Monday, October 31, 2011
Haxan-A Great Witchcraft Film From The Silent Era
The following movie is actually just one segment from a silent film from 1922. Somebody added the soundtrack, a Satanic prayer. The film, named Haxan (The Witches), by Danish filmmaker Benjamin Christensen, was in fact a documentary based on Christensen's study of Malleus Maleficarum, which in the fifteenth century was a respected study of witches used by witch hunters and inquisitors. Christensen wanted to make a film which he hoped would explain the mythology behind witchcraft, and how the beliefs and legends grew over the centuries.
The following clip from the film is a dramatization of Christensen's vision, not of what he believed actually happened, but of what people genuinely believed, and feared, as he saw it.
Not surprisingly, the film was banned in the US and was heavily censored in much of Europe. Nevertheless, it has become recognized as one of the great cinematic achievements of the early film era.
The following clip from the film is a dramatization of Christensen's vision, not of what he believed actually happened, but of what people genuinely believed, and feared, as he saw it.
Not surprisingly, the film was banned in the US and was heavily censored in much of Europe. Nevertheless, it has become recognized as one of the great cinematic achievements of the early film era.
Minotaur Art
This is the best rendering of the Minotaur I've ever seen. I started out looking for an old painting by an artist named George Frederick Watts, painted in the 1880's, when I found this. Unfortunately, I have no idea who did this artwork. All I know is its advertised as a "free wallpaper".
To me, to captures perfectly the inherent nature of the beast. The savagery, the insatiable blood lust, In addition to the sheer sense of debauchery and corruption that led to the creatures birth, hidden life, and ultimate demise.
I see the Minotaur as a symbol of the hidden, unconscious savage nature we constantly try to bury and contain within the hidden recesses of the unconscious mind. When we come face to face with him within our own private labyrinth, we are in effect coming face to face with our own inner beast.
To me, to captures perfectly the inherent nature of the beast. The savagery, the insatiable blood lust, In addition to the sheer sense of debauchery and corruption that led to the creatures birth, hidden life, and ultimate demise.
I see the Minotaur as a symbol of the hidden, unconscious savage nature we constantly try to bury and contain within the hidden recesses of the unconscious mind. When we come face to face with him within our own private labyrinth, we are in effect coming face to face with our own inner beast.
Sunday, October 30, 2011
House Of Horrors No Longer In Business
No, the man in the above photo is not going to a Halloween Party, he's actually standing outside the doors of his former abortion clinic in Rockford Illinois, taunting the Christians who used to stand outside his clinic on a regular basis protesting his business. Note I said former, because the business has now been shut down.
This was because of numerous safety and health violations that seemed to be a systemic problem with the clinic. The closing of this clinic, which transpired near the end of September, is important for a variety of reasons.
One, the fact that it was in Illinois, arguably the most liberal of all Midwestern states, dominated by the state Democratic Party and/or the Chicago machine, speaks to the reality of shifting attitudes. After all, when Roe v Wade was first decided in 1973, the science was far from settled as to whether or not an unborn child was truly alive. Now it has been settled, and there is no doubt that an unborn baby is alive, and has feelings and emotions. It's not just a glob of tissue. As such, more and more people are starting to view abortion in general as murder.
It's also important to note that, being in Rockford, the clinic was across the state line from Wisconsin, which has a parental notification law. This clinic provided a way out, a safe haven for teens who wished to acquire an abortion and avoid Wisconsin law. That avenue has now been thankfully closed. Nothing to me is more despicable than passing a law permitting abortions for young teen girls without notifying the child's parents, and for someone to take one across the state line in order to get an abortion should be grounds for a federal indictment, both of the responsible adult as well as the clinic operators.
And worst of all, not only does the left and the Democratic Party support this, they want the taxpayers to subsidize it. And they aren't asking nicely either.
I'm not one of these that favor outlawing abortion at the federal level, either by way of legislation or by constitutional amendment. But its high time Roe v Wade was overturned and the matter left to the purview of the individual states, including the matter of what to do with those adults who take children across state lines, for this or any other purpose, without their parents knowing consent.
Its just too bad there's no comprehensive way of dealing with those cases where an abortion might be justified, especially due to life and health issues, or rape. But it is what it is.
The Origin Of Bicycle Girl From The Walking Dead
To all of you fans of The Walking Dead, I'm sure you will remember the "Bicycle Girl" from last seasons premiere episode. Well, YouTube has a six part "Webisode" series which explains her origin. I decided to post the last part. If you want, you can go to YouTube and view all six webisodes by way of the link to this video.
One things for sure about The Walking Dead. It may damn well be the scariest show that's ever been on television. One thing that's beyond dispute is its damn well the nastiest.
One things for sure about The Walking Dead. It may damn well be the scariest show that's ever been on television. One thing that's beyond dispute is its damn well the nastiest.
Nowhere To Turn To, Nowhere To Hide
Since Halloween is a day when the dead walk the earth and we strive to pay them due honor and respect (or should) I want to say something about one kid who left this world far too quickly, and while here got little respect in life. His name was Jamey Roddermeyer, from Buffalo New York. He was bullied mercilessly by classmates, because he was supposedly a homosexual. Watch this video he made for the It Gets Better Project shortly before he died.
Notice the level of discomfort he betrays when talking about the level of support he had received from the homosexual community, and from strangers, which he says he knows "sounds creepy" as though he is trying to shrug off the germs. This happens at just after the 1:40 mark of this 2:05 minute video. In another part he inadvertently lowers his voice a slight degree as he glances around nervously, apparently at his bedroom door.
If this kid was a homosexual, then he was sick, in my opinion, in the throes of a delusion. So why in the hell harass him? Would you harass somebody that had cancer?
Of course, I'm wasting my time explaining this to heterosexual bullies, because 1, they don't give a damn, and 2, they don't give a damn. But its incumbent on parents and teachers to understand this phenomenon, and try to get some kind of control over it. After all, not all kids who are bullied are gay (not that it would make it all right if that was the case). Just recently, there was a young kid in Covington Kentucky who, like Jamey, committed suicide because he was constantly bullied. Yet, there was no indication at all that he was gay. He was Sam Denham a nice kid who just wanted to be friends with people and help those who needed help.
A sign of weakness to bullies, and probably to most kids. And there's the rub. Until we understand what causes bullying, it will not get better. This is a primal urge with roots back in prehistory, when the weak were outcast and even destroyed, or made completely subservient to the will of the strong. Bullying is just an outgrowth of that, and it was and is based on an unconscious drive aimed at strengthening the species. This is why a sick animal will be left behind by the herd, even its immediate family. While healthy enough to travel with the herd, they serve the function of being the prey to an attacking predator and thus enabling the others to escape with their hides intact. When they get too weak, or old, to keep up, then they no longer fulfill this function. In fact, they become a hindrance.
So when kids fight, or when they brutalize a smaller, weaker child, they are following the same pattern of asserting their authority, manhood, or worth to the tribe as two buck deers when they lock horns. The bullied kid is worth nothing more, and as a result has no self-worth.
There are ways of dealing with this, by sublimation, and in previous years sports provided a vital outlet. Now, however, in many schools, sports are frowned upon, at least in more "progressive" districts, discouraged by those who don't want to see any child excel or stand out above his or her peers. This mindset, while not prevalent in sports in most schools, yet, still rears its ugly head in other areas of public school, even in the grading system in many cases, while kids are hammered constantly with the demands that they treat all minority groups with a kind of respect that nearly amounts to deference. We are not allowed to express certain aspects of cultural pride in our own European ethnicity, or increasingly even pride as Americans. Yet, such ethnic and cultural and even religious pride is not only encouraged among minority children, it is expected, all but demanded of them.
