Archive for politics

Is government on your side? For how long?

Jeffrey T. Brown says ‘Gun Control’ Is Actually Conservative Control and, in the process, explains a bit about the differing points of view of the role of government in society.

The casual taking of lives is a uniquely liberal phenomena. When people are trained to be victims, and that their “right” to take from others is both fair and commendable, it is only a matter of time before they take everything that belongs to another, including his life.

The fact is that liberals have already not only surrendered to servitude, they have embraced it. They have bought the lie that government is the solution, rather than the cause of nearly every problem which besets this country. They are fine with fewer rights, because they seem to think that the government they worship and depend upon would never turn on them when the money dries up or the issue becomes which priority a totalitarian regime will indulge: freebies to its supporters or its own self-preservation at the barrel of a gun. They see that same paternal government targeting their philosophical enemies, conservatives, and think that because they are politically aligned, it is perfectly fine that government targets some of its citizens. They don’t understand that a time will come when such a government doesn’t need liberals, either.

Gun control is purely and simply a political tool to achieve the disarmament of that portion of the populace that will not surrender to Marxists and fascists. The president wishes to politicize the deaths brought about by his culture, and that of his followers, to achieve total political domination through manipulation of the weak-minded. The left has no intention of being forever checked by those who preserve the America he has sought to overwhelm. The last breath of that America will occur when citizens can no longer forcefully resist the malfeasance of their own government. No one knows that better than a fundamentally transformative tyrant.

Of course, this view sees government as its own separate entity and that may be a question. The history and current experience with despotic regimes does tend to support the view, though.

Leave a Comment

Implications: the war on weapons

It was just a matter of hours before prominent Democrats politicized a tragic on air shooting and that a “fired former journalist known on camera as “Bryce Williams” who murdered two of his former collegues on air with a Glock 19 9mm pistol this morning was a black, gay, racist fan of serial killers” (Bob Owens). The White House spokesman denied reality by claiming that gun violence was an emerging problem. Another story was about the fact that many gun related crimes were committed with stolen weapons. There are a few things about that as well. Gun Free Zone” Laws Are Arming Criminals explains the problem.

We’ve noticed a trend in recent months of law enforcement officers having their personal vehicles and professional vehicles alike targeted by gun and tactical gear thieves … Law enforcement agencies need to radically revisit the concept of leaving guns in their unattended vehicles. They are not alone, as their civilian counterparts are discovering that they have much the same issue

The vehicle thefts are not inevitable, but are the direct result of concealed carriers being forced to leave their personal protection firearms in their vehicles in order to attend events in certain public or private spaces where guns have been banned.

Criminals then wander through the parking lots outside these locations—at malls, outside stadiums, in parking garages, at businesses, and on city streets—and look for vehicles that match a likely target profile.

That means, despite a denial of the reality of the correlation between allowing citizens to arm themselves and crime, there is also the reduce to the absurd in the belief that more guns mean more gun related crimes and that many efforts to eliminate guns have implications and side effects. Gun free zones have been known a ‘free target zones’ and now it is becoming evident that they can be resources for the acquisition of firearms by theft.

As the panelists on Fox Five said of Juan Williams on one of these arguments: “He’s carrying more water than an Alhambra truck” in trying to defend against reality. Juan is not alone.

Leave a Comment

Marx and the evolution into the modern political conundrum

Scott S. Powell on The Quiet Revolution: How the New Left Took Over the Democratic Party:

In a free society, extreme and derivative ideologies from the destructive legacy of Marx, Lenin, and the Frankfurt School can find some appeal to the alienated and disaffected. A constitutional republic like the United States should have sufficient strength to withstand most contradictions and absurdities held by a relatively small minority.

The problem today is threefold: the Left’s wholesale domination of much of the knowledge industry, a growing uninformed and disengaged electorate, and a failing two-party system. The normal process of checks and balances, which is made possible when compromise can be accomplished between the parties, simply no longer works. With the long march through the institutions having resulted in one of those parties no longer sharing much in the way of common ground — in terms of a philosophical heritage and values of liberty, private property, and limited government — compromise has become nearly impossible. The radicalization of the Democratic Party has so affected Congress and the current president as to render bipartisan solutions and reconciliation all but impossible.

