Elect Any Democrat to White House, Be Less Safe and Less Private

We Americans are badly split along lines of belief. There is a large group of Americans who dislike, if not outright hate, this country. The 'others', which is where I put myself, recognize that our nation is not perfect, but also see clearly that it is still the best thing out there compared to all the others.

Now, these are my opinions about the inherent dangers of electing any Democrat to the presidency, basically ever since the Jimmy Carter disaster.
First, we as a nation  become less safe. Democrats cut defense spending and form international agreements or alliances or not based on some other criteria than providing for our mutual defense or even shared mutual interests. Then they skew internal security concerns to promote things that have nothing to do with security and that do not keep anyone safe. To the contrary, things sometimes happen as a result of their overt or inadvertent inaction that endangers people.
Examples: 
1 The Benghazi attack on September 11 of all days. That was a totally unnecessary sacrifice of Americans by an administration callously ignoring the realities of the situation there while pushing a hard campaign that the Republicans are the danger to America. 
2 Egypt is where they welcomed the Muslim Brotherhood takeover with president-for-life Morsi pushing Islamic theocracy and Sharia on an ancient nation that did not want it--not the executions that follow nor the horrible interpretations of criminality that are always there. Ask any rape victim, after she is lashed or imprisoned because she could not find four male witnesses to support her claim.

3 Syria is where the amateur nature of the Obama administration came to the fore in  the most forceful manner. Obama used the term "red line" (on video so watch for a sound bite near you) and then did absolutely nothing. Does not seem to have consulted his national security apparatchiks nor Pentagon types nor the CIA. Just threw out the remark and went golfing, probably.

One year later he denied ownership of his red line and said it was the world's red line. And something the world should do something about. As in something. There is no specificity or outline of what should happen or must happen and so on.

And privacy issues? They are using the Internal Revenue Service against citizens and citizen groups they want to punish. Think of it, use of government agencies for political ends. It is so chilling and un-American, or it used to be. 

Now they are in charge for the time being and the leashes have slipped on the workers in government who agree with them. And since government work is such a good fit for so many of them they have lined the agencies of government with similar thinkers, now becoming operatives to advance their favorite brand of governing. 

I call it the knows better than anyone else do-gooder type where they should be telling all of us just how to live and speak and act.

As if there were no First Amendment.

It's scary.

Howling Mob at the Foot of the Guillotine?

      I read a lot online, pundits and articles and often read the comments after. I find much of the comments to be a mindless waste of time, written by people whose writing makes me think of drooling sycophants with no brains. And they would be a waste of time to be with as they spout inanities and venom.
      A mind is a terrible thing to waste, true. It is also a terrible thing to put yourself out there as a complete, blindly loyal link in a chain to a belief, no matter what that belief may be.
      And in service of that loyalty to the cause much that is asinine is said because many of these so-partisan types are just not that well educated on issues.
     They bring conspiracy theories to he table and waste everybody's time spouting nonsense.
     Please, people, bring the brain, but train it first!

Are Most Media Folks Tools?

And if they are tools, whose tools are they, anyway? And what sort of tool? Are they all either sharp objects or blunt instruments, or a variety of these, assorted screwdrivers and wrenches and hammers and knives?
Which ones are the dull knives?
Most importantly, which ones, seriously, are the least likely to engage in thought before engaging in speech? Are thinking and speaking at the same time too much for the multi-tasking media, many of whom already use Drudge Report as their home page?

As to whose tools, the response to that is to ask what have they written or said lately. When they stay with the herd they are fine within their own kind. It is when they wander from home grounds that they become transformed-into open targets for the wrath of their mob. This is where some of these journalists use 'ilk' and 'hoi-polloi'

We just had the horrid murder in Aurora, Colorado of twelve innocent people and the wounding of scores more, and the 'journalists' had drawn their conclusions before the police investigation had really gotten under way. Has this happened before? Think back to the shooting in Arizona of then Rep. Gabrielle Gifford, and who these people decided had done the deed and published and spoke their conclusions, without a single fact being known? It was, to them, obviously a right-wing zealot instigated by listening to talk radio and not thinking the same way as these practitioners of journalistic malpractice. Instead, as was the case in Norway's mass shooting, we are dealing with a mental patient.

Now the Batman shooter comes, and again we have their decciding early on that a certain political bent caused this man to plot this crime for months, and then carry it out in the coldest of blood. This was a premeditated mass murder. It may well turn out to be a pre-medicated crime as well, as we look to have another individual who has lost the balance of his rationality--he is insane, he is non compos mentis and totally out of his gourd. Case in point, his mother was not completely surprised and shocked. She sounds as if she is the relative of a mental patient, and as if she has quietly wondered for a few years when something terrible might happen.

And now it has happened. And journalists show they are not investigative reporters seeking answers, but are rather proselytes of their own belief system and eager to get out the word when the first opportunity arises. Thus they malign all those who disagree with their paradigmatic view of life and opinion. They do not look back at their words, and they certainly do not retract, redact or apologize for once again getting it wrong.

The reason is that they are tools, of their agenda and belief system, and as preachers to us all, see these as teachable moments when they can help those who disagree to see things from their perspective.

But they get it so wrong, and are often so offensive in their judgment and pronouncement, that they are Tools, in the pejorative modern sense--truly obnoxious.

