Archive for April, 2008

Grouchy Marx

Sunday, April 27th, 2008

\”The charges against Communism made from a religious, a philosophical and, generally, from an ideological standpoint, are not deserving of serious examination.\” -Karl Marx, 1848 (though this could have been stated by any number of modern Darwinian scholars).

I re-read the Communist Manifesto this morning at the encouraging of Andrew Wilkow, my favorite conservative radio talk show host (Sirius Patriot Channel 144). I found the content to be a little more coherent than in my previous attempt to audit the inconsistencies and account for the bile that continues to bubble pustulelently from Marx\’s bitter screed, primarily due to the evidence of the fruiting of this noxious concept sewn here among the amber waves of grain.

I would challenge any and all to read this staggering misapplication of the powers of human perception and reason. This so-called serious study of the impact of \”class\” in the larger worlds of freedom and economics provides, instead of objective scholarly evaluation, a raw view of the impact of envy, resentment and discontent upon the human soul. Marx, like the Mullahs of our day, failed to understand the absolutely essential relationship that exists between freedom and righteousness (or correctness, as expressed in secular terms). He almost got it when he said that the proletariat was a product of the bourgeoisies\’ capitalist pursuits. What he failed to grasp was that, minus the bourgeoisie, the proletariate would also cease to exist (just as righteousness would cease to exist in the absence of freedom). His call for continuous proletarian revolution was lamentably lemming-like. Who will feed and clothe the prols if they kill off all the capitalists? Ask the others who have tried it.

He almost got it again when he proposed that a class struggle has always existed. He is right but his definition of the term, \”class\” misses the mark. In socio-economic terms, class, in his employment of the term actually refers to covetousness. A more correct view of the conflict would use the term \”class\” as meaning refinement, sophistication, quality or excellence (none of which mean Ivy League educations but rather adherence to timeless governing principles). The class struggle is between those who have class and those who do not. A reading of Chapter two of the Manifesto is all the evidence one needs to prove that Marx and his followers still struggle to comport themselves with anything resembling class. Being well-educated and possessing wisdom are two very different things.

I would like to see someone (with more skill and patience than I possess) attempt a mathematical model of this manifesto. I would wager that it would look something like this: The theory: 100-20=200. 100 representing all the people, 20 representing the 20% who do 80% of the work and 200 representing the utopian result of exterminating the 20%. The reality: 100-20=0.

If Obama wants an example of bitterness to point to, he should have chosen Karl Marx or any of the number of his adherents that infest modern America\’s Leftist (communist) movement. Obama will find three fingers pointed back at himself.

If you are of the opinion that Marx was just another Grouchy German from yesteryear, compare his (and Communism\’s) stated goals with our current cultural and political climate. Climate change is real, folks, but it has nothing to do with the weather.

1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes. 

2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax. 

3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance. 

4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly. 

6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State. 

7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan. 

8. Equal liability of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture. 

9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country. 

10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, &c, &c.

And if this isn\’t enough: \”The bourgeois clap-trap about the family and education, about the hallowed co-relation of parents and child, becomes all the more disgusting, the more, by the action of Modern Industry, all the family ties among the proletarians are torn asunder, and their children transformed into simple articles of commerce and instruments of labour. The bourgeois family will vanish as a matter of course when its complement vanishes, and both will vanish with the vanishing of capital.\”

\”The Communists are further reproached with desiring to abolish countries and nationality. The working men have no country. We cannot take from them what they have not got. Since the proletariat must first of all acquire political supremacy, must rise to be the leading class of the nation, must constitute itself the nation, it is so far, itself national, though not in the bourgeois sense of the word. National differences and antagonism between peoples are daily more and more vanishing, owing to the development of the bourgeoisie, to freedom of commerce, to the world market, to uniformity in the mode of production and in the conditions of life corresponding thereto. The supremacy of the proletariat will cause them to vanish still faster. United action, of the leading civilised countries at least, is one of the first conditions for the emancipation of the proletariat.\”

Who has been carrying out Marx\’s work in our midst? These are the enemies of our freedom. Shall we let this treachery go unnoticed and unchallenged?