In the end, what is important for Americans to realize is that the experiment with a left-wing president, like Barack Obama, is less an aberration than the logical outcome of the transformation of both the Democratic Party and the American culture.

The big question is whether the nation can survive and prosper if the culture remains fractured with a majority adrift from the heritage, morality and values of liberty and personal responsibility that are at the heart of the Declaration and the Constitution.

There is worry … and reason for that worry. Lloyd Marcus describes on the efforts to leverage the plaints of the “alienated and disaffected” as Generations of Stolen Black Dreams.

In response to my article, “Please Tell Black Lives Matter to Shut Up and Go Away,” a sincere black activist emailed asking me with what would I replace it? I asked him to explain. The bottom line of his lengthy passionate reply is “Negroes” are still not free in America. He says America has reneged on its promise of liberty and justice for all.

So what is Obama’s solution to fixing these problems plaguing blacks? He lets drug dealers who prey on urban youths out of jail, claiming their crime is non-violent. He has his DOJ bully police across America to back off urban thugs. Obama minion Baltimore mayor said, “Let them loot. It’s only property.” Violent crime is up big-time in Chicago, New York and Baltimore.

Despite claims otherwise, America has not failed its poor. We have welfare and entitlement programs out the ying-yang; a huge chunk of America’s national debt.

Then there is the claim that America “systematically” and “institutionally” hinders opportunities for blacks. Hogwash! A black college professor friend heads a program offering blacks free college tuition. He has trouble finding applicants. This is a guy who worked his way through college and grad school. He was stunned when students thought having to pay their cell phone bill was a legitimate excuse for not purchasing the book and materials for his course.

Like formerly fat people who continue to see an obese person in the mirror, Democrats have ingrained in blacks that they are victims of an “eternally” racist America; despite glaring evidence proving otherwise.

Sadly, there are a large number of black Americans whose brains are entombed in a victim mindset; impenetrable by the truth. A prime example is the disgusting comments made by a black woman during a TV interview, expressing her support of a black youth. “He didn’t do no wrong. He just shot a cop.” This hateful woman is the equivalent of the KKK justifying killing blacks.

To my sincere black activist friend, I say we replace “Black Lives Matter” with “Tough Love.” Tell blacks to stop blaming whitey, seeking more doomed-to-fail government programs and voting for Democrats. Generations of black dreams have been stolen due to Democrats addicting blacks to government dependency

Today, liberals excuse irresponsible behavior, defending it with fancy intellectual sounding language. My late mom would simply say, “Stop acting stupid.”

Stop acting stupid black America. Stop acting stupid.

Yes, some are worried. But what to do when faced with such intransigence in denying reality? 

Leave a Comment

Is the smoke clearing?

Perhaps the behavior is being noticed in the arguments about important political issues. For example. Kurt Schlichter says Gun Rights Advocates Have A Devastating New Argument Against Gun Control. Here It Is.

The fact is that there is no point in arguing with liberal gun-control advocates because their argument is never in good faith. They slander gun owners as murderers. They lie about their ultimate aim, which is to ban and confiscate all privately owned weapons. And they adopt a pose of reasonability, yet their position is not susceptible to change because of evidence, facts or law. None of those matter – they already have their conclusion. This has to do with power – their power.

You can’t argue with someone who is lying about his position or whose position is not based upon reason. You can talk all day about how crime has diminished where concealed carry is allowed, while it flourishes in Democrat blue cities where gun control is tightest. You can point to statistics showing that law-abiding citizens who carry legally are exponentially less likely to commit gun crimes than other people. You can cite examples of armed citizens protecting themselves and their communities with guns. You can offer government statistics showing how the typical American is at many times greater risk of death from an automobile crash, a fall, or poisoning than from murder by gun.