Is it any wonder then that bullying, aggression, and hostility, having fewer and fewer outlets provided it for positive manifestation, has instead metastasized? And in the meantime, we as a society are encouraged to be supportive of homosexual behavior, which not too long ago was seen by mental health professionals as a sickness and a delusion (rightly in my opinion), to the extent that it almost seems as though homosexual activists are actually trolling public schools for naive, insecure boys and girls to indoctrinate, if you will. As such, homosexuals, in and out of the school yard, seem to be growing into more and more of a protected class status. And the more misguided educators and other adults encourage them to "come out", the more of a target they become.
Ironically, though I concede I might be wrong, I don't think Jamey was a homosexual. He might have been, he might not have been. He might have just been a weak, insecure kid going through puberty and not knowing how to deal with his feelings and the hormones raging through him. On the one hand, not having any "guy friends", only girlfriends, and facing constant bullying and harassment. Maybe he was nothing more than an effeminate boy who made an easy target.
For whatever reason, he reached out, and found aid and support from the homosexual community, and I'm sure he was quite popular. He received tons of support and encouragement from homosexuals and their supporters in the greater community, and seemed to have a supportive family as well.
Yet, he killed himself. How, I am not clear, though he was found in his family's front yard. Assuming he did really kill himself purposely, and not through an accidental overdose in a desperate attempt at self-medication, the question remains, why?
This is why I am personally convinced that he was not really a homosexual, he was just going through a great deal of confusion. Unfortunately he had no one to whom he could turn to, no one he could trust. On the one hand he was bullied by people who hated homosexuals, while on the other he was pressured to be a homosexual by gay activists and their supporters, in school and out. He had no choice in the matter, it seems, but to accept the fact that he was a homosexual. And at his age, that was a choice he not only didn't feel comfortable making, it was one he didn't have to make. Not at the age of fourteen.
Yes, he killed himself, but he had all kinds of help getting to that decision, from both sides of the issue, and no reason to not go through with it, from his perspective. After all, he wasn't just some messed up kid in desperate need of acceptance, love, and help. He was far more important than that. He was a symbol, and he was made to know that he had a responsibility, one that was greater than the feelings and insecurities of a fourteen year old boy.
He owed it to some obscene movement to speak for all of them, and to be out and proud. In the meantime, the bullies on one side of the issue hated him, and many other bullies from the other side of the issue wanted to go down on him. And the responsible adults in his life either didn't know the right way to deal with it, or in the case of the educators in his life, were hamstrung by political correctness if they cared at all.
You all helped kill this kid. Yay, good job douchebags.
Notice the level of discomfort he betrays when talking about the level of support he had received from the homosexual community, and from strangers, which he says he knows "sounds creepy" as though he is trying to shrug off the germs. This happens at just after the 1:40 mark of this 2:05 minute video. In another part he inadvertently lowers his voice a slight degree as he glances around nervously, apparently at his bedroom door.
If this kid was a homosexual, then he was sick, in my opinion, in the throes of a delusion. So why in the hell harass him? Would you harass somebody that had cancer?
Of course, I'm wasting my time explaining this to heterosexual bullies, because 1, they don't give a damn, and 2, they don't give a damn. But its incumbent on parents and teachers to understand this phenomenon, and try to get some kind of control over it. After all, not all kids who are bullied are gay (not that it would make it all right if that was the case). Just recently, there was a young kid in Covington Kentucky who, like Jamey, committed suicide because he was constantly bullied. Yet, there was no indication at all that he was gay. He was Sam Denham a nice kid who just wanted to be friends with people and help those who needed help.
A sign of weakness to bullies, and probably to most kids. And there's the rub. Until we understand what causes bullying, it will not get better. This is a primal urge with roots back in prehistory, when the weak were outcast and even destroyed, or made completely subservient to the will of the strong. Bullying is just an outgrowth of that, and it was and is based on an unconscious drive aimed at strengthening the species. This is why a sick animal will be left behind by the herd, even its immediate family. While healthy enough to travel with the herd, they serve the function of being the prey to an attacking predator and thus enabling the others to escape with their hides intact. When they get too weak, or old, to keep up, then they no longer fulfill this function. In fact, they become a hindrance.
So when kids fight, or when they brutalize a smaller, weaker child, they are following the same pattern of asserting their authority, manhood, or worth to the tribe as two buck deers when they lock horns. The bullied kid is worth nothing more, and as a result has no self-worth.
There are ways of dealing with this, by sublimation, and in previous years sports provided a vital outlet. Now, however, in many schools, sports are frowned upon, at least in more "progressive" districts, discouraged by those who don't want to see any child excel or stand out above his or her peers. This mindset, while not prevalent in sports in most schools, yet, still rears its ugly head in other areas of public school, even in the grading system in many cases, while kids are hammered constantly with the demands that they treat all minority groups with a kind of respect that nearly amounts to deference. We are not allowed to express certain aspects of cultural pride in our own European ethnicity, or increasingly even pride as Americans. Yet, such ethnic and cultural and even religious pride is not only encouraged among minority children, it is expected, all but demanded of them.
Is it any wonder then that bullying, aggression, and hostility, having fewer and fewer outlets provided it for positive manifestation, has instead metastasized? And in the meantime, we as a society are encouraged to be supportive of homosexual behavior, which not too long ago was seen by mental health professionals as a sickness and a delusion (rightly in my opinion), to the extent that it almost seems as though homosexual activists are actually trolling public schools for naive, insecure boys and girls to indoctrinate, if you will. As such, homosexuals, in and out of the school yard, seem to be growing into more and more of a protected class status. And the more misguided educators and other adults encourage them to "come out", the more of a target they become.
Ironically, though I concede I might be wrong, I don't think Jamey was a homosexual. He might have been, he might not have been. He might have just been a weak, insecure kid going through puberty and not knowing how to deal with his feelings and the hormones raging through him. On the one hand, not having any "guy friends", only girlfriends, and facing constant bullying and harassment. Maybe he was nothing more than an effeminate boy who made an easy target.
For whatever reason, he reached out, and found aid and support from the homosexual community, and I'm sure he was quite popular. He received tons of support and encouragement from homosexuals and their supporters in the greater community, and seemed to have a supportive family as well.
Yet, he killed himself. How, I am not clear, though he was found in his family's front yard. Assuming he did really kill himself purposely, and not through an accidental overdose in a desperate attempt at self-medication, the question remains, why?
This is why I am personally convinced that he was not really a homosexual, he was just going through a great deal of confusion. Unfortunately he had no one to whom he could turn to, no one he could trust. On the one hand he was bullied by people who hated homosexuals, while on the other he was pressured to be a homosexual by gay activists and their supporters, in school and out. He had no choice in the matter, it seems, but to accept the fact that he was a homosexual. And at his age, that was a choice he not only didn't feel comfortable making, it was one he didn't have to make. Not at the age of fourteen.
Yes, he killed himself, but he had all kinds of help getting to that decision, from both sides of the issue, and no reason to not go through with it, from his perspective. After all, he wasn't just some messed up kid in desperate need of acceptance, love, and help. He was far more important than that. He was a symbol, and he was made to know that he had a responsibility, one that was greater than the feelings and insecurities of a fourteen year old boy.
