Monday, December 31, 2012

Are we tacitly admitting Obama is an unstoppable force?

Fiscal stagnation, political stalemate, no compromise in sight the headlines read! The President advises the usual suspects are at fault, the rich not wanting to pay their fair share; the perceived fat cat industrialists and financiers profiting on the backs of the working class ( save for, the Democrat fat cat industrialists and financiers that is), those uncompromising Republicans! But, nary a word of those on the government payroll or dole taking less, spending less on behave of their in place subsides and entitlements; reducing our bloated government ranks to that same end; curtailing our government regulations and taxation that is stifling our economic progress; get more of our overly dependent citizens paying their fair share; stimulate more jobs in the private sector... no, nary a word! The hue and cry from this administration,"tax more, spend more!" What financial cliff, it's the highway to socialism's nirvana! If there ever was a president that we the people empowered to fulfill his perceived destiny of transforming this United States of America to a socialist state, it is President Barack Hussain Obama. Just look at what we have created, he talks down to us in a condescending authoritative tone, treating us like the sheep we have demonstrated to be! No I don't feel I'm being disrespectful to my country in being disrespectful to it's president, not when that president has desecrated my revered country in his avowed commitment to fundamentally change it's constitutional concepts of life, liberty and freedom! I keep repeating myself, but why can't we get it through our thick skulls that President Obama won't agree to any serious cuts in spending, any reductions in entitlements or ever consider any meaningful compromises to mitigate their financial impact-, it's contrary to his ideology! So get on with it, muster up our resolve, stick to our principals, appraise our situation intelligently and devise a plan that best serves American, the American people for the long haul. But please, you supposed leaders of ours, tell us precisely and with conviction what that plan is, so that we can all be on the same page! Again, we do have a plan don't we? Please don't tell us we must look solely to the conservative media to glean purpose and direction for political guidance! Who is our politician spokesmen, articulating our plan, garnering our support, our obvious and dedicated Obama counterpart! I say again, we are in desperate need of something, someone to rally around this 2013.

A horrible backdrop of things to come: Always remember the fate of the city from whence he came, the political culture of his formative years, the "Shining City by the Lake" Chicago!  Chicago with the highest murder rate in the country, one of the worst school systems, state pension fund $78 billion in dept. Sales Tax 10.25%, burgeoning welfare dependents! Chicago, in a state run from top to bottom through the city's administration by liberal, socialist leaning Democrats. Their worst dilemma not a Republican in sight,or was there ever,to blame these woes on!  

Sunday, December 30, 2012

Same ole, same ole this near 2013

I say again we've learned nothing from those once bastions of european democracy mired in the dogma of socialism, the likes of  Greece, France, Great Britain, all floundering in insolvency; dictated to by a burgeoning welfare state perpetuating, through the ballot box ineffectual government to assure it's maintenance! It's immigrants no longer seeking refuge from political and religious oppression; aspiring for freedom and opportunity, but rather the gain of welfare benefits and entitlements. And we, the leaders of the free world tracking along, trading our economic strength, our security for perceived needed reform of the world's most envied standard of living, liberties and freedoms! What are we thinking!

I keep hearing, ad nauseam:..... " You Conservatives just don't know how to get your message across to the electorate.Your politicians  simply can't articulate the dire straights our country is in that will resonates with the populous.You cite statistics, historical data, and precedence framed in what you perceive as blatant liberal Democrat demagoguery. Don't you understand It's the social issues they want addressed; leaders they want, who will expeditiously put those issues into play....." I'll give you that my naysayer Republican brethren, but only in your understanding that the major problems our country is facing are not those of social reform but rather of a national crises-, those issues of: insolvency, unemployment, a faltering economy, the threat of crippling inflation, to say nothing of pending international chaos! Sure, gay rights, abortions, tax inequities, immigration law, welfare reform and a host of other social itches, all deserve a scratch in the scheme of our democratic morals . But, understand if all of those social issues were to be resolved in one fell swoop our country would still be facing those catastrophic unresolved national dilemmas. We have been manipulated into taking our eye off the ball by clever and devious politicians. As said here before we fiddle while America burns! The selfless patriotic American of yesterday has been significantly supplanted by the selfish, self-serving American-, we are the "iAmericans" of the 21st century, as well as those would be immigrant citizens of illegal status!! Wouldn't our forefathers be proud! 