But none of that matters, because this debate is not about facts. It’s about power. The liberal anti-gun narrative is not aimed at creating the best public policy but at disarming citizens the liberal elite looks down upon – and for whom weapons represent their last-ditch ability to respond to liberal overreach.

In light of this sort of opposition, there is very little one can do as far as any debate goes. That means the argument proceeds to the next level and that is where the situation gets worrisome.-

Leave a Comment

How it’s done: a towfer

Steve Tetreault reports that the New national monument blocks rail route to Yucca.

Besides preserving desert valleys and buffering a massive piece of modern sculpture, a new federal conservation area in rural Nevada carries another impact: It blocks a priority shipping route to Yucca Mountain.

So, first, is the ‘national monument’ route which doesn’t require any Congressional or public approval to implement then you block off a chunk of land to assert power and control for PC purposes and then choose that land so as to obstruct another problem.

Rather than turn Yucca Mountain into a nuclear reprocessing facility and energy resource, the effort is to kill it to cause constipation in the entire nuclear energy sector. That, in turn, makes the non-polluting energy source more expensive and that then helps the PC energy sources become more competitive as well as eliminating a vital resource for those most in need. 

Leave a Comment

Politicizing prosecution

Several cases have surface recently that raise questions about the motivation behind the search for criminal misconduct. Scott Horton describes The Thin Gruel of the Hastert Prosecution — “We should all be concerned about Dennis Hastert’s strange indictment“.

The fundamental problem in the Hastert case is simple: what, exactly, is the crime? As presented, the crime consists of a series of structured withdrawals supposedly designed to avoid a reporting duty, about which Hastert misled federal agents when they questioned him. This is not only extraordinarily thin gruel, it is also ripe for abuse. Keep in mind that the prostitution scandal that was manipulated by a Bush-era prosecutor to end the career of Eliot Spitzer was also triggered by similar bank payment reports.

Another case is described by Armstrong Williams suggesting that a South Dakota ‘voter fraud’ case deserves more attention.

The 43-year-old Sioux Falls physician was accused by State Attorney General Marty Jackley of having committed what is commonly referred to as “voter fraud.” Specifically, she had been indicted for having turned in nominating petitions that include the names of people whose signatures she did not personally witness.

That she did so is not in dispute; how the doctor has been treated very much is. According to ballot access activist Paul Jacob, Mr. Jackley’s “threatened penalty is the most severe any American has ever faced on a petition-related charge,” while “the transgressions alleged against Dr. Bosworth are arguably the least sinister” the activist has ever seen brought to trial.

Then there’s the Oregon case where the allegation is that the prosecution colluded with an LGBT group in going after a $135k discrimination claim. The Orange County disqualification of all of its lawyers in the district attorney’s office in a capital murder case is another problem in this vein.

These prosecutions are only the active half. The other half can be seen in Baltimore, New York, and other places where Police are inhibited in their efforts to tackle crime by political demands. Then there is the judicial front such as in the suit to stop the mainlining illegal immigrants. The war is on many fronts in may different ways.

Leave a Comment

More on the nature of man and the implications of different beliefs

Dennis Prager starts with underlying beliefs about the nature of man in looking at the Differences Between Left and Right: Part I.

Left-of-center doctrines hold that people are basically good. On the other side, conservative doctrines hold that man is born morally flawed — not necessarily born evil, but surely not born good. … To those who argue that we all have goodness within us, two responses: First, no religion or ideology denies that we have goodness within us; the problem is with denying that we have badness within us. Second, it is often very challenging to express that goodness. Human goodness is like gold. It needs to be mined — and like gold mining, mining for our goodness can be very difficult.

This so important to understanding the left-right divide because so many fundamental left-right differences emanate from this divide.

Material poverty doesn’t cause murder, rape or terror. Moral poverty does. That’s one of the great divides between left and right. And it largely emanates from their differing views about whether human nature is innately good.