He owed it to some obscene movement to speak for all of them, and to be out and proud. In the meantime, the bullies on one side of the issue hated him, and many other bullies from the other side of the issue wanted to go down on him. And the responsible adults in his life either didn't know the right way to deal with it, or in the case of the educators in his life, were hamstrung by political correctness if they cared at all.
You all helped kill this kid. Yay, good job douchebags.
Friday, October 28, 2011
The Nobodies
There will be a brief break from the typical fare here, as I get ready to, hopefully, post some Halloween and/or Samhain related material. A few things will be serious, most will just be fun or entertaining, and hopefully all of it will be interesting. One things for sure it will be different. I might post everything on hold and then post it all at once on Halloween. I haven't really decided yet.
In the meantime, enjoy the Manson video.
Thursday, October 27, 2011
Susan Bradford And The Shocking Case Of John McCain And Jack Abramoff
Remember Jack Abramoff? Well, turns out he might have been innocent of the charges against him, the victim of a vengeful plot hatched by rival lobbyists and organized crime figures tied to Senator John McCain.
Susan Bradford has written a book about it, called Lynched!: The Shocking Story of How the Political Establishment Manufactured a Scandal to Have Republican Super-lobbyist Jack Abramoff Removed from Power [Paperback]
I recently ran across her blog, Susan Bradford Press, where on the post titled The Shamelessness Of The Washington Post Knows No Bounds she went into some detail mainly about the culpability of the Washington Post in helping to engineer the downfall of Abramoff. But in this post she also explains how the Posts villainy culminated in John McCain using his Senate influence to call a special committee hearing on behalf of his own lobbyist friends and Abramoff rivals, and how this was instrumental in Abramoff's persecution.
I was mainly curious as to whether she considered McCain to be a dupe, or whether he was willingly involved in the effort to intentionally destroy Jack Abramoff. I was pleasantly surprised to receive an answer from Susan the same day I posted the query, and she gave me permission to post it in full. It follows, along with a subsequent response from me, and again from Susan.
SUSAN BRADFORD-Thank you for writing. Is your question: was McCain duped in the Abramoff conspiracy? I know that legislators are tremendously busy and rely heavily upon the advice and judgments of others. Since I never interviewed McCain, I cannot answer with complete certainty.
However, according to Indians close to McCain, the Senator’s wife, Cindy, demanded that he take down Abramoff after losing the South Carolina primary of 2000 since she was under the mistaken belief that the lobbyist spread the rumor that she was a drug abuser.
There are a number of indications that McCain carefully orchestrated the take down of Abramoff. Many participants were offered/cut deals. For example, Louisiana Coushatta Council Member William Worfel, who defended Abramoff, changed his position after McCain invited him to appear in the hearings with the representation of Roy Fletcher, counsel McCain personally recommended to him after promising that he would amend the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, with the advice of Worfel. In addition, the firms involved were aligned with McCain.
McCain was personally close to the accusers. In fact, he even used his office to act on their behalf. The accusations brought forth against Abramoff in his hearings could easily have applied to McCain’s own fund raisers – including the exceptional fees Abramoff was able to command from tribes. Lobbying firms close to McCain micro-managed the hearings, investigation, and media to acquire the results they sought.
McCain, in turn, used the information he had acquired to challenge political opponents, like JD Hayworth — and others, by threatening to either turn the investigation on them or slander them by tarring them with the Abramoff scandal.
In fact, he used the scandal, after removing from power a lobbyist who had thwarted his presidential ambitions in 2000, to position himself for a second presidential run in 2008. McCain was no innocent bystander.
What is unclear is what and how much he knew. My view is that McCain is an incredibly savvy and ruthless political operator who knew exactly what he was doing and was arrogant enough to think he could get away with it.
Rather shocking for many people, wrongful convictions are becoming more common than not.
I am glad you are asking questions and seeking out the truth. Our country needs more people like you!:)
Please keep in touch — and thank you for your post!
Reply
On October 26, 2011 at 8:52 pm ThePaganTemple said:
TPT-You’re welcome. Actually, I was wanting to do a post about this on my blog. Would you mind if I use your reply in my post? I’m assuming its all right with your attorney for you to talk about it. This is really some interesting stuff here, and could be very important. I for one never questioned Abramoff’s guilt. I just assumed everything I had heard was basically the truth. I was never a McCain fan though, so this doesn’t really surprise me, other than it ever seeing the light of day. If the truth was known, this is probably the tip of the iceberg.
On October 26, 2011 at 11:08 pm susanbradfordpress said:
SB-I would be deilghted if you would! What was uncovered is the tip of the iceberg, as you said. My book, Lynched, which is available on my website (www.susanbradford.org) and on Amazon, does provide a full and detailed account of what actually transpired over the investigation, if you are interested. Look forward to reading your post! Thanks again!:)
There the conversation ends, and I think I should point out that the reason I made the statement that I assumed her attorney was all right with her discussing this is because there is currently a lawsuit in the works, in which Susan Bradford is seeking damages from The Huffington Post. The Post, the lawsuit claims, made an agreement with Bradford to publish her story, and then reneged on the agreement. At some later date, however, they published the story and attributed it to a different author.
I just learned all of this today and am still digging. Sometime tomorrow I'll try to update with some links pertaining to the suit.
For now though I'll just end this by saying that if this is true-and I have no reason whatsoever to doubt Ms Bradford or her story-this could be really big, and a lot of people could go down, not the least of whom is Senator John McCain.
Stay tuned.
Susan Bradford has written a book about it, called Lynched!: The Shocking Story of How the Political Establishment Manufactured a Scandal to Have Republican Super-lobbyist Jack Abramoff Removed from Power [Paperback]
I recently ran across her blog, Susan Bradford Press, where on the post titled The Shamelessness Of The Washington Post Knows No Bounds she went into some detail mainly about the culpability of the Washington Post in helping to engineer the downfall of Abramoff. But in this post she also explains how the Posts villainy culminated in John McCain using his Senate influence to call a special committee hearing on behalf of his own lobbyist friends and Abramoff rivals, and how this was instrumental in Abramoff's persecution.
I was mainly curious as to whether she considered McCain to be a dupe, or whether he was willingly involved in the effort to intentionally destroy Jack Abramoff. I was pleasantly surprised to receive an answer from Susan the same day I posted the query, and she gave me permission to post it in full. It follows, along with a subsequent response from me, and again from Susan.
SUSAN BRADFORD-Thank you for writing. Is your question: was McCain duped in the Abramoff conspiracy? I know that legislators are tremendously busy and rely heavily upon the advice and judgments of others. Since I never interviewed McCain, I cannot answer with complete certainty.
However, according to Indians close to McCain, the Senator’s wife, Cindy, demanded that he take down Abramoff after losing the South Carolina primary of 2000 since she was under the mistaken belief that the lobbyist spread the rumor that she was a drug abuser.
There are a number of indications that McCain carefully orchestrated the take down of Abramoff. Many participants were offered/cut deals. For example, Louisiana Coushatta Council Member William Worfel, who defended Abramoff, changed his position after McCain invited him to appear in the hearings with the representation of Roy Fletcher, counsel McCain personally recommended to him after promising that he would amend the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, with the advice of Worfel. In addition, the firms involved were aligned with McCain.
McCain was personally close to the accusers. In fact, he even used his office to act on their behalf. The accusations brought forth against Abramoff in his hearings could easily have applied to McCain’s own fund raisers – including the exceptional fees Abramoff was able to command from tribes. Lobbying firms close to McCain micro-managed the hearings, investigation, and media to acquire the results they sought.