O No Yoko

Saturday, April 26th, 2008

Anyone who thinks that the playing of a line or two of John Lennon\’s \”Imagine\” in the recently released Ben Stein movie \”Expelled\” constitutes an endorsement of the film is either imagining or smoking something. People should see the movie before offering up criticism (though I\’m sure that is way too much to ask). By the way, the movie is not a critique of Darwinian evolutionary theory; it is a critique of the actions of some in the \”higher\” learning sphere who have prohibited the introduction of Intelligent Design into the debate over the origins of man. Shutting off debate is the signature obsession of the closed minded and the Left. There is still something left to debate, however. The closest the Darwinians have come to answering the question \”how did life originate?\” is an explanation revolving around proteins (200+ different proteins required for life) collecting on the backs of crystals and being somehow induced into becoming DNA strands. This makes the \”magic bullet\” theory seem entirely plausible by comparison. And these people think that Christians are bunch of yokos!

Driving the Fiat

Friday, April 25th, 2008

Now the Wall Street Journal is telling us that it is time to stock up on food because the value of the dollars in our wallets will never keep pace with the spiraling price of basic edible commodities such as rice, wheat, corn, soybeans and, by extension, all those critters we consume who eat the aforementioned grains. Food riots have been reported in 35 nations. The reasons for this \”crisis\” (the UN\’s term for this state of affairs) are many but most can be placed at the feet of our very own government and those who control it; our friends at the Federal Reserve and their friendly central bankers around the globe. The whole notion of utilizing currencies that have no basis in value other than their daily relative values to other currencies is simply madness, but that is where we are today. Paper money is valueless unless it is guaranteed redeemable in specific amounts of specific commodities; historically gold and/or silver.

When America\’s central bank was created (along with the Income Tax) December 23, 1913 by the US Congress (never ratified by the states as required), its commission as described in the Act was, \”To provide for the establishment of Federal reserve banks, to furnish an elastic currency (aha!), to afford means of rediscounting commercial paper (whatever that means), to establish a more effective supervision of banking in the United States (like that\’s happened!), and for other purposes (sounds ominous!).\” The US government had long resisted the concept of a central bank but there were a handful of congressmen who were for sale on the eve of Christmas Eve, 1913.

John Kennedy attempted, by Executive Order 1110, June 4, 1963, to return the responsibilities of monetary policy to the US Treasury by reinstating the Silver Standard and pulling the plug on the Federal Reserve. Not long thereafter he was dead. Two of the five members of the Warren Commission were directors of the Federal Reserve. A third member was former CIA director, Dulles, whom Kennedy had fired. The forth was Gerald Ford, the only president never to be elected president. (The author of the \”magic bullet theory\”, Commission council, Arlen Specter, went on to make a career of slight-of-hand as a US Senator from PA.)

We now have our \”elastic currency\” (also known as \”fiat\” currency) and look where it is gotten us. Some very, very few have profited mightily from this manipulation (the kindest word I can think of to describe what these people have done). The vast majority will find that even the silver lining has been stolen.

Is all of this explainable as pure paranoia on the part of a hopeless conspiracy theorist? You can hope so, but the facts remain. In the meantime, don\’t forget to stock up on a few essentials. You should still be able to afford to purchase all that will fit in the back seat of your Fiat. I have plenty of crow to feast upon if my analysis if it is found wanting.

PS. The thoughtlessness of the modern environmental movement has also played a significant part in bringing us to this cruel moment in time. All actions have consequences. It would be wise to ponder as many of the potential outcomes proceeding from our decisions as possible before pursuing a particular course. The price and availability of fuel and food have been enormously impacted by this inattention to the realities that exist. There are natural laws to consider in the process of creating policy. Wishing is not one of them.

The Ides of April

Wednesday, April 23rd, 2008

Tax day was just a week ago and many are still smarting from the feeling that they are not getting all the government they are paying for (or that they are getting more government than they bargained for). In view of recent actions by the \”Fed\”, printing 100\’s of billions to bail out the investment houses, a question arises; if the central bank can just create money, why should anyone have to pay taxes at all? Why can\’t the Fed create all the money the government needs?

