Posts by Tom:
A Lie By Any Other Name
August 30th, 2010As I continued to consider the impact of the Restoring Honor rally in DC Saturday (8/28/10) I was simultaneously considering some other recent news events. A very interesting juxtaposition struck me. The questions posed are quite simple – what is a lie, when is it a crime, and why should we care?
Tuesday August 17 there were two decisions rendered by federal courts that bring this question into sharper focus. In Chicago the verdict was announced on the conviction of former Governor Rod Blagojevich on only one of twenty four criminal counts. That one count was lying to the FBI. On the very same day the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (or the “9th Circus” according to Rush Limbaugh because of its often bizarre decisions that are frequently reversed by the Supreme Court) ruled that the Stolen Valor Act, a law aimed at people who lie about receiving a national honor such as a Medal of Honor or Purple Heart, was not constitutional because it violates a person’s free speech rights. That’s correct – lying is protected speech under the first amendment. Kinda reminds you of Clinton’s famous, “It depends on what ‘is’ is” statement.
So let’s review the scoring from the judges – Blago lies to the FBI and goes to jail; another politician lies in his campaign about receiving honors and he goes free. Consider this – what type of society would we have if truth was never relevant? What type of honor would we be restoring if honesty is lost in the process?
Let’s consider another long-standing set of federal laws – The Civil False Claims Act, the Criminal False Claims Act, and the False Statements Act. The civil section of law says that if a person knowingly presents, or causes to be presented, a false or fraudulent claim for payment or approval, or knowingly makes, uses, or causes to be made or used, a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim, or conspires to commit a violation of any subparagraph of this law is liable to the United States Government for a civil penalty of not less than $ 5,000.00 and not more than $ 10,000.00, plus three times the amount of damages which the Government sustains because of the falsehood.
The criminal False Claims Act states, “Whoever makes or presents to any person or officer [of the government] any claim upon or against the United States, or any department or agency thereof, knowing such claim to be false, fictitious, or fraudulent, shall be imprisoned not more than five years and shall be subject to a fine in the amount provided in this title.”
The False Statements Act provides that “whoever, in any matter [before] the … Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact; or makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry; shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism … imprisoned not more than 8 years, ….”
So what we can conclude, for now, is that our country clearly states in its laws, that lying is bad. We punish lying – we punish false claims, we punish false documents, we punish false invoices, we punish lying to investigators, and we punish conspiring to lie. Then we specifically punish those who lie about military honors and steal the valor of others– except in California. If Blago is guilty, why is Alvarez innocent?
Wouldn’t it be nice if we had some certainty in this area? How will you know when a lie will put you in jail and when it will be protected as your free speech right? Will that have any effect on what people say? Will there be a chilling effect on what people say? Will people of honor stay well away from the line while others who like to shave corners tread too close, and then complain that their first amendment rights are being trampled?
In my view, lying is lying and it is IN NO WAY protected by the first amendment. Alvarez is a fraud and a liar. The honor of our country demands no less.
Have you ever misstated a fact in your Facebook profile? Is everything on your resume absolutely accurate? Is there anything wrong with a “little white lie?” And when women gossip or men shoot the bull, is there any expectation that what is being said is true? Does it matter? For an excellent treatment of this topic I strongly recommend Harry G. Frankfurt’s two wonderful little books, On Bullshit and On Truth. They will make you think.
Lest you be confused over WHY this is happening, perhaps this excerpt from Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged might enlighten you:
“Did you really think we want those laws observed?” “We want them to be broken. You’d better get it straight that it’s not a bunch of boy scouts you’re up against… We’re after power and we mean it… There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What’s there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on guilt. Now that’s the system, that’s the game, and once you understand it, you’ll be much easier to deal with.” (‘Atlas Shrugged’ 1957)
Whether you personally believe that lying is ever appropriate, it is revealing to consider these events and laws – Blago guilty of lying to the FBI, Alvarez innocent of campaigning on the basis of lies about his military service, or the federal CIVIL False Claims Act or the CRIMINAL False Claims Act or the False Statements Act– as a reflection on our society today. The laws are confusing and unequally applied. We are straying ever further away from the Republic that we were given by Mr. Franklin and his fellow patriots. It seems that it still remains an open question of whether we can keep it. Lying is wrong in any context whether you are a six year old child, a state governor, or the president of the United States. We are a less honorable people every time we permit it to happen without consequences.