McCain, in turn, used the information he had acquired to challenge political opponents, like JD Hayworth — and others, by threatening to either turn the investigation on them or slander them by tarring them with the Abramoff scandal.
In fact, he used the scandal, after removing from power a lobbyist who had thwarted his presidential ambitions in 2000, to position himself for a second presidential run in 2008. McCain was no innocent bystander.
What is unclear is what and how much he knew. My view is that McCain is an incredibly savvy and ruthless political operator who knew exactly what he was doing and was arrogant enough to think he could get away with it.
Rather shocking for many people, wrongful convictions are becoming more common than not.
I am glad you are asking questions and seeking out the truth. Our country needs more people like you!:)
Please keep in touch — and thank you for your post!
Reply
On October 26, 2011 at 8:52 pm ThePaganTemple said:
TPT-You’re welcome. Actually, I was wanting to do a post about this on my blog. Would you mind if I use your reply in my post? I’m assuming its all right with your attorney for you to talk about it. This is really some interesting stuff here, and could be very important. I for one never questioned Abramoff’s guilt. I just assumed everything I had heard was basically the truth. I was never a McCain fan though, so this doesn’t really surprise me, other than it ever seeing the light of day. If the truth was known, this is probably the tip of the iceberg.
On October 26, 2011 at 11:08 pm susanbradfordpress said:
SB-I would be deilghted if you would! What was uncovered is the tip of the iceberg, as you said. My book, Lynched, which is available on my website (www.susanbradford.org) and on Amazon, does provide a full and detailed account of what actually transpired over the investigation, if you are interested. Look forward to reading your post! Thanks again!:)
There the conversation ends, and I think I should point out that the reason I made the statement that I assumed her attorney was all right with her discussing this is because there is currently a lawsuit in the works, in which Susan Bradford is seeking damages from The Huffington Post. The Post, the lawsuit claims, made an agreement with Bradford to publish her story, and then reneged on the agreement. At some later date, however, they published the story and attributed it to a different author.
I just learned all of this today and am still digging. Sometime tomorrow I'll try to update with some links pertaining to the suit.
For now though I'll just end this by saying that if this is true-and I have no reason whatsoever to doubt Ms Bradford or her story-this could be really big, and a lot of people could go down, not the least of whom is Senator John McCain.
Stay tuned.
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
Ask Not For Whom The Hipster Comes-He Comes For Thee
Sometimes you can only push a hipster so far even if you do so under the cover of authority. He might put up with so much, but once you cross that line then by golly it's on. Witness the following scumbag hipster who in the following video declares war on the Oakland Police Department for their recent actions against #OccupyOakland.
He's a former security guard. He has a pair of handcuffs. He knows how to use them. And he's coming for you, Oakland PD. And when he gets there-
You. Are. Under. Arrest.
H/T The Other McCain
He's a former security guard. He has a pair of handcuffs. He knows how to use them. And he's coming for you, Oakland PD. And when he gets there-
You. Are. Under. Arrest.
H/T The Other McCain
Tuesday, October 25, 2011
Mitt Romney-Future Ten Commandments Of The Once And Future God
Some might remember a while back when Rick Perry was introduced at the Value Voters Summit by a certain Baptist Minister who proclaimed that Mormonism, the religion of Perry rival Mitt Romney, was a cult. It caused a firestorm of controversy. Many conservative bloggers considered it a distraction which the liberal media would gleefully use to tear apart any conceivable hope of Republican unity. Even many of those who support Rick Perry, such as Emperor Misha, quickly jumped to Romney's defense. Such vile anti-Mormon bigotry has no place in electoral politics according to Misha, owner of The Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler.
Meanwhile, Lemuel Calhoun of Hillbilly White Trash is more or less in agreement to the extent that a person's religion should not be the determining factor as to his or her worth or ability to be president so long as that person follows and adheres to the constitution. However, Lem points out that it is wrong to demand that any other presidential candidate deny that Mormonism is a cult, and goes on to relate some key beliefs of Mormon doctrine. From Lem's post-
Mormons do not believe that God is eternal. They believe that he was born a mortal human in the distant past on a distant planet (a long long time ago in a galaxy far far away) and that he earned his godhood by perfect obedience to the Mormon religion. They believe that upon his death he was judged worthy and elevated to godhood and that he then called out the name of all his wives who then were elevated to the status of goddesshood. That he then formed his own heaven and earth (our earth) out of already existing materials and began populating his heaven by having sex with his goddess wives, who became pregnant and gave birth to babies who had only spirit bodies. The first of his spirit children was Jesus and the second was Lucifer. They call this life in spirit form before getting a body "the preexistence".
Lem goes on to explain that all Mormons who qualify by adherence to the faith will at some point repeat this same process. Having read this, on reflection it gradually dawned on me exactly what Romney's true goals might be.
Mitt Romney is running for President because he figures it will be good practice for the day he becomes-wait for it-
The god of his own planet!
With this in mind, I've done some digging, and come up with what I believe to be an accurate summary of Mitt's future Ten Commandments. They are as follows.
Thou Shalt Have No Other Gods Before Me, For I Am The Lord Thy God And Must Come First!
Thou Shalt Have No Graven Images Unless They Are Edgy Or Unless They Make A Statement!
Thou Shalt Not Take The Name Of The Lord Thy God In Vain Unless Thou Art Really Pissed Off! Or It Makes A Salient Point! Or It Sounds Cool Or Funny!
Remember The Sabbath Day To Keep It Holy Unless Something More Important Comes Up!
Honor Thy Father And Thy Mother So Long As They Do Not Become A Burden Unto Thee!
Thou Shalt Not Kill Unless Thou Hast A Darn Good Reason!
Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery Unless Thou Make Darn Sure No One Knows!
Thou Shalt Not Steal Those Things Thou Needs Not!
Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness Against Thy Neighbor When Thou Hast Nothing To Hide!
Thou Shalt Not Covet Thy Neighbor's Wife, House, Or Possessions Unless Thy Neighbor Is A Prick!
Now that's what I call a caring, devoted God for the ages, always ready to offer absolution, salvation, and most important of all-wiggle room.
Monday, October 24, 2011
See Dick's Dick. See Jane's Mouth. Suck, Jane, Suck
Robert Stacy McCain nails it in this post about the current state of sexual education and, if recent events in the New York school system are any indication of what's coming nationally, soon your kids will be nailing it as well. And by "it" I'm not talking about the honor role.
And this is not high school students. This is 11-year-olds. This is New York-
New York City 11-year-olds will soon be learning sex education from workbooks that include instruction on “mutual masturbation, French kissing, oral and anal sex, and “intercourse using a condom and an oil-based lubricant.”
The shocking revelations were uncovered in “recommended” workbooks reviewed by The New York Post. . . .
One of the preferred resources for students is Columbia University’s website, “Go Ask Alice,” the Post reported. That site includes discussions on topics ranging from “doggie-style,” oral sex with braces, fetishes, and “sadomasochistic sex play.”
As for how this story applies nationally, here's the new rules from the Department of Education-
Starting in the spring, the DOE will require one semester of sex ed in sixth or seventh grades and one in ninth or 10th.
It says schools can pick any curriculum but recommends the widely used HealthSmart and Reducing the Risk programs and trains teachers to use them.
By the time most kids graduate, its up in the air whether they can read or write in comprehensive sentences or perform simple math. But at least they'll know how to perform every sex act known to man.