Where are those irate pre-election conservative politicians? What, you stubbed your toe, and are just going to go away and sulk! Where is the strength in your convictions; who are our champions ready and willing to pick up our fallen banner, our tattered Constitution and fight on! Where are our young lions? I would like to see a pride of them form a coalition of outspoken conservative thinkers to meet this President and his administration at every level of their liberal/socialistic agenda! Where are you, who are you? Why can't the GOP, our Conservatives' current standing party of record, identify and anoint them accordingly!  And don't tell me McConnell and Boehner as our ranking Republican office holders are going to lead us out of this quagmire. We need some one of Lincolnesque stature and presence to take the helm; someone who is highly visible, motivated, and engaged in the preservation of all things once held near and dear to we Americans-, not a posturing politically correct operative, who comes out of the woodwork every four years, and certainly not a watered down so called Independent! I for one wish Romney would have stayed on at the very least to lead and organize the Republican party's conservative faction in some ex officio capacity, to stay the course, to remain engaged. We want our country back, who is going to lead us in doing it-, anyone? Why is it that we fail to comprehend this President and his administration's ideology supersedes our national interest, they do not buy into our free enterprise system, our unalienable rights for life liberty and the pursuit of happiness unencumbered by an oppressive all regulating government; they are committed socialist's bent on spending and taxing us into submission!

Thursday, December 27, 2012

Déjà Vu All Over Again

Judging by your response to my Sandy Hook Blogs, you out there in the Bloggosphere are both incensed and confused! Let me give those of you, less firearm's oriented, a crash course in munitions. Not that I'm an expert mind you, but had grown up with hunters and practiced marksmen, and am one myself. And of course entwined in my familiar anti-current administration, anti-liberal, anti politically correct, anti-socialism rhetoric

With Obama following Rahm Emanuel’s rule of never letting a “serious crisis go to waste” he has announced that he will use “all the power of his office” to institute laws to prevent the Newtown horror from ever happening again.  Cue the anti-gun opportunists.  Less than four days after the tragedy we have had Dianne Feinstein, Chuck Shumer, Carolyn McCarthy, Andrew Cuomo, Mayor Bloomberg and a cast of thousands of mindless politicians, talking head newscasters, and assorted second amendment bashers lining up for their turn at proposing completely preposterous, ineffectual, ridiculous “solutions” to keeping firearms out of the hands of the mentally deficient.  Bravo.  If I hear one more of these sheep refer to an “assault weapon” as a “machine gun”, use “clip” instead of  “magazine”, “automatic” in place of “semi-automatic” or start ranting on about such nonsense as “cop killer bullets”, “microstamping”, or the necessity of “allowing” the public to possess “military style” firearms, my head is going to explode.  So many sheep and so little time.  Where do I start?  

Let’s start with the most preposterous:  a rifle is a rifle, boys and girls.  Whether it is painted black, has a flash hider, a bayonet lug, a collapsable stock, a picatinny rail, a laser site, a magazine forward of the pistol style grip, it’s all lipstick on a pig.  All these politicians have their knickers in a twist over esthetics without a consideration to statistics. I am yet to hear that a 7-Eleven was effectively knocked over because the assailant’s rifle had a bayonet lug and a flash hider.  Fact of the matter is: rifles are used in only 2.78% of all murders.  And that’s all rifles, with so- called assault weapons an even smaller percentage of that (the FBI does not make a distinction, but makes note of their rarity).  More people are murdered by knives (13.21%) and just hands and feet (6.6%), yet I haven’t seen a call by our astute leaders to ban cutlery or human extremities. Rifles are just too cumbersome, the barrels are too long, they are difficult to conceal, and there are far more effective options if your intent is murderous mayhem.  