Not Politics – Restoring Honor
August 28th, 2010I am watching the Restoring Honor event in Washington DC this morning. When I linked up there were 85,000 people tuned in through Facebook. Right now there are over 119,000, not counting those watching on C-Span and those actually in attendance. Some of the people watching are from Greece, Australia, Italy, Africa (country not specified), and all across this great nation of ours.
There is a rolling chat going on at Facebook and there are just countless comments flipping by. With over 110,000 people watching, that’s a pretty sizeable chat group! And of course – there are the trolls. These are the people who attempt to disrupt the chat and take a contrarian viewpoint. And that’s fine. They have a right to their opinion no matter how wrong-headed it might be. One of the recurring themes with the trolls is that this is not an American celebration – it is a church service. And surely there are numerous references to God, Jesus Christ, and prayer.
I am reminded of a very short but poignant book written by Pastor John MacArthur entitled Can God Bless America? While he always says what he has to say FAR better than I can paraphrase, the point is quite simple: Unless and until we return to our faith in God – AS A COUNTRY – we don’t even deserve the vast blessings he already bestows on us. And Pastor MacArthur is correct.
We are promised freedom of religion in this country, but in an indirect way. What the Constitution says is that CONGRESS shall make no law that establishes a national religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The states, on the other hand, are under no such restriction even though most have tended to adopt it in an extreme fashion. It seems to me that all the various restrictions of religious observance have absolutely NOTHING to do with the passage of laws that establish a religion. In short – we have simply gone too far. We have eradicated God from our society, and as a Christian I find that the free expression of my religion is constantly stampeded by the godless minority who, in my very honest opinion, are motivated by none other than Satan.
I did a study recently to understand the role of Angels and Satan in our world and it was rather eye-opening. But I will leave that for a future post. What I simply want to observe here is that it seems to me that Glen Beck has made a major step forward in helping America recognize its need to return to its faith, hope, and love of the one true God – the God of Abraham, Joshua, Moses, Noah, and Adam. We must reassert our right to worship our God, to honor Him, and live up to the motto we have had for our entire existence – In God We Trust. We do not presently deserve God’s blessing. We have turned our backs on Him. We need to fix this.
We often think that we can’t change the world, but that is not true. Events like this, where the word of God is spoken publically, where people pray together and recognize the mercy of their Lord and Savior help. The real question is much simpler, but harder with which to deal. Are YOU deserving of God’s blessing? You see God loves us as individuals and the best way to have an impact for God is to be the best YOU that YOU can be. Do you pray regularly? Do you immerse yourself in the word of God? Do you belong to a church? Do you confess your sins and work to deal with its influence in your life? You see, while you can’t change the heart of any politician, or even your neighbor, you are called to change your own heart.
So we must start at home. Start with yourself. Once we each fix the plank in our eye, we can deal with the speck in our brother’s. Return to God so that our country can return to God and in consonance with His character, He can then bless us. May God Continue to Bless America while we are yet undeserving!
Two of my favorite posts were the following:
The truth will make you miserable at first, and THEN it will set you free!
Once AGAIN, in my adult life, I am proud of my country!
Call it What you Will – it’s a Shakedown
June 22nd, 2010To avoid misunderstanding, let me say unequivocally that BP Screwed up. People died, the environment has been damaged, and too many people to count have had their meager lifestyle negatively impacted. It is a tragedy beyond comprehension to most of us and BP needs to be held responsible under the rule of law on which this country was built – not by an illegal shakedown.