One of they key understandings in looking at this is that the belief starts at home. The belief that all people are basically good means a belief that the self is intrinsically good as well. That mean’s one motives must be good ones and the impulse to control the behaviors and thoughts of others must also have ‘good’ motivations. That also leads to the idea that ‘since I an basically good then those who don’t agree with me must be bad.’

The striving to overcome one’s own evil tendencies leads to introspection of one’s motivations and to skepticism about one’s conclusions. That is one reason why science and reason has flourished in a Christian environment as science requires taking a close look at reality and weighing one’s observations against a greater whole.

Leave a Comment

The war within and a legacy fifty years on

The Ferguson protesters are getting a bit upset because they have not received promised payments. The history of such a paid army working in such a manner is not new. Scott Johnson introduces Bryan Burrough’s Days of Rage: America’s Radical Underground, the FBI, and the Forgotten Age of Revolutionary Violence.

The book covers the period 1969-1985 in telling the story of six homegrown radical groups that conducted terrorist campaigns against the United States. Their operations in total included thousands of bombings of skyscrapers, federal buildings and businesses from coast to coast. … The operations of the radical groups also included scores of bank robberies and assassinations of police officers. … Did I say mention that the book is exciting? It is of the can’t-put-it-down variety. It features daring jailbreaks and more close escapes than The Fugitive as well as more thrilling car chases than Popeye Doyle’s in The French Connection.

If you’re a boomer, you might remember some of this. Eastwood’s San Francisco cops movies are floating in it. The movies of the seventies take up the themes as a background reality. As is usual with the Left, persistence is a primary tactic and this is seen again in trying to foment race violence and diminution of the police. The hope seems to be that history will be cleansed and not provide any lesson for this generation’s efforts to stem the warfare inside.

Leave a Comment

Minimum wage and all the usual ‘arguments’ behavior

Mark Perry brings in his comments about Don Boudreaux on the ‘manifest idiocy’ of Robert Reich’s minimum wage video. It is a case study on the nature of debate on many of today’s hot button issues.

In a series of posts, George Mason economist Don Boudreaux has done a great public service by conducting a systematic, step-by-step takedown of Reich’s economic asininity, because in Don’s words, “Nearly every sentence out of Reich’s mouth in the video is flawed.” Demonstrating his total “economic bad-assery” in regard to regularly dismantling every aspect of economic nitwitery about the minimum wage, here’s a summary of Don’s takedowns of Reich’s “manifestly idiotic” video:

First to note. Of course, you might think that with the focus on Robert Reich that it was an ad hominem rant. The thing to note, though, is that the commentary is not about the person but rather his behavior, what Reich actually said. It is the assertions and debate points that are ridiculed and not the person.

Add the minimum wage fantasies to a long list supported by a lack of touch with reality and reason.

Leave a Comment

Standards. morality,and ‘poor pitiful me’ attitudes

Derryck Green thinks that What’s Been Allowed to Happen in Baltimore is a Moral and Cultural Abomination and explains why.

where does this kind of damaging mindset of victimization and perpetual grievance come from? Leftism. Leftism in all its forms has done a tremendous disservice to blacks, having poisoned their minds and hearts, leaving them perpetually angry and racially paranoid. Though I still lay the blame on Obama, Holder and company- all Leftists, by the way- all of this anti-social behavior is the culmination of what the Left has done to blacks since the 1960’s. White progressives have made perpetual children of blacks, whose temper tantrums- which continues to be the only way blacks are able to articulate their frustrations- must be endured as proof of a still racist county absolving itself of its past racial sins and other injustices.

And the resentment this creates and nourishes among mainstream America might be too large to overcome.

That black people continue to humiliate themselves like this is disgusting and I’m sick of it. White people are too frightened to tell the truth about bad black behavior for fear of verbal and physical reprisals. Blacks are too afraid to speak out against criminal behavior that lends itself to black stereotypes because of racial empathy and racial solidarity.