So what’s the big deal with “assault weapons”?  They make for good press, that’s what.  They are lethally attractive, threatening in appearance, conjuring up images of SWAT teams, drug cartels and military action.  They are prominently featured in video games where their picatinny rails support all sorts of flashlights, laser sites, holographic sites, scopes and assorted bling to add to their lethal appearance.  But under all that hardware is a good old-fashioned semi-automatic rifle.  Pull the trigger, it fires one shot.  No bursts, no continuous fire.  One shot.  It is not a machine gun, stupid. Granted, the magazine can make the difference here.  With many states having existing magazine restrictions, especially in the red states, the big 30 round banana shaped mags are more of a rarity, and even 20 rounders are scarce for purchase in the northeast.  But there is still a boatload of them out there, readily available to the criminal element.  10 rounds is more the norm on new purchases, consistent with many handguns, but anyone reasonably proficient can change out a magazine in less than 2 seconds.  Kinda like Bloomberg’s ban on Big Gulps…..just buy two 16 ounce cups and voila!, you have high capacity.  Duh. Unfortunately, assault rifles also appear to be the weapon of choice for deranged rampage style killers.  Probably because these nitwits all have the same thing in common:  they are gamers, learning their trade at the controls of a Playstation or an X-Box.  They seek drama, and what’s cooler than an assault weapon? Hollywood showed them that.  They want to kill as many people as possible and a big old magazine or better yet a bunch of magazines will do the trick.  They always pick soft targets, you know the ones where you’re least likely to encounter resistance and find the largest number of unsuspecting victims.  Like those “gun free” zones.  And you want to get maximum press, your 15 minutes of fame.  Rack up a large body count and the media will glorify your killing spree all month, maybe even get you a cover on People magazine.  And lastly, as soon as you encounter resistance, off yourself.  It’s almost like there’s some kind of rampage killer handbook.  Oh yeah, there is:  NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, MSNBC, New York Times, and yes…the entire internet.  Keep it up, right now there’s another disenfranchised nut-case out there taking notes.

And why can’t I have such a rifle? Muzzle loaders were replaced by bolt action rifles firing cartridges.  Bolt actions were replaced by semi-automatics. Even in National Match competition for high power rifles, the venerable action of the M1 Garand (and subsequently the M14: same action with a detachable magazine) has been replaced by the AR style platform.  And why wouldn’t it?  The AR (designation for the designer, Armalite, not the political term “assault rifle”) platform has been around for over 40 years, has become the standard for American military style rifles and has become refined in both function and accuracy.  As the M1 Garand took the place of the bolt action Springfield in match competition, why wouldn’t the AR replace the Garand as the technology creeps into the shooting sports as well?  But why do I need an assault weapon?  Why do I need a Ferrari, a Lamborghini, an Aston Martin, a Corvette, or a Porsche?  If the speed limit is 65 miles per hour, a speed limit established by our government for the purpose of safety, why do I need a vehicle that goes nearly 200 miles per hour?  Certainly that serves no purpose, and is inherently unsafe to both the driver and the public at large.  After all, 40000 people are killed each year in car accidents , making the automobile the most dangerous consumer product in the world.  People should just be restricted to driving a 1932 Ford Victoria.  After all, it is slower, serves the same purpose and is inherently safer.  A Ferrari belongs only in the hands of a professional race car driver, doesn’t it? Well, think of an assault weapon as a Ferrari, a race car.  It is efficient, it is accurate, it is available in a multitude of cartridges, it is safe in the hands of a skilled user, it is lightweight, it has a tolerable recoil and it is versatile for both hunting, especially varmint hunting, and target practice.  Why wouldn’t a sportsman select a weapon that reflects the best that technology has to offer?  And also bear in mind that not all of us are sitting in a Starbucks this morning sipping a latte, reading the New York Times and contemplating whether we should take the Beamer or the Prius to the symphony tonight.  Some of us hunt, some of us target shoot, some of us are shooting skeet, and some of us need to keep the coyote population in check.  A gun is a  tool for sporting purposes as well as a tool tailored to the needs of where we live. 

