pre-existing conditions.
Radical leaders are now instituting numerous and vast programs that insert government ownership and control over heretofore mostly private industries.  Car companies, insurance companies, banks, and even more control (complete control, ultimately) of health care.  There was even a recent balloon floated about bailing out the flagging newspaper industry; but that's probably more appropriate for the subsequent chapter on fascism (it's not your grandfather's Nazism anymore...).

The theme of this chapter is murder.  So, where's all the murder?  Patience, the stage needs to be set.  In order for murder to become legal and acceptable, one must first get power and alignment of the economy, politics and the culture.  Deaths follow socialism as day follows night.

Hint:  read Chapter 1.

Quotient out.

Wednesday, October 28, 2009

Chapter 3. America's Genocide

American deaths from:

382                          Persian Gulf War
759                         Operation Enduring Freedom
2,260                      War of 1812
2,446                      Spanish-American War
4,320                      Operation Iraqi Freedom
4,435                      The American Revolution
13, 283                    Mexican-American War
36,574                     Korean War
58,220                     Vietnam War
116,516                   World War I
405,399                   World War II
620,000                   The Civil War
50,000,000             Legal Abortions since 1973

Yes, despite the horror of American lives lost in war (over 1.2 million), the number pales in comparison to the number of babies killed in the womb since the landmark misplaced Supreme Court decision Roe v Wade.

As one pro-life activist puts it: 
"I had to face up to the awful reality. Abortion wasn't about 'products of conception.' It wasn't about 'missed periods.' It was about children being killed in their mother's wombs. All those years I was wrong. Signing that affidavit, I was wrong. Working in an abortion clinic, I was wrong. No more of this first trimester, second trimester, third trimester stuff. Abortion–at any point–was wrong. It was so clear. Painfully clear."
The activist who stated this had been pregnant in 1973, but the Supreme Court decision came too late for her to obtain a legal abortion and she had her child.  She has since joined the pro-life movement and entered the Catholic Church.

The activist's name is Norma McCorvey, better known under her pseudonym "Jane Roe," the plaintiff in the 1973 tragedy.

Quotient out.

Saturday, October 24, 2009

Chapter 2. American Blinkmanship in 2009

Forty seven years ago, in October 1962, the United States was in the midst of the Cuban Missile Crisis.  In 2009 we face a growingly defiant near-nuclear Iran; an uncertain strategy for victory in Afghanistan; enemy combatants sitting down in Gitmo; and the ever-apparent risk of terrorists embedded within our midst.  The difference in approach to these situations, so far at least, is striking and alarming.

The Soviets had begun putting nuclear-equipped missiles into Cuba in 1962, as a show of strength and Communist moxie.  The Cold War was on the verge of heating up, rapidly, and the crisis became the model for modern day brinkmanship.  Invoking the Monroe Doctrine in which foreign powers should be actively opposed from political influence in any part of the Americas, President Kennedy boldly declared in a public speech on October 22, 1962: 

"It shall be the policy of this nation to regard any nuclear missile launched from Cuba against any nation in the Western Hemisphere as an attack on the United States, requiring a full retaliatory response upon the Soviet Union."

This was principle; motivated by American power and security, to be sure, but principal nonetheless.  Having the Soviets putting devastating armament at our doorstep was simply unacceptable, even if it dramatically increased the chances for nuclear war.  Fortunately, through tough and shrewd action, rhetoric and negotiation, war was averted.  Kennedy ordered a quarantine that directed the American Navy to detain and inspect any suspicious ship headed for Cuba.  At the same time, communications between Washington and Moscow led the way for an agreement between the leaders.  The end effect:  the Soviets packed up their missiles and went home.  Although later it was revealed that Kennedy secretly agreed to remove missiles from Turkey, the general public consensus was that America won and the Soviet Union lost.  In Dean Rusk's famous phrase, "We were eyeball to eyeball, and the other fellow just blinked."

Consider now the various words, postures, and actions (or lack thereof) of the current American President in formulating our security paradigm.  Gone are the days when protection of American sovereignty (some might say hegemony) within our own hemisphere, was worth risking it all.  It must not be worth it anymore.  So, for what principal does President Obama stand?

In the midst of a two-front Middle East war, and what might be called the "state of tension" between America and Iran, not to mention South America and North Korea, President Obama wasted the first critical months of his "historic" administration by apologizing for American mistakes, and its success.

Just today we hear of yet another hatched plan to allow the defiant Iran to continue building its nuclear capability, while giving fissionable material to (sit down) the Russians to take care of for them.  There is no plan for Afghanistan, despite the request submitted by General Stanley McCrystal nearly eight weeks ago, for a counterinsurgency strategy similar to the one successfully employed in Iraq.