Rush Limbaugh today read an article by Thomas Sowell concerning the BP shakedown of $20 billion. They both rail against the unconstitutional taking of property and blast Obama for his disregard of the Constitution. They both (well respected and far smarter than me), however, seem to have missed the point. It is really quite simple.
Look at Obama’s life. A fatherless boy taught to hate America. His liberal agenda is classic – take from the rich to give to the poor without effort or merit. There is no social program that should not be funded, and his only labor even approaching a job (as the rest of us understand that word) was as a community organizer fundraiser. Just another form of taking from the rich (often through false guilt) to give to the poor. While he was allegedly an “editor” of the law journal, I’ve never known ANY member of the law review to attain that highly sought credential without a competitive writing assignment and requirement to publish. And the only case he apparently ever argued was on behalf of ACORN, which he won before a like minded liberal judge.
He served part of a term in the Illinois legislature and part of a term in the Senate. The only thing he understands is campaigning and fundraising. Since being elected he has completely failed to lead, but has unceasingly campaigned. Even after the health care bill has become law he continues to press for its acceptance. It’s a campaign. Everything is a campaign in Chicago politics. All he knows how to do is campaign.
What he did with BP was use the political muscle he best understands – that of the Chicago political system – to extract a campaign donation. Rush and Thomas both criticize Obama for using the funds to give his friends a job or to buy votes. But isn’t that what you do with campaign contributions.? Pay your friends to further promote your campaign and garner votes? With this money he will look tough, fund more pet projects, vilify BP (the “rich” despite the fact that he has stolen the money from BP shareholders – oh yeah, just like he did at GM for the benefit of the unions), and demand their undying obsequience to further his liberal agenda. The fact that there is no Constitutional authority for what Obama did is simply of no concern. He has never cared about the Constitution meaning anything but whatever serves his immediate purpose. More importantly, there is actually a Constitutional PROHIBITION against the taking of property without due process. Look it up. It’s in the fifth amendment, right after the rule against self incrimination. Unless of course it is a “voluntary” campaign contribution, to match all the funds he has previously received from BP.
While it may be due to normal internet problems, the article from Thomas Sowell has been removed from TownHall.com. Very interesting.
Fire Senator Bennet
March 25th, 2010We are putting up a new banner today as we devote a portion of this blog to a particular political cause. Senator Michael Bennet was appointed by the governor of Colorado to fill the remaining term of Senator Ken Salazar who took a position as Secretary of the Interior in the Obama administration. His term would expire this year, so the seat is up for election in November.
Senator Bennet has not served the interests of the people of Colorado. He has supported the Obama agenda at every turn, has supported the abomination known as the health care bill, and has stated to the Wall Street Journal that he really doesn’t care what the people of Colorado want – he knows what is best for us. Well, Mr. Bennet – YOU ARE WRONG!!
You do not deserve the title of Senator and in correspondence with you I made it very clear that your positions were anathema to the good of the nation and the people of Colorado. If you persisted you would find me actively campaigning against you in the next election. So here we are. My goal, sir, is to unseat you.
I do not presently have a preferred candidate. There is no perfect Republican or Libertarian currently announced, but either of those would probably serve us better than you.
I have captured the domain names of http://www.FireSenatorBennet.com and http://www.DumpSenatorBennet.com and they both direct here. We will publish the truth about your positions and your actions. We will give the people of Colorado a forum to learn what they need to know – that you are not protecting their interests in Washington. You do not belong in the Senate. In my opinion, you are emblematic of EVERYTHING that is wrong in Washington. We need better representation. That is not you.