And besides, how in the hell can a young girl have any real kind of self-esteem if she can't suck a mean dick while she's wearing braces?
And this is not high school students. This is 11-year-olds. This is New York-
New York City 11-year-olds will soon be learning sex education from workbooks that include instruction on “mutual masturbation, French kissing, oral and anal sex, and “intercourse using a condom and an oil-based lubricant.”
The shocking revelations were uncovered in “recommended” workbooks reviewed by The New York Post. . . .
One of the preferred resources for students is Columbia University’s website, “Go Ask Alice,” the Post reported. That site includes discussions on topics ranging from “doggie-style,” oral sex with braces, fetishes, and “sadomasochistic sex play.”
As for how this story applies nationally, here's the new rules from the Department of Education-
Starting in the spring, the DOE will require one semester of sex ed in sixth or seventh grades and one in ninth or 10th.
It says schools can pick any curriculum but recommends the widely used HealthSmart and Reducing the Risk programs and trains teachers to use them.
By the time most kids graduate, its up in the air whether they can read or write in comprehensive sentences or perform simple math. But at least they'll know how to perform every sex act known to man.
And besides, how in the hell can a young girl have any real kind of self-esteem if she can't suck a mean dick while she's wearing braces?
Sunday, October 23, 2011
Attention Please-That Rotten, Putrid Stench You Smell Is NOT Coming From The Kitchen
Here we have an Occupy Wall Street progressive fuckstick interrupting the meal of patrons of a restaurant owned by Danny Meyer, who sits on the board of Sotheby's. In fact, that's the reason for the disruption, which the thug promises will continue until Meyer, and Sotheby's, stops engaging in "union busting".
Frankly, I'd like to see somebody bust this little cocksuckers head open with a baseball bat.
Frankly, I'd like to see somebody bust this little cocksuckers head open with a baseball bat.
Saturday, October 22, 2011
New York Lawmakers Told "Time To Kill The Wealthy"
According to Politico that is the subject line in an e-mail sent to Republican New York State Senate leaders concerning a New York State surcharge on the wealthy which was passed in 2009 and is due to expire. The e-mail in question demanded the tax be renewed. The tax levies an extra one percent tax on anyone making over 200,000 dollars a year, and a extra 2.12 percent on those making over 500,000 dollars a year. One part of the e-mail states-
“It’s time to tax the millionaires!” reads the email, according to WTEN in Albany. “If you don’t, I’m going to pay a visit with my carbine to one of those tech companies you are so proud of and shoot every spoiled Ivy League [expletive] I can find.”
To be sure the message was clear, the sender got even more specific-
“How hard is it for us to stake out one of the obvious access roads to some tech company, tail an employee home and toss a liquor bottle full of flaming gasoline through their nice picture window into their cute house,” wrote the author of the email.
The message asserted that the "wealthiest 1 percent" were being assisted in the confiscation of the wealth of the bottom ninety-nine percent, as though the wealthiest Americans were thieves who stole their riches from the poor.
This is presumably an outgrowth of the recent Occupy Wall Street Movement, which has been recently promoted and supported by the media, 9/11 Truthers, Stormfront, the SEIU and other unions, and progressive activists, leftist celebrities, Mahmoud Ahmadinajahd and the Iranian regime, Democratic lawmakers, and, oh yeah, Barak Obama.
New York Democratic Governor Andrew Cuomo is on record as joining the Republicans in the state legislature in opposing as extension of the surcharge on wealth. No word as yet as to whether he also received a copy of the e-mail in question.
But there can be no doubt that these people are dangerous, and need to be dealt with in a way that is direct and, let's just say, definitive.
“It’s time to tax the millionaires!” reads the email, according to WTEN in Albany. “If you don’t, I’m going to pay a visit with my carbine to one of those tech companies you are so proud of and shoot every spoiled Ivy League [expletive] I can find.”
To be sure the message was clear, the sender got even more specific-
“How hard is it for us to stake out one of the obvious access roads to some tech company, tail an employee home and toss a liquor bottle full of flaming gasoline through their nice picture window into their cute house,” wrote the author of the email.
The message asserted that the "wealthiest 1 percent" were being assisted in the confiscation of the wealth of the bottom ninety-nine percent, as though the wealthiest Americans were thieves who stole their riches from the poor.
This is presumably an outgrowth of the recent Occupy Wall Street Movement, which has been recently promoted and supported by the media, 9/11 Truthers, Stormfront, the SEIU and other unions, and progressive activists, leftist celebrities, Mahmoud Ahmadinajahd and the Iranian regime, Democratic lawmakers, and, oh yeah, Barak Obama.
New York Democratic Governor Andrew Cuomo is on record as joining the Republicans in the state legislature in opposing as extension of the surcharge on wealth. No word as yet as to whether he also received a copy of the e-mail in question.
But there can be no doubt that these people are dangerous, and need to be dealt with in a way that is direct and, let's just say, definitive.
Thursday, October 20, 2011
Huntsman Brings Out The Big Cannons
Jon Huntsman, the moderate GOP presidential candidate whom Democrats really want Republicans to nominate for 2012, has unveiled his super secret weapon. It seems to have slowly sunk in that he's not going to get the nomination based on his good looks, any more than he will as a former political appointee of Barak Obama, whom he once praised in the most sickeningly saccharine and effusive terms.
His new strategy? Their names are Liddy, Abby, and Mary Ann, and they are his daughters. What time they haven't been posting to their blog on the Huffington Post, they have been making campaign appearances both on the stump and on the cable news networks and talk shows.
And, in order to really get the message out, they have started their own Twitter account, Huntsman Daughters. They've already got their own fan club, but do they have what it takes to get their dad into the Oval Office?
Uhhhm, no, and I don't think they're seriously thinking they can. Since two of the three girls are single, I think they're husband hunting, or maybe just engaged in some other degree of self-promotion. Which is fine. I'm all in, and am now on record as asking the Hunstman Sons-In-Law if I can have sloppy seconds. So far, no answer to that, or to these tweets to the girls I made from my Twitter page. Their tweets follow the RT, my response follows the double slash marks.
@Jon2012girls RT Liddy just woke up to this nice man holding her hand on the plane//Sounds like Liddy woke up just in the nick to time.
@Jon2012girls RT @jon2012boys only wish they were the son-in-laws//Don't be arrogant, I for one would have to get to "know" you first.
@Jon2012girls the only girl married is Abby/Damn that's the one I want too. Figures.
@Jon2012girls RT check out our blog: tinyurl.com/3e77kyr /Really girls-HuffPo? You understand Jon's running for the GOP nomination, right?
@Jon2012girls RT Huntsman speaks in NH-fellow GOP candidates in NV unionleader.com/article/201110… /Clever move-Jon might get to 5% or 6 % in NH now
@Jon2012girls RT "Who's the best candidate to beat Obama?" HINT: He's not on stage in Nevada tonight// Buddy Roehmer?
All in fun of course, but I did feel it my duty to make the girls face the cold, hard facts. I don't know if they've ever read any of my tweets, of course, but if they have, I'm sure they don't take me seriously, any more than I do them or their father, who is probably a good man, but just not the right man for the job. Not this year, and probably not ever, as Jon Huntsman represents a style of Republican politics that is frankly on the endangered species list.