But what about those high capacity magazines?  Why do you need one of those?  Sportsmen don’t purchase high capacity magazines for the purpose of obliterating game with multiple shots, although some varmints are the exception.  The purpose of most hunting is actually to preserve the condition of the game for consumption.  And if you intend to take a trophy, you lose style points if it is filled with holes. A high capacity magazine is a convenience for the range.  When you go skiing, you don’t necessarily enjoy riding the lift.  When you play golf, you don’t enjoy riding the golf cart to the next tee.  When you play tennis, you don’t enjoy picking up the balls between points.  You actually want to play the sport.  Similarly, when at the range, you want to maximize your time shooting, not reloading your magazine.  To get proficient at your sport, you want to practice the actual sport, not the grunt task of reloading a magazine with a nice tight spring.  Like it or not liberals, PETA members, and democrats:  hunting is a sport and target shooting is a skill, whether you choose to practice it or not.  I personally think golf is ridiculous, but I do not denigrate it because I don’t play, nor to I profess to know anything about the skill required to play it.  So back off about something that you don’t know anything about, and stop pretending to be an expert when it is apparent that you haven’t a clue on the subject. It’s like a vegetarian lecturing me on the evils of eating steak.  Shut up.

And you have to love the cast of simpletons out there picketing in front of the NRA headquarters with such signs, obviously fostered by genius, like : the “NRA is killing our children”.  You can’t be serious.  With Occupy Wall Street closing up shop, you mental midgets have nothing else to do?  Please.  Protesting against the NRA for gun violence is like picketing Triple A for car accidents.  You liberals just love to spout off with your pre-conceived notions about the NRA, the Tea Party, or Fox News without actually knowing anything about them, or worse, basing your opinions on what other liberals have said about them.  The one thing that mass murderers and liberals all have in common is that neither of them is a member of the NRA. It’s like blaming high cholesterol on the dairy lobby or The American Medical Association for malpractice.  They have a subject relationship, but no responsibility for the individual.  One is disconnected from the other, and largely ignorant of the other’s perspective. Now, the NRA tone is admittedly strident in defending the second amendment and promoting the shooting sports. It is well organized and is an effective political force.  But the NRA is also more effective in promoting gun safety than any liberal politician could ever dream of being, taking into account the hundreds of ill-enforced, and phenomenally ineffective gun laws currently on the books.   The NRA is pure and simple the mouthpiece for the law-abiding gun owner.  Do any of you liberals actually think that the NRA promotes gun violence?  When was the last time you heard:  In related news, it was found that the robbers of the First National Bank were all NRA members? Punishing the law-abiding for the actions of the criminal element is completely nonsensical. Like the Tea Party, the NRA  appears to be a cross section of America, mostly males (although the female membership appears to be growing steadily) , majority white, veterans, hunters, and marksmen who enjoy the shooting sports and have a propensity for conservative ideals.  One doesn’t join the NRA for the latest tips on how to knock over a liquor store.  In fact the latest issue of American Rifleman, the official NRA publication, contained two pages of politically oriented editorials, and an analysis of what gun owners can expect from the next four years under Obama rule, but the remainder of the magazine featured an article reviewing a new handgun offering, an historical article on the US Marines, an article on holsters, an article on a hunting cartridge and an article on how to properly fit your shotgun for hunting, as well as scattered reports on training, state associations, firearm identification, values and gun shows.  Hardly seditious stuff.  And if you are seeking training in how to properly use your firearm don’t you go to the firearm experts?  More shooters have been trained by NRA certified instructors than anyone else outside the military, and most likely many military and police officers received training from the NRA. 