We are NOT a Violent People
March 25th, 2010Glenn Beck made an extremely interesting point on his show yesterday (Wednesday March 24, 2010). In his inimitable chalkboard style he showed how the radicals of the 60’s through the 90’s had used violence to try to achieve their ends. As many of them have said (Ayers as only one example) they are very sorry that they did not do more – blow up more things and kill more people. There can be no question that this level of violence goes so far beyond civil disobedience that they do not really belong in the same category. But what Beck noted was that those who partook of violence in that manner always lost. That is, the aims they were seeking to achieve were not obtained. They had a following but they were essentially ostracized by the public and put down by “the man.” I loved it when he used that phrase. I have not heard it used in that context for a long time (except on That 70’s Show!). After all – my generation was the one that said never trust anyone over 30!
So, Beck noted, they changed their tactics since they finally learned that those who perform indiscriminate violence always lose. They worked hard to actually become “the man” but redefined with their own social objectives. As you look at Obama and his henchmen associates, they are clearly and indisputably from that segment of society that participated in violence, advocated the destruction of our government, and relied extensively on socialistic principles of Marxism, social equality, and economic justice. (It is important that you understand what those terms actually mean. They are buzzwords for socialism without saying socialism. They sound noble, but they are insidious words.) But they are not participating in the violence of their past. They are using the democratic system they despise to restructure America into something different. Well, different than the America of the past, but no different from the social democrats of Europe. They are in fact EXACTLY like those social democrats and Dennis Preager recently wrote a piece advocating the use of that term where it applies rather than plain vanilla “democrat.”
But I digress. Beck’s primary point was that these people who now hold positions of power within our government know all too well that the violence of their past does NOT achieve the social objectives that they want. That approach is, in fact, a losing proposition. Thus what they are trying to do is to maneuver the “radical” right into a position of violence so that they can be as discredited as Ayers, Alinski, and the other violent radicals of the past. What have you heard on the news reports since Sunday? – that democratic congress people who voted for the legislation have received death threats. Of course the MSM will gladly promote these stories while completely ignoring the violence against unborn babies, and the violence of the currently “favored” class. And there is no question that ANY group will have its radical fringe. Regardless of the “side” they are on, such radicalism does not belong in a civil society and should be dealt with appropriately. After all – there were the Squeaky Froms and John Hinkleys of every generation. So what Beck was saying was – sure you are angry. Sure you want to strike out. Sure there are many things going horribly wrong in Washington. BUT DO NOT PARTAKE OF VIOLENCE!!! It has no place in our civil society. The physical attacks on congressional field offices, threatening phone calls, and (the most stupid thing since they are completely traceable) death threats against Obama are simply wrong!
But there are some very positive things you can do with your anger and frustration. You can engage in a voter recruitment activity. You can write letters to you r local papers and TV stations. You can participate in town halls, tea parties, and other NON-VIOLENT activities such as this blog. And you can work individually to educate yourself on the positions of those running for office, advocate their positions, support their candidacy, and support their campaigns financially or as a volunteer. Just stay away from the violence. That is ALWAYS the losing position. As Obama’s henchmen have learned. Don’t let them beat us at our own game. Don’t become like them. We still hold the constitutional high ground. Let’s keep it.
Chicago Politics
February 22nd, 2010Political discussion lately has often made reference to “Chicago-Style Politics” and generally in a negative sense. I’m not sure ethical people can even perceive that phrase in a positive light. Politics has always been dirty business, even back to the days of Plunkett of Tammany Hall who drew a distinction between legal graft and illegal graft. Some political careers have appropriately been called dynasties. That’s not the way it was planned 235 years ago. They rejected kingship in favor of a Republic.
It was in a recent show on the History Channel about the gangster era of Chicago that it all started to make sense to me. From the time of prohibition and Al Capone, the criminals controlled the city. They controlled the drugs, the booze, and the prostitutes. They infiltrated the cops, judges, and city hall. They made the law what they wanted it to be and used strong-arm tactics to get their way. They excelled at intimidation and rewarded those who were “cooperative.” The cemetery was filled with the bodies of rivals. Seems remarkably similar to many inner cities today. The difference is that this form of corruption and intimidation became the norm and therefore acceptable. This is the political machine within which Obama earned his chops. It is the political temperament that is being exported throughout the Federal government, where ACORN tactics are acceptable, votes are to be bought with taxpayer money, and “no crisis should be wasted.”