We the 'Little People' of the United States

"Congress shall pass no law" is how some of the first 10 amendments to our constitution begin. This is our Bill of Rights.
There is an unwritten bill of rights for members of Congress, apparently. It is that they can pass all kinds of laws, while remaining completely exempt for life from these laws' impacts. Nepotism laws-those are for the little people. The same applies to all other laws skirting ethics in business and society. Everyone else must suffer the consequences of the laws, but members of Congress do not. Hence the totally unsurprising revelation that members will hear of things to come and immediately take action to profit from it, by buying or selling with their inside information. That is so illegal for all of the rest of us, but not for them.
What a corrupt, self-serving bunch of people!
It is why this page has the name that it does.
They need to leave office sooner rather then later, and they need to be cut off from pension benefits that get better the longer they 'serve'.
I think they have things good enough as it is. They totally stack the deck in their favor.
The rest of us can just eat cake.

What is Up with Celebrating a Murder?

Osama Bin Laden, the baddest of the bad, is dead. Navy Seals went in and eliminated him and grabbed a bunch of material to study.

And in many places in this country there was jubilation in the streets, as if we had won a championship or a war had ended.

Neither is the case here. We sent in a hit squad and they performed their duty as our brave president ordered them to do. See http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2011/05/osama-bin-laden-dead.html for an explanation of that.

The thing is, for me, we do not celebrate something such as this. As well, this war is not over and eliminating the head of the beast may spawn others, as in hydra-headed al Qaeda.

There should be solemn consideration that a human being has died, even if a monster.

There should be prayers for peace in the world, since this will stir that famous Arab street into action.

And I prefer if we do not act as if we have the same behaviors here on our streets.

If We Held to First Principles...

But many in Congress show us on a despairingly regular basis they have no principles at all. We've lost our way when no one can point to an activity and say "this is a conflict of interest" and should be barred. Not in Congress, nor on Wall St, nor in any aspect of the financial or media interests does a conflict of interest get acknowledged. It is refreshing to see Fox News with their "in the interests of full disclosure" statement whenever a sister organization is discussed.

A freezer full of cash, the House Bank scandal, the cash for stamps scandal. The entire state of New Jersey, it seems. Certainly everything that comes out of Chicago's Daley machine and this includes the current bunch in the White House.

Can you imagine a nation that will not impeach an Obama because of the real horror that would come from a Biden administration*? That is where we may be if the Chicago pols keep doing their thing and those chickens come home to roost.

* also known as a gaffe-a-thon

It's a Crazy World Out There: How Can Obama Get People to Love Him Again?

It's a Crazy World Out There: How Can Obama Get People to Love Him Again?

How Can Obama Get People to Love Him Again?

At last President Obama has fallen to earth, as far as his poll numbers go at least. Today he is 48-51 on Rasmussen, and low on all others--Zogby, etc.

What can he do to offset this? What can he do to make himself popular again?

Can he do anything? I've tried to think of anything, and am coming up pretty blank. Because I am not looking for anything that costs money. No enhancing the deficit, in other words. He overspent and probably is burning out the printing press at the Mint.

So no big giveaway programs, no new entitlement, any preferential treatment to one group pushes another group away from the love for Obama.

Unpopularity is something he is completely unfamiliar with and I think he is not comfortable. He prefers the love and popularity, and even the adulation of the masses.

He's getting into Carter troubles early in his term, his "first term." He already referenced his second term in his "state of the union" type speech before both houses of Congress.

Hubris is what he has in abundance, so he may have a far way to fall still.

On Complacency-It's a BAD Thing So Pay Attention!

Complacency: n, A feeling of contentment or self-satisfaction, especially when coupled with an unawareness of danger, trouble, or controversy.

In other words, complacency means clueless.

If you walk down the meanest street in town with earphones in and you get mugged, did you contribute to that outcome?

Politically we Americans have been THE most complacent people around. We seldom have total participation in an election, of any sort.

My personal history saw complacency lead to embezzlement of my homeowners association. No one paid attention, everyone trusted the guy who did it. The treasurer never looked at the accounts and the guy forged signatures on all these checks.

And so it goes in larger political entities. There is a price to pay for not paying attention. We keep sending the same people back term after term. Who is minding the store? They are busy lining their own nests with relatives in lobbying firms and multiple conflicts of interest.

The Alinsky Radical and What's Going on in Washington Now

In November voters punished the Republican party for the perceived harms of the Bush administration.
In January Barack Obama took the reins of government and galloped into the future still proclaiming "It's Bush's fault!"
He sends his forces marching out on a multi-front assault on our way of life and our entire system of government.
This follows several decades of lax regulation and harmful lending practices promulgated on American banks by long-standing Democrat politicians. These were the same people who denied there were any problems and now blame the Bush administration for the troubles.
He is forging far ahead of where the country is willing to go, in a classic operation out of Rules for Radicals by Saul Alinsky. He is shooting for 100% of the community organizer's ideal programs in a shot gun broad approach.
He surely knows there will be a backlash, and the Alinsky advise was to accept the amount you always thought you would be able to get.
When the backlash comes there will be a rollback, but probably not all the way. There will have been an incremental creep toward socialistic governance.
And that is fine with a community organizer in the Saul D. Alinsky model.