But, those blacks that choose not to condemn these lawless actions- largely a product of the black underclass, but increasingly adopted and justified by blacks in the middle class- that sit silently on the sidelines out of fear and/or racial solidarity and empathy are, in my opinion, traitors to their race and their country. Their silence condones this behavior. Their lack of justifiable outrage for unjustifiable black lawlessness in cities across America sends a clear message that the jungle behavior that destroys our nation’s cities is an appropriate way to air one’s grievances, real or imagined. Black silence in the face of vandalism and continuing anarchic riots betrays everything their cultural ancestors achieved. Silent blacks are guilty of undermining the achievements of abolitionists and freed slaves, of undermining blacks who fought against insurmountable odds to prove to former slave owners and other whites who were suspect of black humanity that blacks were every bit as dignified as they were; of damaging the legacy of blacks who successfully fought their way into the American mainstream though legalized discrimination fought back. America isn’t perfect, but black silence is complicit in unnecessarily betraying a country that has given blacks every material benefit and social opportunity their forebears could only dream of.

Blacks will never- never– get ahead, or be taken seriously, as long as we endorse this kind of behavior- our silent complicity telling beleaguered onlookers that this kind of conduct is acceptable and must be endured.

More than $100 million has been put into Sandytown in Baltimore in recent years. It did not show much on terms of results before the current brouhaha and the mobs have proceeded to destroy what little they had. The path is, and has been for a long time, in the direction of destruction and anarchy rather than civil growth and order. As in the DIY homes refurbish and renew shows, the demolition part is easy and can be fun. It is the construction, the design, the repair of flaws, and the finish work that is tough and requires developed skills. It seems that too many cities are continually in the demolition phase and very seldom rise to repair and refurbish of the fundamental and foundational aspects of a functioning city.

Leave a Comment

What you want vs what really is: Vietnam Vets

Successful Dallas financial advisor B.G. Burkett remembers how flummoxed he was by the media’s frequent portrayals of Vietnam-era veterans as “losers, bums, drug addicts, drunks, derelicts—societal offal…with the potential to go berserk at any moment.” His large circle of veteran acquaintances looked and acted nothing like these descriptions, holding down long-term jobs, with houses and children and voting records.

Currently, there are around 21.3 million veterans in the United States, comprising 9% of the adult population. Every year, around 250,000 veterans return to communities across the country, willing and eager not just to reintegrate into civilian society, but, as the Veteran Civic Health Index shows, to strengthen it.

‘Broken’ no more: Military veterans are civic assets, data shows.

The image of Vietnam Veterans is in the same bed as the rest of the fantasies about that war held by the left to rationalize their uncivil behaviors in anti-draft riots. Hard data refutes this fantasy. Again.

Leave a Comment

Integrity loss

No, both sides aren’t the same.

The American left has come to condone and accept untruth as an appropriate way to conduct their affairs. They are abetted by a media that actively covers up their scandals, while exaggerating the faults of their opposition.

A preacher recently observed in a sermon about lying that “accepting the notion that the ends justify the means leads to a climate where lying becomes the norm.” According to sociologist Robert Nisbet, “What sociologists are prone to call social disintegration is really nothing more than the spectacle of a rising number of individuals playing fast and loose with other individuals in relationships of trust and responsibility.” Our culture’s embrace of lying indicates moral breakdown on a profound level, in which people have begun to satisfy their selfish impulses without regard for the consequences inflicted on others.

Kenneth Blackwell: The lying game — “Liberals operate on the notion that the ends justify the means.” We are finding meaning in the old saying “there will be hell to pay.”

Leave a Comment

Thought patrols and oppression supression

“The basis for this was the campaign-finance reform movement, which sees money in politics as a greater evil than a government empowered to shut down political speech. The John Doe law in Wisconsin shows exactly why government intervention in political speech is worse than any corruption it attempts to prevent. The use of force in Wisconsin got applied to one side exclusively, and intended to shut down conservatives before they could exercise their legitimate political power. It’s even more egregious than the IRS targeting of conservatives between 2009-2013, but it’s the same kind of abuse of power, and it leverages the same kind of campaign-finance reform statutes that give government at state and federal levels entrée to control political speech.”