Obama’s strong socialist upbringing is undeniable and many who supported his hope and change philosophy have suddenly gotten religion upon discovering the outcome of such policies. Larger government, beholden constituency, benefits for non-contributors, higher taxes to those who actually work for a living, and ballooning deficits. What I find most troubling today, however, is how these Chicago style antics have started to become mainstream. In two recent postings from the left the language is troubling.
According to Kristinn Taylor at biggovernment.com, a recent CNN published article concluded with:
Obama’s critics keep blasting him for Chicago-style politics. So, fine. Channel your inner Al Capone and go gangsta against your foes. Let ‘em know that if they aren’t with you, they are against you, and will pay the price.
There was similar language in the Huffington Post:
You’ve given it your best shot, you’ve tried numerous times to talk with the Republicans, to negotiate, to meet them halfway on every single matter before the American people. But they hate you for many reasons. It’s time you break kneecaps [bold in original]. It’s time to destroy the Republican Party. They don’t deserve a seat at the table when all they want to do is score political points by being the Party of No.
The posting included a picture of a baseball bat with Barack’s name on it.
I won’t begrudge the people of Chicago from putting in place whatever style of government they want. Our diversity of viewpoints and freedom to choose is part of what makes America great. But I will absolutely draw the line on threatening violence against a group of people SOLELY for their support of our constitution. I further object to the persistent lies and false characterizations (another hallmark of Chicago style politics) as seen in the example above, calling the Republicans “the Party of No.” Any rationally thinking person knows that the Republicans have been completely marginalized in Congress and even if they WERE the “party of no” (they are not; numerous republican proposals have been ignored by the democratic party leadership), blaming them when the Democrats could not get their agenda passed even with a super majority can clearly be seen as a typical temper tantrum. We failed and it couldn’t possibly be our own fault, so we have to find someone else to blame – yet another mantra of the morally deficient left.
Taylor also noted that the Obama White House has consistently allowed such rhetoric. This certainly implies endorsement. After all – to a Chicago politician there is nothing abnormal about it. But there is. And we know it. There are reasons to be afraid. And we need to consistently call out such inappropriate language. It’s wrong in any political system and especially ours.
Why so Long?
February 5th, 2010Why so long? Why has it been since October that this blog has been updated? Well, there are literally thousands of reasons, but only a couple that matter. As I look back over what has happened in this country since then I see a few significant trends. For awhile the only thing ANYONE was talking about was health care reform. The sides were clearly drawn. What could I add to the dialog? The Tea Parties had been held, the left had disparaged them, and the conservative voters fought back in the most appropriate way – they elected a Republican Governor in Virginia, a Republican Governor in New Jersey, and a Republican Senator in Massachusetts – to fill the “Ted Kennedy” seat. The greatest comment made throughout these wonderful episodes was from Scott Brown in one of the Massachusetts debates when he reminded the questioner that he was not seeking to fill the “Teddy Kennedy” seat or even the “Democratic Seat” but the seat that belongs to the people of Massachusetts. Such arrogance from the left.
Then there was Thanksgiving, Christmas, and New Years. Good riddance to 2009. I even had a birthday in there somewhere and had another article published in Contract Management magazine (January issue). And you know what? We got several new subscribers here at the blog and NOT ONE SINGLE COMPLAINT about no postings. We also got no new comments. So I’ve come to the conclusion that these are my own private musings. If I feel like writing I will. If I have something to say, I will say it. A very wise man once told me that when you have nothing to say, say nothing. And one of my favorite historical figures, Mark Twain remarked that it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.