Food and Fuel

Tuesday, April 22nd, 2008

Food is fuel. The prices of both are ascending, bearing each other on an ever-heightening spiral of demand and an ever-tightening spiral of supply. Can we recognize that the bio-fuels crowd (the same brilliant \”intellectuals\” that brought you the color \”green\”) has driven us sufficiently off course, or must we wait for the bus to plow through the guardrails and over the cliff before we do something reasonable, like slam on the brakes of this careening juggernaut? Then let\’s once again return to the time honored tradition of eating the corn and drilling for oil and gas domestically? Solutions that do not include these two simple elements are doomed to fail. Now, if we could convert weeds to bio-fuel, weed have something. Hmmm—hemp oil—-naahh!

Can Johnny Have Two Mommies?

Tuesday, April 22nd, 2008

It is more than troubling that the state of Texas is willing to trample on the religious liberties of some of its citizens in the guise of defending their children from some perceived harm. In an age when children are continually bombarded with sexual images and taught the appropriate (or inappropriate) use of condoms in public elementary schools, just what is Texas attempting to protect these children from?

If the state is concerned for the welfare of these children for other reasons, say to prevent potential psychological harm from living in an environment that promotes beliefs that are at odds with the larger culture, let us hope that the state applies this concern universally and consistently. I would hope that all Islamic Madrases will be the next target of the authorities. Certainly, according to the traditions of Islam, having more that one wife is wholly appropriate if not altogether desirable and acceptable. And we would wouldn\’t want to neglect an obvious concern for the psychological well-being of those children who are taught that the straightest path to heaven is through martyring oneself in the process of murdering infidels.

If the state\’s concern surrounds sexual/moral health issues, the ACLU should be all over this. If man/boy relationships are okay (according to the ACLU), what could be wrong with man/girl relationships? If it is alright (according to the ACLU) for homosexual scoutmasters to spend the night in the tents of young boys, why can\’t a heterosexual male marry a young girl? Do all children (of all ages) have a reasonable expectation of being free of the psychological mayhem that modernity\’s morally amorphous messages must generate?

I am not of the FLDS faith but I can appreciate their belief in plural marriage (not for me, heaven forbid; one wife is already more than I can handle!), which harkens back to Abraham, the common father of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David, Solomon, etc, all had more than one wife. Perhaps there is something of significant value to be gleaned from this particular approach to familial relationships. Maybe it is good for a man to have more than one wife; if the women have each other to befriend, befuddle and berate, maybe a guy can get some work done. Is this concept really so far-fetched in era when \”family\” has already been re-defined and in an age when it is totally okay for little Johnny to have two mommies—–when the mommies are lesbians.

I think it is time for everyone to re-read the Constitution or at least the Bill of Rights. All public servants take an oath to protect and defend the Constitution but there seems to be a growing problem with the adherence to that practice. The citizens have a right and an obligation to demand this of their public servants. Other rights of redress exist.

The Biggest Chill

Saturday, April 19th, 2008

It has all become perfectly clear to me now; global warming is caused by the fact that God is no longer cool.

Ben Stein has tossed a huge boulder at the wall that Darwinists have erected around science. Ben is not on crusade to launch a new theocratic epoch; he just wants science to behave scientifically, reviewing all possibilities and allowing dissenting critique before declaring that the \”debate is over\”. Trouble is, as with global warming, the debate is over. The reason; one side has declared it to be so. This is science? This is freedom of inquiry? Asking these questions is sufficient for terminating a scientist\’s or a professor\’s employment?

The making of this film, \”Expelled\”, may well be a seminal moment in the nation\’s history, demanding that the intellectually honest among us demand more intellectual honesty from the occupants of the ivory tower. It shouldn\’t take too many phone calls and emails to politicians and universities, and letters to the editors (of the newspapers no one reads) to get some action. At the very least, we can encourage our friends to see this film.

On the subject of the object, the most interesting thing about Darwinism is that it does not and cannot account for human consciousness; the very mechanism by which all theories, including evolutionary theory, are designed. Just how much intelligence went into the design of the theories propounded in \”The Origin of Species\”? Is the debate truly over or has it just begun?