Ed Morrissey on the Wisconsin efforts to silence certain political critics: “I thought it was a home invasion” — and it was

Leave a Comment

Giving away the hard earned prize: Vietnam

It is a favorite meme on the left that is bent to fit its anti-military desires. The problem is that the loss wasn’t military, it was political and the loss sits squarely on their shoulders. Bruce Walker describes When We Lost the Winnable War, why were in it, and the disingenuous opposition.

The whole faux “moral argument” waged by draft-dodgers and communist sympathizers during the 1960s and 1970s against the Vietnam War was wrong. America had a treaty obligation and a moral duty to save South Vietnam and its neighbors from the horrors and poverty of communism. The only real argument that remains is whether we could have “won” this war or not.

As sickening as it seems, craven politicians in Washington and communist sympathizers on American campuses, safe and comfortable in America, bartered away the courage of better Americans who fought and bled in Vietnam and condemned tens of millions of innocents in Southeast Asia to genocide and slavery.

There is, of course, a lesson for us today. The same sort of spoiled and selfish political class in Washington today surrenders the willing sacrifices of all those good Americans who have fought in this, our longest war, so that Obama or his flacks can gain a few polling points or bask for a moment in false glory. We are, today, losing another winnable war.

Of course, for the left, it is American atrocity that matters no matter how small or how isolated. What is forgotten is “The conduct of the war by the communists in South Vietnam was calculated and sadistic terrorism, particularly focusing on threats to members of the family or the local village, who had no political views at all.” The SEATO alliance gets short shrift. The moral outrage was not in trying to defend South Vietnam but in a politically restrained effort that tied the hands of the military and undermined public understanding of the nature of the conflict. The result was that many suffered. It is those that stimulated and promoted that suffering that are preening their moral purity. They did not learn and, it appears, have not yet come to grips with their denial.

Leave a Comment

Adding up the numbers

This is a textbook example of projection, but not the type produced by the Urban Institute or the CBO. The irony is that Krugman’s own lies, combined with the clumsy misrepresentations of math-challenged people like Cohn, have contributed heavily to the skepticism that most Americans feel about Obamacare. Most voters intuitively understand that the numbers don’t add up. Sadly, the same cannot be said about most of the law’s media cheerleaders.

There are those who just can’t handle numbers and then there are those who can but only in ways to support their foregone conclusions. See David Catron: The Right Prescription – Math Is Hard For Obamacarians – The numbers are not their friends.

Leave a Comment

Trafficking in fear

Net neutrality backers traffic in fear. Pushing a suite of suggested interventions, they warn of rapacious cable operators who seek to control online media and other content by “picking winners and losers” on the Internet. They proclaim that regulation is the only way to stave off “fast lanes” that would render your favorite website “invisible” unless it’s one of the corporate-favored. They declare that it will shelter startups, guarantee free expression, and preserve the great, egalitarian “openness” of the Internet.

No decent person, in other words, could be against net neutrality.

In truth, this latest campaign to regulate the Internet is an apt illustration of F.A. Hayek’s famous observation that “the curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design.” Egged on by a bootleggers-and-Baptists coalition of rent-seeking industry groups and corporation-hating progressives (and bolstered by a highly unusual proclamation from the White House), Chairman Wheeler and his staff are attempting to design something they know very little about-not just the sprawling Internet of today, but also the unknowable Internet of tomorrow.

Promoting fear of what might be is a common tactic used in pushing many ideological ideas. You can see it with climate change, with vaccines, with alternative energy, … “alternative” anything, it seems. In this case, it’s the pipeline becoming critical to the masses for communications and entertainment and business. Geoffrey A. Manne & R. Ben Sperry suggest that The biggest threat to the Net isn’t cable companies. It’s government. The politics driving governmental control of the I’net is clear:

Generally speaking, neutrality advocates don’t spend much time in the weeds of boring traffic-flow engineering and network prioritization. What has animated everyone from HBO comedian/anchor John Oliver to millions of irate FCC commenters has been an angry suspicion that somewhere, some rich corporations are on the verge of hijacking the Internet’s architecture to profit themselves while excluding others.