So when the NRA stated the obvious in their press conference: that schools should be protected by armed security and that our culture of violence in movies, video games, television, and rap music is contributing to this epic wave of moral turpitude, why did the liberal press go absolutely apoplectic? Because the NRA is an easy scapegoat for the simpletons. NRA membership makes up 1.14% of the US population, and with 300 million firearms in the hands of US citizens it is a good bet that the NRA doesn’t represent anywhere close to the majority of gun “owners”.  It can’t possibly be our fault that we’ve become a godless, entitlement driven, porn watching, morally skewed, violent, bunch of primitives. Witness the Christmas Eve shooting in Webster, New York.  What have we come to? Have you watched television recently?  Tune into the Kardashians for a couple of episodes and ask yourself that question again.  Americans are embarrassing.  And not in the tacky dressing, camera toting way that used to unnerve Parisians.  At least in those days we had gravitas.  We had brawn.  We worked harder than everyone else, we produced more, and we carried a big stick.  We were cowboys.  Now we are an apologizing, sniveling bunch of whiners, pointing fingers at everyone else for our misfortunes and commanding zero respect on the world stage.  And we are being led by a President with an open hatred for our way of life, seeking higher levels of entitlements on the backs of the productive, willing to cede our place in the world to the United Nations with their pitifully corrupt third world despots. And why wouldn’t we want to protect our most precious cargo, our children?  We protect banks with armed guards, we protect our money with armored cars and phalanxes of security personnel and we protect politicians and celebrities with small armies of armed bodyguards.  We walk through metal detectors and get patted down at sporting events, concerts, the airport and in public buildings without protest.  And yet isn’t it laughable that money, celebrity and politicians are, based on their level of security, more important to us than our children, so much so that the media pillories the NRA for suggesting a change in priorities.  Pitiful.

So go ahead, ban assault weapons, ban firearms, ban them all and sentence America to a wave of violence and crime unseen in history.  Sentence an entire generation to joblessness, perpetuated by a government that favors power over the people, that places entitlement over accomplishment, favoring redistribution and Keynesian economics, the same policies that have doomed Europe to mediocrity, only to have us follow as some sort of sad historical footnote.  Make the political class the new aristocracy with their lavish entitlements on the backs of the taxpayer under the guise of leveling the playing field and making us all equal not just in opportunity, but in wealth, regardless of effort or success.  To hell with the Constitution. Let them eat cake. We are a special country, a special people.  We have unique demographics and unique geography.  We are not Europe, nor do we care to be.  It is time to rethink our future, redefine “progress” and restore America to her place in the world with our Constitution as our guide.  A mindless, short sighted excision of the Second Amendment from our Constitution is not the place to start.

Monday, December 24, 2012

Do I hear the fat lady singing?

Are any officials in this administration ever responsible for mismanagement, for blunders, for errors in judgement? Is it always the fault of their distant underlings, mitigating circumstances, or their predecessors? Ever since the advent of this President, the master of deniability, the artful dodger, has this deflection become so prevalent. For instance he laid the Fast and Furious gun debacle on the Justice Dept. , the Attorney General in-turn passes the blame down the line to the next plausible suspect; he identified the State Dept. as being at fault in the Libyan Consulate incident, after suggesting at great length it was rightly precipitated by an insult to Mohammed, the Secretary of State cites other agencies as culpable. This pass-the-buck ploy has gone on through out his administration's tenure. No official of significant stature is ever held accountable, and if by chance is so tarnished in association with a disaster and forced to resign his or her post-, is left to carry on elsewhere in the regime. Insidious!

P.S. And as the machinations of this election past are reveled, our loss becomes more painful. It wasn't because Romney lost the Independents, thought to be the lynch pin in favorably securing the election, because come to find out he didn't. And it wasn't because Obama captured the full measure of his base as he did; that was a given, a conceded point from the get go. What essentially caused our defeat was: a) Romney's base, our base, did not get out the vote anticipated, the Republican vote advised by the mid-term elections and McCain's turn-out in '08; and b) the unaligned, the uninformed the unidentifiable and consequently untargeted, less than10% of the electorate, did us in! Those citizens among us, who vote, but are uninformed of the issues at stake and/or don't care, saw President Obama as above the fray, an outsider like themselves and voted accordingly. Don't take my word for it, read one of your own house organs, Time magazine. In designating President Obama "Man of the Year", Time advised his garnering of this fugitive uninformed segment of the electorate was the reason for their selection; Obama's ascension to a second term! A case of a minuscule, undetected minority dictating the outcome of the election, the fate of our nation! A minority we could have easily overcome if we just got the support from our own base! Now in the aftermath we can only fault our selves. We were on the brink of a decisive win and blew it! And yes, it was equally apparent, it would have helped if we better excite our base in moving more to our conservative right in our rhetoric, more Tea Party like in our demonstrations and commitments, more vitriolic in sounding the alarm that our country is going down the tubes! We had the potential votes, at least for the moment; we had candidates of merit to lead us. What we didn't have when push came to shove was the actual votes from our own less-than-faithful party. They simply did not show up! Shame on us. If we don't get our collective selves together and soon, my fellow Americans, my fellow patriots, I can hear the fat lady cueing up in the wings for our swan song!