Sticks and Stones

Wednesday, April 16th, 2008

It is not news that people naturally tend to ascribe one\’s own motives and mindset to those of others. Of course we would expect that our own perspectives would fairly approximate those of the majority, having grown up in a world of universally conveyed \”realities\”; blue, red and yellow are the primary colors, 1+1=2, 1×0=0, nothing comes from nothing (unless you subscribe to the \”Big Bang\” theory), what goes up must come down, Simon says (and continues to say), a bad air day is not a bad hair day (but one can cause the other), beauty is skin deep, nothing is certain but death and taxes, sticks and stones can break my bones but words will never hurt me. With all this commonality of input (true or not) and after all the tests we have had to pass in order to pass, a person has a right to expect that, at the very least, the words we use to describe what we experience would mostly mean the same to another person, but alas. Mark Twain said that the Americans and the British were two peoples divided by a common language. This problem seems to have spread.

Let\’s focus on five words; choice, tolerance, hate, bitterness and happiness. Let\’s take the last word first because it is the cause of many interpretations and misapplications of the other words. What is happiness? We Americans ought to know. Its pursuit lies at the root of our national experience. Some believe it is the very purpose of life, and who could successfully argue that it is not?

The dictionary offers these words as being synonymous: contentment, joy, well-being, elation, bliss, euphoria, pleasure. Apart from joy, these words seem to fall short of the mark, do they not? They convey elements of happiness but are not, in themselves, happiness. In fact, pleasure is often the cause of great unhappiness, a point which leads us to the other words.

Tolerance: acceptance, open-mindedness, patience, charity, understanding. We all understand, right? Who among us has a right to expect these things from others, especially other Americans? Surely those who insist on tolerance must exhibit the quality themselves, or? And if they do not, why not? Could it be that they are not happy?

Hate: to loathe, detest, despise, abhor, to find intolerable. Interesting. Hatred derives from being unable or unwilling to tolerate someone or something and renders that person unable to bear the presence of the other, in fact it causes the one to recoil from the object of his or her scorn. Is it likely that a person so wrapped in hostility could reasonably be described as happy?

Bitterness: resentment, rancor, indignation, acrimony, malice, enmity, antipathy, vitriol, nastiness, ill will, bad blood. Wo! Happy? I dare say, not!

The most interesting thing about the preceding three words is that they are most often used by leftists to describe conservatives, most frequently Christian conservatives, all the while demanding \”tolerance\” for their own primary predilection; the pursuit of pleasure. Who will argue that this is not the case? The Left should, however, be more careful about those they target, especially those who \”cling\” to their rights.

Choice: freedom of selection, election, choosing, decision, picking, option, abortion. I added the last synonym as a culturally correct definition. After having elected to seek the pleasure of sexual intimacy another decision was made. How many choices are there? Isn\’t the \”choice\” crowd actually demanding freedom from the consequences of previous choices?

Perhaps the meaning of happiness is best described by what it is not; wickedness never was happiness and it never will be. The Left castigates Christians and Christianity not because of an arbitrary imposition of rules but because religious doctrine makes it very clear that there are consequences for choices, good and bad. One of those consequences for bad choices is the loss of happiness. Telling someone that he or she will ultimately be held accountable for his or her poor choices is now considered hate speech, even and especially if that counsel is lovingly offered and charitably intended.

We live in the very time when good is beheld for evil and evil for good. As we can see, good and evil are not the only words whose meanings have drifted far from the original interpretation. Words have meanings. We might not be able to do anything in the larger scheme of things but we can personally resist the encroachment of hypocrisy and the manipulation of the language within our own circles of family and friends where truth and principle obligate us to take a stand. I pray that we will do so.

Papal Visit

Tuesday, April 15th, 2008

The Pope, on his way here, says that he is ashamed of the clergy abuse scandal. I can see that but I am confused. Is it because Catholic clergy are supposed to be celibate? It certainly can\’t be because some are homosexuals because that would leave the church open to being accused of discrimination, wouldn\’t it? So, what exactly is the problem? If it is okay to be a homosexual, and if it is okay for homosexuals to pursue their personal happiness with young boys (the ACLU, the arbiter of all civil rights issues, supports the North American Man Boy Love Association), and it not okay for the Boy Scouts to keep homosexual scout leaders out of their organization, why should the Catholic church be concerned?