We are turning a corner in this country. We needed Obama and his radical socialism to wake us up. We needed Eric Holder to supplant the Commander in Chief and decide to prosecute the Christmas underwear bomber as a civilian. New York is waking up and telling the feds that there will be no prosecution of Guantanamo terrorists just blocks from the World Trade Center site. Several Democrats are retiring rather than face defeat in the next election (of course – why not retire, they are already entitled to full pay and benefits for life just for serving in a part-time job). And the benefits they get far exceed ANYTHING anyone of you get or will ever get. As Mel Brooks has told us, “It’s good to be king!” Boxer, Pelosi, and Reid (no relation thank God!) are struggling for their political lives. Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Those people are totally corrupt.
AARP has sold out its members, and people are discovering that the AMA speaks for very few doctors. Public unions are growing to the point that they now exceed the membership of private unions (those that represent true contributors to society through the capitalistic system). Their attempts at dirty tricks, such as eliminating the secret ballot, are failing. The public sector is growing far too fast to be supported by any level of capitalism, and people who illegally sneak into the United Sates are given more rights than natural born citizens – social security without ever paying into it, welfare without residency, free public school education without paying taxes to support it, and a free college education in several states. While H1B visas for the real contributors to our society lie stagnant in some bureaucrat’s inbox.
There is still much to do. We are piling up debt far too fast. China is buying us by the pound. We have truly mortgaged our children’s and our grandchildren’s future. We must fix that. It will be tough medicine. Obama may still get some of his agenda through, but we must continue to fight for personal liberty and a free society. We must defend our Constitution and the principles of states’ rights which it clearly intends to protect. We must support our troops and stop coddling our enemies. Yes, we have real enemies. We have people in this world who hate our way of life and want to kill us. To me, that makes them our enemies. And as a society it is time to grow up a little more. We are spoiled and feel far too much entitlement to the world’s resources. Europe still has us beat in that respect, but they should not be our model. Their social experiment has failed. We need to grow up on our own and seek reconciliation with our creator. Whenever I have been in a discussion on abortion or stem cell research I offer that we should not do things simply because we can. As a society we are not yet mature enough to know how to handle all the knowledge we have. We are like a 12 year old girl who has new body parts and no idea how to control them rather than let them control her. We simply haven’t matured enough to know how to handle it all. At one point in our history we thought it was OK to own human beings as property. While some treated it as a political issue it wasn’t. It was a moral issue. Thankfully we grew up enough in time to keep our country in one piece – but just barely. Abortion, likewise is not a political issue but a moral one. As is stem cell research. And we do not yet know the answer. We look back at pre-Civil War times and ask, “How could we as a society think that slavery was OK?” No one rationally accepts slavery as proper in any form today. Someday our descendants will look back at us and ask, “How could they have been confused about abortion?”
So please visit when you can. Stumble us. Recruit friends. Link to this site. And offer some thoughts. Even something as simple as “I agree” or “I disagree” at least lets me know that someone is reading. And I will try to have something to say more often. Something worthwhile. Something to make you think. Something that will prompt you to respond.
Single Payer Groceries – What a Concept!
October 19th, 2009I have been madly busy and have fallen behind in this blog. Sorry. I have gathered a bunch of great material, but I feel like a late-night talk show host during the Carter administration. There is just so much fodder it is often hard to choose. So I’m still busy teaching a three week class, but I’ve found these two items that are too good not to share. Hope you enjoy them as much as I did.
This blogger does a very good job of pulling together a bunch of information about the nature of the Obama presidency. There is just so much information that you are certain to have missed some of it. One of my continuing fears is that this administration is just flooding us with radical ideas under the banner of “change.” If you put enough of this junk out there, some might agree to a large portion of it on the basis of, “well, at least we stopped them from (fill in the blank).” This is not a negotiation where we can afford to “split the difference” and those of you who know me or have attended my negotiation classes already know, it is no secret that I consider that a horribly weak negotiation ploy in the first place. Take a look at this and explore the links for those items with which you are not familiar. It is well worth the time and will encourage you to continue to fight the good fight.
http://thebobofiles.com/?p=1681
And this guy is just fascinating. Even though he teaches at Loyola College in my home state, I’ve never heard of him. But after reading this – I like him!