Suspicion. Fear. Envy. And persistence.

One would think that after 10 years of political teeth-gnashing, regulatory rule making, and relentless litigating, there would by now be a strong economic case for net neutrality—a clear record of harmful practices and agreements embodying the types of behavior that only regulation can pre-empt. But there isn’t.

All of this goes along with the certitude and arrogance that substitutes for rationality, intellectual integrity, and actual, solid factual basis in reality of those advocating for governmental control. The pattern of behavior is a first clue about the quality of what is advocated.

Leave a Comment

The chickens will come to roost – but it’s not those of the President’s pastor

Two essays on morals in the country today:

Americans are now at the mercy of a bankrupt society where the crime of sexually assaulting a child is minimized by a judge who measures the “wrongful act” of sodomy against whether or not the offender stalked his victim or felt remorse after murdering a little girl’s soul in the pursuit of sexual satisfaction. Moreover, it’s where, in a game of political tit-for-tat, elected politicians who have already justified murdering 60 million unborn babies are now publicly joking that sometimes fiscal prudence excuses terminating the disabled.

So, sadly, in place of virtuous standards, a viewpoint that reeks of self-serving arrogance is currently in the process of institutionally degrading America’s legal and political systems and systematically progressing to a point where the indefensible is now being defended.

The credibility of moral relativism is shaky, because even for the most ardent relativist there’s always a limit to what principled sensibilities can endure. That’s why every relativist should exercise extreme caution when reacting to the unthinkable, lest a code of ethics be established that even skeptics might be forced to acknowledge.

And as twisted as that may sound to those who subscribe to archaic standards like Biblical doctrine, natural law and universal principles, America is now sliding into further decline because without fear of rebuke, moral equivocators are dismissing despicable behavior and publicly verbalizing vile sentiments. [Moral Relativism and the Normalization of the Indefensible, American Thinker

The other is from Rev. Michael Bresciani.

Apostate churches abound in these last days, but not all have lost their spine. Some of the best known ministries and ministers have sent warning to the Supreme Court justices of the United States that the scriptures attest that same sex marriage and homosexuality are perversions that violate the laws of God, man and nature.

The Bible clearly warns that the practice and promulgation of homosexuality and other perversions will draw God’s disfavor and in time his severe judgement on this and any nation. Those who take their bibles seriously cannot wait until others take them seriously—it will be too late by then.

Regardless of which way these legal battles turn out one thing is clear the only thing real Christians hate about the gays is the fact that more creatures created in the image of God will be cast into an eternal hell.

Concern and sadness about the loss of their lives and futures is something that compassionate believers all share because it is not the will of God that anyone should perish. If it is not God’s will then it is not our will.

“The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.” (2Pet 3: 9) [Pop Culture Trends are not Morality—What Christians Actually Hate will Surprise You]

Perhaps the foundation of this is the matter of false witness. When one is willing to deceive one’s self with a false reality, then anything goes.

Leave a Comment

Maybe the steaming pile is getting a bit more notice?

Naomi Schaefer Riley notes that Facts matter: Left sticks to ‘narratives,’ evidence be damned. There are some indications that this particular observation is becoming a bit more widespread than it used to be. We can hope.

The stimulus on this one is the campus rape epidemic hoax. The reporting still asserts that the claimant was a traumatic rape victim despite a lack of any support for the claim. That doesn’t matter (the reality, that is). What matters is the message. And that isn’t the only item on the list.

But who cares about the facts as long as awareness has been raised? Take the case of Ellen Pao, who filed suit against her former employer, venture capital group Kleiner Perkins, for gender ­discrimination. … Two weeks ago, a jury decided her claims were completely without merit. And yet from the media coverage, you’d think Ellen Pao successfully exposed a Silicon Valley rife with discrimination. … There was no merit to her claims. If Silicon Valley is so filled with sexist pigs acting illegally, perhaps we could find a case where they actually did that.

and another case related only in correlation to the leanings of the ideologues making allegations:

This is not unlike what happened after the Justice Department released its report on the shooting of Michael Brown last summer.