It\’s Been a While

Tuesday, April 15th, 2008

I\’ve been distracted by a host of things, not the least of which is trying to eek out a living while simultaneously attending to familial and civic obligations. It is the quintessential balancing act of mortality. If I were slightly more cynical I would refer you the \”Portrait of Dorian Gray\” when Dorian\’s world-weary friend offers his take on male/female relationships, quipping \”women motivate men to strive for the highest heights and then invest themselves in every effort to forestall the achievement of his aspirations\”, or something akin to that. Oops, I guess I must be more cynical than I had thought. In any case—

The purpose of this post is to encourage all who are able to see Ben Stein\’s documentary \”Expelled\”, coming to a theater near you in the very near future. He spent three years touring universities throughout the world to determine the degree to which the theory of intelligent design is discussed by those who control the science departments. You probably wont\’ be amazed. While approximately 80% of US citizens believe in a God, He is not welcome at school. Professors who have sought to make Him part of the conversation surrounding the design and origins of the universe have been silenced. The tolerance crowd is not very tolerant at all, it turns out. Newton must be spinning in his grave, having been set in motion by the preposterous notion that there is no God.

It would seem that they are only in support of tolerating hedonistic pursuits and will fight like hell against any intimation that there are consequences for aberrant behavior. You can read more about this dynamic right here at the poached frog. Just type \”liberalism is a moral disease\” in the search field.

We should heartily support this film.

It\’s Not 3:00 AM!

Wednesday, April 9th, 2008

It\’s not 3:00 AM. The pone is not ringing. All is quiet. Too Quiet. While you and your children are wide awake the criminals among us brazenly and boldly rob us blind and no one seems to notice; probably because they have already robbed us blind. Who are these thieves? You can guess.

Secret to Happiness

Tuesday, April 8th, 2008

I think I\’ve got it! I\’m raising my standards and lowering my expectations! I am trying it out, anyway. I\’m not quite sure what to expect but it shouldn\’t be too hard to set expectation levels for people like Jimmy Carter who has taken it upon himself to negotiate with Hamas. How much lower can one get?

Chinese Spying

Thursday, April 3rd, 2008

The Chinese launched the greatest espionage campaign in the history of the world, back in the 90\’s, against the USA. This campaign continues to this day. It initially appeared that their primary interest was developing information on consumer goods but now were know what they have really been after; with the incredible proliferation of automobiles in their country (8000 new vehicles per month in Beijing alone) they have discovered the necessity of learning how to drive.

Fed up with the Fed

Thursday, April 3rd, 2008

I was returning from business in Reno on Wednesday and stopped in Verdi, a wide spot on I-80 on the Nevada side of the CA/NV state line, for gas and a bottle of water. I saw a sign indicating that the Bonnie and Clyde death car was on display and so wandered over to look. There by the bar, just beyond the flashing lights but within the carnival sounds of the casino was the remarkably tough, bullet-riddled 1932 Ford V-8 in which the two famous bank robbers met their end. It seemed odd to me that I was the only one of about 50 people within view of the crime scene that was paying any attention to it at all. Everyone was glued to their own flashing video screen. As I contemplated the impact of the hail of bullets (approx 150 armor-piercing 30 caliber, 12 gauge slugs and 45 caliber) that the six lawmen had loosed that morning (May 23, 1934), I couldn\’t help but reflect on an infinitely larger robbery committed in broad daylight but largely unobserved by those who have have aimed their focus at their own glowing video screens; the biggest heist in the history of mankind.

Has anyone bothered to check to see if there any gold left in Fort Knox? Any money left in the Social Security \”lock box\”? What has happened to the purchasing power of the dollar in the past generation? Is the Federal Reserve Federal?

The real question is; is there really anything, anywhere, left to steal? Were Bonnie and Clyde truly the folk heros some have imagined them to be?