What he does is postulate the theorem of “Single Payer Groceries.” If health care has become a constitutional right, then it seems that eating ought to be right up there as well. And he notes a connection. Since many of today’s major health issues are life-style related, by making single payer groceries the norm, the government can control what we eat. Very entertaining, but in the final analysis – very scary.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo176.html
Let’s Politicize the Arts
September 23rd, 2009Here’s something that I am quite sure has flown under your radar. And why not? You certainly won’t see anything about it reported in your local paper or on network TV. How about we get the Heritage Foundation (a conservative think tank, of which you should be a member) to meet with the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) in an effort to get a few art displays developed and promoted that reflect how global warming is a piece of science fiction, how the Christian religion has performed charitable efforts for centuries, how the American system of health care has produced the vast majority of healthcare advancements, and to commission certain art works that are favorable to Reagan, Bush (1 and 2), and paint both Pelosi and Reid in a bad light. Pretty neat, huh?
And I trust that your reaction is – “No way! That would be completely inappropriate! We would never do that, or have any expectation that the NEA would cooperate in such an effort.” Ahhh yes, naiveté reigns supreme.
So I suppose that you would be surprised to learn that on Thursday August 6 the NEA held just such a conference call that was orchestrated by a liberal think tank called United We Serve and also included the White House Office of Public Engagement. The subject of this call – to get “cool people to join together and work together to promote a more civically engaged America and celebrate how the arts can be used for a positive change.” The goal was to engage the arts community to inspire civic service by the general public in four key areas. Two of them were “health care,” and “energy and environment.” One participant asked a very cogent question – Is this the role of the NEA? See his full report at BigHollywood.Breitbart.com. His research revealed that the NEA was formed in 1965 under President Johnson as “a public agency dedicated to supporting excellence in the arts, both new and established; bringing the arts to all Americans; and providing leadership in arts education.” No where could he find a mandate to proselytize on public issues that are currently under heavy political debate.
This participant reports that the session closed with these statements from the NEA: “This is just the beginning. This is the first telephone call of a brand new conversation. We are just now learning how to really bring this community together to speak with the government. What that looks like legally? … bear with us as we learn the language so that we can speak to each other safely…”
He closes his blog with another cogent question: Is the hair on your arms standing up yet?
See yesterday’s blog about the negotiation tactic where you overload the opponent and he will give in to much of what you want just to get rid of you. Alternatively, engage the cultural agencies, along with the regulatory agencies, to brainwash and indoctrinate the population until they simply say “ENOUGH!” and allow the public option, the forced transfer of even more productive wealth without effort on the part of the recipient, and the use of the empathy vote in the administration of justice thus removing her blindfold. Even if the radicals don’t get everything they have wanted, they get enough to completely change the complexion of the America as it was founded and as we all grew up knowing it to be – warts and all.
Do you still think that the current administration is NOT trying to socialize this country and indoctrinate its population with its Godless view of the world? Ahh yes, naiveté does reign supreme.
Boil it Out of Them
September 22nd, 2009I am greatly troubled by a trend that is happening and no one seems to be noticing. It is like the parable about the frog that is put in a pot of cool water and then the temperature is slowly raised until the frog boils to death. If you had plopped the frog into hot water to begin with, he would have immediately jumped out. While I have never known anyone who has actually tested that hypothesis by boiling a frog, it does illustrate the point that if dangerous change happens gradually, we often fail to notice until it is too late.