And I stand by that. Jon Huntsman is being used, possibly of his own volition, as a stalking horse to keep Romney from getting the nomination. The reason being that the people backing him on this foolish, ill-advised run have it in their heads that a successful Huntsman candidacy would result in a man who many conservatives would absolutely refuse to support, due to his past statements in support of the belief in Anthropogenic Global Climate Change and gay civil unions, in addition to his moderate approach to compromise with the Democrats,and also due to the fact he has worked for two Democrat Administrations, going so far as to express admiration for both Clinton and, especially, Barak Obama.
Democrats know that Hunstman would be the reincarnation of the Gerald Ford, Bob Dole, John McCain style of campaign that would limit if not outright refuse to engage in "negative campaigning" (which is how Democrats define telling the truth about their policies and candidates)and will treat Obama with deference and respect.
On the other hand, should Huntsman lose, the hope is it would nevertheless result in enough votes drained from Romney as to result in the nomination of someone who is seen as too far right-wing to get the votes of moderate independents and moderate or conservative Democrats who might be dismayed at the results of Obama policies.
From the perspective of the Democrats, the one candidate they fear most is Romney. Or this was the case when Huntsman first started his run. I think now they've started to realize they have no more to fear from Romney than they do Huntsman. For that reason, the Hunstman campaign just cannot and will not gain any traction with GOP voters, for the same reason Romney has never been able to break thirty percent in polling of Republican voters, including likely voters, despite being the only establishment candidate in the race with any support at all.
Most Republicans want to win, but not at the expense of compromising conservative principles. That is the implication of a Romney campaign, and the idea of a Hunstman candidacy is Romney times two.
The girls do make a good case. Just not for their dad. For themselves, as devoted daughters, yes. But if they do ever see my tweets to them, I hope this is the one they take the most seriously, though it might be the hardest one to take.
@Jon2012girls Sorry girls, Jon should concentrate on one day being God of his own planet. He'll damn sure never be President of the US.
Wednesday, October 19, 2011
If You're A Conservative Republican Woman, Joe Biden Wants You To Get Raped
Hey, that's no lie, he said it and he meant it.
Also, if you're a conservative Republican business owner he wants you to get robbed.
And if you're a conservative Republican parent, he wants your children to be kidnapped and molested.
That way see you'd understand what it was like and you would stop opposing Obama's job plan that includes hiring more police (and other public sector union workers).
Of course Democrats could always drop their strident gun laws which make it difficult and/or prohibitively expensive for law-abiding citizens to own firearms, in which case crime would drop substantially among all categories and there would be no need to hire extra police.
But hey, we all know that's a crazy idea. We will always need as many public sector employees as possible, and since they are putting so many states in the red, the feds have an obligation to step up and foot the bill. Everybody wins, except the Democrats, the public sector unions, and, well, those other crooks and rapists.
Also, if you're a conservative Republican business owner he wants you to get robbed.
And if you're a conservative Republican parent, he wants your children to be kidnapped and molested.
That way see you'd understand what it was like and you would stop opposing Obama's job plan that includes hiring more police (and other public sector union workers).
Of course Democrats could always drop their strident gun laws which make it difficult and/or prohibitively expensive for law-abiding citizens to own firearms, in which case crime would drop substantially among all categories and there would be no need to hire extra police.
But hey, we all know that's a crazy idea. We will always need as many public sector employees as possible, and since they are putting so many states in the red, the feds have an obligation to step up and foot the bill. Everybody wins, except the Democrats, the public sector unions, and, well, those other crooks and rapists.
Liberal Democrat Senators Mind Your Own Business So You Don't Have To
Oh yeah, that would be me.
And they seem bound and determined to prove my point yet again, by calling for Major League Baseball to impose a voluntary ban on smokeless tobacco during the upcoming World Series between St. Louis and Texas.
See, this is how clever these progressives are. Dick Durbin of Illinois (the number two Dem asshat in the Senate), along with Frank "DeCavalcade" Lautenberg of New Jersey, Tom "Ethanol Subsides" Harkin of Iowa, and Richard "Prosecutorial Misconduct" Blumenthal of Connecticut, aren't threatening to pass a law or anything, they want Major League Baseball, and the Player's Association, to ban smokeless tobacco on a voluntary basis-you know, for the good of the chiiiii-dren. This, of course, is their fall back strategy when accusations of racism, sexism, homophobia and general intolerance start to lose their respective edges. They trot out the kids and try to tug at the heartstrings by appealing to our sense of responsibility and what not. It's the old commie diversionary tactic I like to call the commie two-stomp. Step back, obfuscate, reverse course, sidestep, and then go full steam ahead towards the ultimate goal. You know, that one that never changes with these scum, which is full on government control of all aspects of the economy, and society at large. They can't even leave our national pastime in peace.
As witnessed at St Louis Today
Durbin and three other Democratic senators asked the Major League Baseball Players Association to prohibit use all tobacco products on the field, in the dugout and even in locker rooms at Major League Baseball parks.
Who would be affected by seeing the players use tobacco in THE FUCKING LOCKER ROOMS is yet to be explained. Thankfully, they can't pass a law as it stands now because HAW HAW HAW the Commiecrats lost control of the House of Representatives last year.
Oh, but before they lost the House, earlier in April 2010, Democratic Lefty Lunatic Henry Waxman did call for a law banning smokeless tobacco from Major League Baseball. It didn't get anywhere probably because, unfortunately, far too many people were obsessed with such mundane matters as, you know, FINDING A FUCKING JOB!
Now of course the Democrats are reduced to using a great sport as a political whipping post, which makes you wonder in just how bad of disarray, just how desperate, the Democrats are. Unemployment is still at over nine percent and we just had a plot to kill diplomats on American soil sponsored by, allegedly, the Iranian regime, the housing market is still in the crapper, the world is still full of people who want to either rip us off or destroy us, or both, the borders are as porous as ever, and we are on track to break twenty trillion dollars in national debt, and can't do anything to reverse course, while lowlife scumbags are piling into the streets making all kinds of unreasonable demands, and the government is doing everything it can to disrupt job creation by the private sector.
But Dick Durbin still marks time on his calendar for this. And people wonder why I will no longer vote for a Democrat under any scenario. But if you are one of the ones who do wonder why people like me make such a big deal about it, it's really pretty simply. If Democrats can find excuses to extend their dictatorial objectives during the absolute shittiest of times like we have now, just imagine what they will try to get away with when times are good, should We The People become more complacent.
One way they accomplish this is by giving you something you want, or need, and think you just can't live without it and must be supplied or subsidized by the government. In the case of Major League Baseball, they have enjoyed close to a century of exemption from the confines of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, which makes Major League Baseball a legally recognized monopoly.
This could easily be revoked at any time by a significant court challenge, or possibly even by a legislative act which would probably be upheld this go-round, which of course gives Congress a great deal of leverage.
The anti-trust exemption could and should be ended, in all honesty. That would put a stop to at least this avenue of interference.
Because frankly, the likes of Dick Durbin should be allowed no closer to Major League Baseball than the cheap seats. Unless of course its by way of a baseball bat up the side of the head, but that's probably asking for too much, unfortunately.
Sunday, October 16, 2011
Donald Douglas-Struck By The Poison Of Progressive Ideology
Zilla Of The Resistance is now Zilla For The Defense of a fellow blogger who is being unfairly maligned by his leftist enemies. His name is Donald Douglas and he blogs at the American Power.