Other gems of policy include the pledge to empty Gitmo in the next few months (and send those enemies of the U.S. where, exactly?), and the harassment of former CIA agents for being very mean-spirited.  All of this really does, to use the hackneyed phrase, embolden our enemies.  They see the President's indecision and lack of resolve, as weakness and confusion.  And they are right.

And of course, what examination of President Obama's disappointing performance concerning foreign policy would be complete without noting the very pinnacle of the airy nothingness of endless rhetoric and appeasement:  the Nobel Peace Prize.  The NPP was given to Obama apparently due to his potential to make the world more peaceful, since it was decided on just a few days after the President took office.  In reality, it was simply a meaningful gesture utilizing a meaningless prize.  The rest of the world wants the United States weak, or at least think they want us weak. 

What better way to encourage the global-socialist inclinations of a man such as Barack Obama than by putting a lightweight PARTICIPANT medal around his neck, when the official score sheet reads DNF?

Somewhere in the world, one of our many enemies just stated that, "We were eyeball to eyeball, and the other fellow just ran off to another Letterman appearance."

Quotient out.

Friday, October 23, 2009

Chapter 1. Welfare, Illegitimacy & Abortion: the New Slavery

Human slavery in the United States was an affront to the dignity afforded to each person by our Creator.  Then came the War Between the States to settle the matter. Then came the carpetbaggers.  Then came the Great Society.

According to a 1965 report by the Department of Labor, Black out-of-wedlock births were at about 16% in 1940, and in 1963 were up to 23%.  That was during Jim Crow, when states systematically instituted racist laws.  One concise and direct statement in the DOL report, among many, reads, "By contrast, the family structure of lower class Negroes is highly unstable, and in many urban centers is approaching complete breakdown."

The Black community had divided into a somewhat healthy middle class and a damaged, debilitated lower class in which the family was disintegrating rapidly.  That was bad enough.

But, by 2005 the Black illegitimacy rate had risen to nearly 70%!  How and why could this be?  (page 12, paragraph 2)

In the four decades since the government began "helping" folks via a network of far-flung and expensive programs, the Black family unit has suffered apparently mortal wounds.  Under the laughable guise of equality and empowerment, politicians and societal leaders have dismantled the Black family, and given Black men the out they need to abandon their women and leave their children to the uneven surrogate fatherhood of the State. 

It's not only the oft-repeated phrase that Welfare pays women to have more babies; a new servitude has been instituted whereby Black women face the daunting prospect of raising children alone.  The children are then born into the grim reality of life without a male role model, which is demonstrably hurtful to both boys and girls of any race.  The men are reduced to caricatures of unthinking beasts, without temperance or judgment, and nearly most importantly without jobs. 

Finally, in their desperate search at some sort of dignity and acceptance, these women grasp the most ironic and evil outlet of all:  abortion.  In what other way can the majority of Black women continue to function in the State-sponsored expectation of single-mom households, but to continually service their soon-absent lovers until the only "choice" is to waddle off to the abortion clinic so that the cycle can begin all over again?

And why would any leader be part of this human gristmill?  Power.  Once an entire segment of society has had its economic freedom stripped away, and is completely beholden to the State for (literally) its food, those folks will have no other viable option but to succumb to whatever the State and its leaders beckon them to do.  In America, this means votes.

Two more points.  Obviously out-of-wedlock births are not restricted to only the Black population of America; in fact white illegitimacy has gone from 3% in 1963 to 26% in 2005.  Nevertheless, although the deleterious effects on children and families is similar and independent of race, the sheer numerical weight of having 7 of 10 Black children born out of wedlock is a devastating "force multiplier" that creates large and concentrated pockets of despair.  And finally, yes we live in a free country; yes, these women are choosing to have relations out of wedlock; and yes they could (and some do!) pull themselves up and persevere. 

Still, should our government and our society continue to support such a humiliating and dehumanizing way of life, for any American?

There will be more on this topic.

Quotient out.

Prologue: Dark Days Ahead

There are many ominous clouds gathered above us. The rumbling you hear may be thunder, or may be the hoof beats of ravenous beasts charging closer. Or, perhaps the sound of a cavalry of savior knights.

Time will tell.

In this blog we'll explore the forces drawn against us: against democracy, freedom, faith, and our families; and, some ideas for saving ourselves.

It won't be easy. There will be spilt the blood of martyrs, as there has been in every righteous defense. Very soon you will have to choose sides.

Choose well.

Quotient out.