In a similar vein, there is a very popular negotiation technique where you go all out to get everything you possibly can, even the most outrageous of demands, because what the other side will ultimately agree to will be far more favorable to your side than if you had acted reasonably in the initial phases of negotiation. You plant in the other party’s mind the thought that they are glad to have lost only what they lost since you raised the stakes so high that they could have lost a lot more. It can be a very effective negotiation tool when you either a) do not care whether you ever do business with the other party again (since they will hate you), or b) you rely on the absolute stupidity of people who will fall for that ploy time and time again. It reminds me of the reason that so many spammers from Nigeria continue to spam us. There are enough stupid people falling into their ploy that simply by overwhelming the system they will net a few gullible people. And a few gullible people are all you need to make the tactic work.
What is happening in politics in America is quite frightening. The pent up socialist ultra liberal agenda has burst like a dam. By flooding the system with every conceivable radical idea some portion of them will actually get passed and implemented. This will move the country closer to a socialist temperament and the losers will be glad that they didn’t lose more. Wow, we beat the public option, and only got “triggers”. Wow, we beat abortion on demand for any reason whatsoever, and only let them get away with abortion on most every demand as a birth control method. Wow, we didn’t get a true ultra liberal on the Supreme Court; we only got a racist who admits to making policy outside of the legislative process. Wow, we didn’t let unemployment go to 14%, we were able to keep it just at 10%.
Go back and read the “but only” portions of those statements. The fact that we are accepting them as minimal losses is just frightening. They are dooming America. And when people finally do wake up and find themselves in boiling water, their reaction will be interpreted as excessively reactionary since, after all, we’ve now been doing things this way for YEARS!!!! The radical agenda becomes the norm until the next great crash and burn negotiation ploy wends its way through our political system.
The critics of Rush and Beck and Hannity say that we should not listen to them because they are speaking in hyperbole, i.e. extreme examples such as saying to your child “I’ve told you a MILLION TIME” not to do that.” Clearly you have not said it a million times. You speak in extremes for effect. What is actually happening, as many of us fall asleep at the wheel, is that the hyperbole is in the radical policies being implemented, not with those who are calling these socialist politicians on what they are doing. They are practicing an age-old, discredited philosophical argument called ad hominem. Literally “against the man.” When you can’t fight the logic, you attack the messenger. These advocates of socialism (going back to the Alinsky mode of agitation and “community organizing”) have no soundness to their arguments, so they attack their detractors.
In my view the only way to prevent this is to know clearly what you believe and why you believe it. Beneath every public policy is a linkage to a philosophy. If you have ever donated to charity you believe in some level of socialism, but at that level we call it charity. And the distinguishing mark is that it is voluntary – not a forced tax. And helping your neighbor IS a good thing to do. But should it be mandated by the government under the threat of prison? And should it be given to just anyone, whether or not they are working to improve their situation? And should it be given to support causes that you simply do not believe are appropriate? And should it be given to support the religion of humanism when our government is not supposed to dictate any particular religion?
Spend some time today thinking about what it is exactly that you believe and why you believe it. What is your underlying philosophy for that belief? Where is your moral center? Where is your anchor against which you calibrate right and wrong? I assure you that there is an ongoing assault against your beliefs with the intent of legislating what you should believe. The ultimate endgame is thought police. You will ultimately be told what to think. Do you believe that this is hyperbole? I only wish that were true. There is a conspiracy out there and it has nothing to do with Hanger 51, a second shooter on the grassy knoll, or whether or not we actually put men on the moon. It has a lot to do with shaking your underlying beliefs and slowly boiling them out of you. The temperature is rising and you are accepting things today that years previously you would have rejected out of hand. If you think seriously about this, you will see it is true. The parallels to history are real. And rather disturbing.
Just because you are NOT paranoid does not mean that they are not out to get you. And even the paranoid have real enemies. The threats to our belief structures are very real. Step one is always to get God removed as a factor. While it only succeeds for a little while, living in those times is a terrible fate.