According to Douglas-
Some time back, one of my colleagues suggested that no matter what the nature of online disagreements, no matter how intense or vile, taking such disagreements to an opponent's employer is outside the bounds of decency: it is simply un-American. And I would add that when those same workplace complaints involve blatant and patently false allegations amounting to libel, those taking such actions are not only un-American, but genuinely satanic. And I have to apologize to longtime readers who might be getting bored with such blogging, but writing about the progressive left's perpetual campaign of personal destruction, against my economic livelihood, is how I'm able to deal with the issues, keep my sanity, and of course clear my good name. As I noted earlier, there is essentially no lie that's beyond the pale for the radicals. They'll do anything to destroy opponents. And they don't stop. And virtually to the one, the complaints leveled against me have been pure lies. I'm not going to recount them. All of this is of a piece. But since many on the left are coordinating these attacks, the frequency seems to be accelerating. I'll soon know more about the latest round of allegations and lies. In the meantime, here's a roundup of the workplace attacks I've defended against now for almost three years. In each case, there's never been any finding of impropriety or wrongdoing. In fact, the opposite's been true: Accusers have been revealed as the hateful demonic scum that they are. RTWT
The page which contain links to numerous examples of personal and workplace harassment is here-
The problem seems to be three-fold. Professor Douglas is-
*A university professor
*A devout Christian
*A staunch, unabashed conservative who blogs unapologetically for conservative principles and against the politics of the radical left.
As such, he has made many enemies. One of these is E. D. Kain, one of the founders of the blog The League Of Ordinary Gentlemen.
Kain for his part has accused Douglas of defamation and joined the chorus of those who have complained to Douglas's employer. This in particular seems to have something to do with Douglas's criticisms of Kain due to the latter's seeming change of political allegiance over time. I of all people could certainly be sympathetic to Kain, as my views have also evolved, though in the opposite direction. However, when Kain contacted the University, he went way over the line, which he himself admitted in a comment at the post in question.
Only problem is, after posting the apology Kain evidently complained again to Douglas's employer, and demanded that he refrain from any criticism of him on his blog, allegedly going so far as to demand the blog be shut down.
But its not just Kain, there are more engaged in harassment of Douglas, and the charges run the gamut from defamation to accusations of involvement in child pornography.
This is the left, and this is what they do. Freedom of speech, it seems, means freedom to join their cause and act in agreement with their principles, but does not apply to those who hold an opposing viewpoint. But to take it to the extent of harassing employers and fellow employees, or family, unfortunately is not seen as out of bounds to the hard core left.
Full disclaimer. Unlike Douglas, I am not a Neocon, and I would probably find more disagreement with him over pertinent issues than agreements. Truthfully, I don't see Neocons as conservative at all, I see them as pro-national security, anti-communist liberals, which is what they are. As such, they tend to also be Big Government conservatives, and liberal in almost all matters not related to national security, and on many matters that are as far as how they perceive the proper way of going about achieving their policy goals.
But I still respect them and steadfastly defend their right to express their views, on their own blogs and elsewhere. For anyone to attack them to the point of harassment in their personal and professional lives is clearly beyond the pale, and totally unacceptable.
Can there be any question of what life would be like under any kind of leftist regime, especially one with unchecked power.
According to Douglas-
Some time back, one of my colleagues suggested that no matter what the nature of online disagreements, no matter how intense or vile, taking such disagreements to an opponent's employer is outside the bounds of decency: it is simply un-American. And I would add that when those same workplace complaints involve blatant and patently false allegations amounting to libel, those taking such actions are not only un-American, but genuinely satanic. And I have to apologize to longtime readers who might be getting bored with such blogging, but writing about the progressive left's perpetual campaign of personal destruction, against my economic livelihood, is how I'm able to deal with the issues, keep my sanity, and of course clear my good name. As I noted earlier, there is essentially no lie that's beyond the pale for the radicals. They'll do anything to destroy opponents. And they don't stop. And virtually to the one, the complaints leveled against me have been pure lies. I'm not going to recount them. All of this is of a piece. But since many on the left are coordinating these attacks, the frequency seems to be accelerating. I'll soon know more about the latest round of allegations and lies. In the meantime, here's a roundup of the workplace attacks I've defended against now for almost three years. In each case, there's never been any finding of impropriety or wrongdoing. In fact, the opposite's been true: Accusers have been revealed as the hateful demonic scum that they are. RTWT
The page which contain links to numerous examples of personal and workplace harassment is here-
The problem seems to be three-fold. Professor Douglas is-
*A university professor
*A devout Christian
*A staunch, unabashed conservative who blogs unapologetically for conservative principles and against the politics of the radical left.
As such, he has made many enemies. One of these is E. D. Kain, one of the founders of the blog The League Of Ordinary Gentlemen.
Kain for his part has accused Douglas of defamation and joined the chorus of those who have complained to Douglas's employer. This in particular seems to have something to do with Douglas's criticisms of Kain due to the latter's seeming change of political allegiance over time. I of all people could certainly be sympathetic to Kain, as my views have also evolved, though in the opposite direction. However, when Kain contacted the University, he went way over the line, which he himself admitted in a comment at the post in question.
Only problem is, after posting the apology Kain evidently complained again to Douglas's employer, and demanded that he refrain from any criticism of him on his blog, allegedly going so far as to demand the blog be shut down.
But its not just Kain, there are more engaged in harassment of Douglas, and the charges run the gamut from defamation to accusations of involvement in child pornography.
This is the left, and this is what they do. Freedom of speech, it seems, means freedom to join their cause and act in agreement with their principles, but does not apply to those who hold an opposing viewpoint. But to take it to the extent of harassing employers and fellow employees, or family, unfortunately is not seen as out of bounds to the hard core left.
Full disclaimer. Unlike Douglas, I am not a Neocon, and I would probably find more disagreement with him over pertinent issues than agreements. Truthfully, I don't see Neocons as conservative at all, I see them as pro-national security, anti-communist liberals, which is what they are. As such, they tend to also be Big Government conservatives, and liberal in almost all matters not related to national security, and on many matters that are as far as how they perceive the proper way of going about achieving their policy goals.
But I still respect them and steadfastly defend their right to express their views, on their own blogs and elsewhere. For anyone to attack them to the point of harassment in their personal and professional lives is clearly beyond the pale, and totally unacceptable.
Can there be any question of what life would be like under any kind of leftist regime, especially one with unchecked power.
Saturday, October 15, 2011
Friday, October 14, 2011
Blinded By The Light
I have no idea whether or not the following story is true, but if it does turn out to be valid its going to send shock waves through the GOP. Apparently, someone, an unidentified source from inside the camp of GOP Florida Senator Marco Rubio, has informed Robert Stacy McCain of the blog The Other McCain, that someone on Rubio's staff has been trying to influence the GOP Republican presidential primary calendar. The person or people involved, which may or may not include Rubio himself, have been instrumental in moving up the date of the primary, in what would seem to be a transparent attempt to benefit the then current front runner, Mitt Romney. If true, the plan is as clever as it is diabolical, as it presupposed that New Hampshire, which has a state law declaring they must have the first primary in the nation, will be obliged to likewise move up the date of their own primary. New Hampshire also heavily favors Romney at the current time. All of this has caused not just New Hampshire, but other states, specifically Iowa, South Carolina, and Nevada to move their caucus and primaries up as well.
So, whether or not Rubio is involved directly or indirectly, what does he get out of this? Presumably, he would be picked as Mitt Romney's running mate.
As you can imagine, this has, or will cause much anxiety among conservative circles, most of whom see Rubio as a kindred conservative spirit while viewing Mitt Romney as an establishment favorite, and a bit of a squish. While Romney's support has held steadily in the mid-to-upper twenty percent of GOP voters, he never seems to rise above that due to his moderate, RINO reputation based mainly on his identification with big government conservatism at best, and at worst his support for such left-leaning policies as universal health care and a belief in Anthropogenic Global Climate Change, to name just a few things.