The only “lesson” that could really be drawn from the DOJ report and the grand jury’s non-indictment was that you shouldn’t knock over convenience stores, but if you do and a police officer catches you, it’s probably not a good idea to ­resist arrest.

But that was not the lesson that others wanted to emphasize. Which is why the Ferguson police now have to try to change the composition of their staff and ticketing policies — though they have no bearing on the case at hand.

as to the message?

Actually, yes, it does diminish the importance because it calls into question whether those were real issues at all. … Not everything has to be a teachable moment. And if we do need a moral to every story, it would be useful to find one based on the facts.

That teachable moment is for the other guy since those trying to do the teaching know it all already. The uncomfortable part is that they are trying to teach the masses that that stinking pile is really good eats when anyone with a sense of smell and some level of intellectual integrity can see it for what it really is. Some things are best for fertilizing the fields and buried in the topsoil.

Leave a Comment

Double Down: propagating the propaganda to the bitter end

Two stories illustrate how deep the delusion runs. Clarice Feldman describes how New revelation helps exonerate Scooter Libby and Jack Cashill goes into What Columbia Missed In Its Review of Rolling Stone.

In a book just released, The Story: A Reporter’s Journey, Judith Miller, a key witness in the Libby prosecution, states that Patrick Fitzgerald had offered repeatedly to drop all charges against Lewis Libby if he would “deliver” Vice President Cheney to him.

That’s one victim. The other case attempted to smear a fraternity but the news reporting became a celebrity case itself so a journalism school was tasked to find out what went wrong.

With much ado, Columbia responded. Its 13,000-word report identified problems in “reporting, editing, editorial supervision and fact-checking.” This was all true enough, but Columbia missed the real problem. As I document in my forthcoming book, Scarlet Letters, cases like the Rolling Stone’s have become so common because those perpetrating a given fraud almost inevitably advance causes that the cultural establishment, the Columbia faculty included, wants to see advanced.

In both these cases, political ideology has swept aside truth, reality, and anyone in the way. When that happens, people get sacrificed for the cause. No wonder there have been reports about how the Russians are trying to put Stalin back on a pedestal by rationalizing what he did to so many of their fellow countrymen. It almost seems like the old medical practice of blood letting to cure anemia.

Leave a Comment

A call to account: EPA on climate alarmism

Robert Bradley Jr: Dear Gina (and Jerry): Where’s the Climate Science Behind Your Plan (Carbon Tax)?. – An exchange between Senator Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) and Gina McCarthy (U.S. EPA), March 4, 2015 raised the question. It appears that the Congressional Committee wants hard answers supported by proper citation rather than evasion or hand waving.

During the March 4, 2015, Committee on Environment and Public Works hearing on the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Fiscal Year 2016 budget, several important questions regarding current climate science and data were raised. Although questions regarding the impacts of climate change were clear and straightforward, none of the questions received direct answers, and many responses contained caveats and conditions.

We write today to emphasize that these questions were not posed lightly or in passing. In fact, questions related to whether projected climate impacts are actually occurring are critical to verifying EPA’s commitment to the best science and data, especially as the agency proposes costly carbon dioxide emissions reductions throughout the United States. Stated differently, given that the Administration’s proposal to fundamentally change the nature of domestic electricity generation is based on the apparent need to avoid “devastating” climate impacts to the United States and the planet, it is imperative that the agency be candid and forthright in assessing the reality of this projection.

EPA must demonstrate its commitment to sound science and data by providing prompt and thorough responses to questions from Congress.

The problem, of course, is that business of “providing prompt and thorough responses to questions from Congress” as the current administration seems to hold contempt of Congress as a higher honor than openness or integrity.

Leave a Comment