If Rubio is perceived as having betrayed the conservative Tea Party movement in order to secure a place on the ticket with the RINO Romney, it could be bad news for the Republican cause.
But should it really be a surprise? Rubio hails from Florida, a battleground state, and though he is seen as a Tea Party conservative, is he really? Conservatives have since his election, and well before, heaped praises on his head, and hailed him as one of the saviors of conservative principles. Yet all the while Rubio seems to have been taken under the wing of the Bush dynasty, particularly ex-Florida governor Jeb Bush, and was invited by Nancy Reagan to speak at the Reagan Library, where at one point he prevented Mrs. Reagan from falling, in an episode that almost seemed staged to me.
At 40, Rubio is a relatively young man, practically a kid in political terms, yet here he is one the one hand the object of near-veneration by the Tea Party, yet feted by and absorbed into the establishment club. Having had a small taste of the potential of the power and influence of Washington politics while rarely questioned or met with a critical eye, should we not have expected this?
This is of course presuming the story is true and that Rubio is himself knowingly involved if it is true. It might well be that the story comes from a plant in the Rubio camp, possibly even a Perry supporter. But the story bears watching, and it will be interesting to see how Rubio responds, if he does.
Whatever the case, conservatives should take from this an object lesson. Being possibly majority Christian, they more than most should be aware of the dangers of the allure of political power and influence. You can dress a man in royal raiment, and tell him in so many words that he's "a god, not a man". Do it long enough and he might even take you seriously on some level. Then by the time that old owl hoots, more often than not the corruption has already done its work, and irreversible damage.
UPDATE-When questioned about McCain's report, Marco Rubio issued a sternly worded denial, ending with "Hahaha". That Marco, such a jovial sort. Even accused McCain-the apparent "they" of the denial-of making the report up "out of thin air". Here's a portion of Rubio's statement, courtesy of The Shark Tank
“Don’t you think if something like that had happened, you would have heard something? 100% fiction, they just made it up out of thin air . . . Ok, BTW, if this were true, it means you got scooped in you own state!!!! Hahaha”
So what exactly is the truth? Who knows? Rubio admits to spearheading the effort to move Florida's primary up in 2007, so I guess that could serve to give him some plausible deniability cover. And then there's this, from The Shark Tank post linked above-
the recent move by the Florida legislature was carried out by a committee spearheaded by House Speaker Dean Cannon and House Majority Leader Carlos Lopez-Cantera- both have endorsed Governor Rick Perry in the Presidential primary.
Convoluting matters further, one of Perry’s top campaign consultants was also Governor Charlie Crist’s consultant during the 2010 Senate race before Crist jumped ship and ran as an Independent, and that Perry’s Florida team was being led by Rich Heffley, Jim Rimes and Randy Enwright. Heffley was responsible for fabricating the infamous “truthaboutRubio” attack website against now Senator Rubio.
So the initial link could be a concerted effort by Perry staffers and former Crist operatives to hurt both Romney and Rubio and in the meantime deflect from the involvement of the Perry campaign apparatus for their role in the primary calendar debacle, something R S McCain has been in the forefront of critical reporting about.
Still all in all, I'm not ready yet to absolve Rubio of complicity. Strange bedfellows and all that.
One thing is for sure. Once the jovial smiles and the joking was over, I bet Rubio started going through his staff with a fine toothed comb. Expect at least one head to roll.
So, whether or not Rubio is involved directly or indirectly, what does he get out of this? Presumably, he would be picked as Mitt Romney's running mate.
As you can imagine, this has, or will cause much anxiety among conservative circles, most of whom see Rubio as a kindred conservative spirit while viewing Mitt Romney as an establishment favorite, and a bit of a squish. While Romney's support has held steadily in the mid-to-upper twenty percent of GOP voters, he never seems to rise above that due to his moderate, RINO reputation based mainly on his identification with big government conservatism at best, and at worst his support for such left-leaning policies as universal health care and a belief in Anthropogenic Global Climate Change, to name just a few things.
If Rubio is perceived as having betrayed the conservative Tea Party movement in order to secure a place on the ticket with the RINO Romney, it could be bad news for the Republican cause.
But should it really be a surprise? Rubio hails from Florida, a battleground state, and though he is seen as a Tea Party conservative, is he really? Conservatives have since his election, and well before, heaped praises on his head, and hailed him as one of the saviors of conservative principles. Yet all the while Rubio seems to have been taken under the wing of the Bush dynasty, particularly ex-Florida governor Jeb Bush, and was invited by Nancy Reagan to speak at the Reagan Library, where at one point he prevented Mrs. Reagan from falling, in an episode that almost seemed staged to me.
At 40, Rubio is a relatively young man, practically a kid in political terms, yet here he is one the one hand the object of near-veneration by the Tea Party, yet feted by and absorbed into the establishment club. Having had a small taste of the potential of the power and influence of Washington politics while rarely questioned or met with a critical eye, should we not have expected this?
This is of course presuming the story is true and that Rubio is himself knowingly involved if it is true. It might well be that the story comes from a plant in the Rubio camp, possibly even a Perry supporter. But the story bears watching, and it will be interesting to see how Rubio responds, if he does.
Whatever the case, conservatives should take from this an object lesson. Being possibly majority Christian, they more than most should be aware of the dangers of the allure of political power and influence. You can dress a man in royal raiment, and tell him in so many words that he's "a god, not a man". Do it long enough and he might even take you seriously on some level. Then by the time that old owl hoots, more often than not the corruption has already done its work, and irreversible damage.
UPDATE-When questioned about McCain's report, Marco Rubio issued a sternly worded denial, ending with "Hahaha". That Marco, such a jovial sort. Even accused McCain-the apparent "they" of the denial-of making the report up "out of thin air". Here's a portion of Rubio's statement, courtesy of The Shark Tank
“Don’t you think if something like that had happened, you would have heard something? 100% fiction, they just made it up out of thin air . . . Ok, BTW, if this were true, it means you got scooped in you own state!!!! Hahaha”
So what exactly is the truth? Who knows? Rubio admits to spearheading the effort to move Florida's primary up in 2007, so I guess that could serve to give him some plausible deniability cover. And then there's this, from The Shark Tank post linked above-
the recent move by the Florida legislature was carried out by a committee spearheaded by House Speaker Dean Cannon and House Majority Leader Carlos Lopez-Cantera- both have endorsed Governor Rick Perry in the Presidential primary.
Convoluting matters further, one of Perry’s top campaign consultants was also Governor Charlie Crist’s consultant during the 2010 Senate race before Crist jumped ship and ran as an Independent, and that Perry’s Florida team was being led by Rich Heffley, Jim Rimes and Randy Enwright. Heffley was responsible for fabricating the infamous “truthaboutRubio” attack website against now Senator Rubio.
So the initial link could be a concerted effort by Perry staffers and former Crist operatives to hurt both Romney and Rubio and in the meantime deflect from the involvement of the Perry campaign apparatus for their role in the primary calendar debacle, something R S McCain has been in the forefront of critical reporting about.
Still all in all, I'm not ready yet to absolve Rubio of complicity. Strange bedfellows and all that.
One thing is for sure. Once the jovial smiles and the joking was over, I bet Rubio started going through his staff with a fine toothed comb. Expect at least one head to roll.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)