To lend to my further angst: John Kerry as Secretary of State! What, he didn't do enough damage as the Senator from Massachusetts, to his state, to his country, that we are going to let him try his hand at what he can do to the United States on the international stage? I keep telling myself, try though they may, I will not let these people ruin my Christmas!!

Thursday, December 20, 2012

Coming Attractions

Michigan joins 23 other states in passing a so called right to work Law and predictably the union thugs took to the streets! Know I'm not against labor laws that defends workers from unscrupulous employers, however I am against unions that create a fiefdom of dictatorial control, nepotism, deceit and political manipulation to gain unjust rewards. Unions have been gasping for air in recent years in the private sector while thriving in the public sector. Why do you suppose that is? Politics plain and simple. An unholy alliance if their ever was one; a tolerated conflict of interest that has benefited government employees inordinately over those of their private sector brethren. Unions, as are Robber Barons, a thing of the past. Labor laws now prohibit misconduct in the employee/employer relationship. Unions have abused their originally intended purpose, that of giving their members solidarity in approaching their employers for fair compensation and treatment for their contribution to the enterprise's success! Today's unions, most of them that is, have an agenda that seeks far more than fair compensation and treatment from the employee's employer, they demand compensation for their political preferences, and biases, their managerial excesses through coercion. These right to work laws strike right at the heart of that union control by giving the employee the right not to join the union. So gird your loins people, it's us against them. If you think the union leaders are more willing to give up their exsorbinate salaries, benefit packages, than those on welfare and other recipients of government entitlements of one kind or another you've got another thing coming! It's going to be a hot time in the ole US of A come summer 2013!

Tuesday, December 18, 2012

Sandy Hook Reprise

More than a bit long winded here, but to those who took exception to my blog of yesterday "Sandy Hook and the UASS" - here is a more detailed and studied insight into the aftermath of this tragedy. And know, I am not a NRA shill.

Okay, everyone take a deep breath.  The tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut was absolutely horrific and my heart breaks for the parents that suffered what is an immeasurable loss.  But in the aftermath, let’s not get sucked into the media feeding frenzy where the talking heads are competing with the grandstanding politicians for airtime to further their own agendas.  Let’s actually sit back and analyze where the system failed us, and how we could have prevented this tragedy rather than participate in the predictable, simplistic and preposterously illogical knee jerk liberal response that we know is forthcoming.  Within minutes of the breaking news of yet another inexplicable mass shooting Carolyn McCarthy was firmly planted on her soapbox, characteristically shrill in proposing bans of everything from squirt guns to slingshots whilst Mayor Bloomberg was off on a yet another rant about circumventing human nature by removing any potentially harmful inanimate object from the face of the earth.  As usual, damn the facts and to hell with the statistics because government knows best.  The simpletons continue to strap on the blinders, mistake ignorance for perspective and preach that the elimination of the instrument of death will cure the lust for taking a life that resides within the beast.  As if removing guns will prevent murder. Removing automobiles will prevent car accidents.  Removing alcohol will prevent drunk driving.  Removing cigarettes will prevent lung cancer.  Removing drugs will prevent addiction.  Or perhaps removing politicians will prevent stupidity.  After all, prohibition went so well and the war on drugs has been such a roaring success. But I digress.  The system failed us on multiple fronts and more gun control laws will not correct it.  The problem here is people.  People are flawed.  People do stupid, incomprehensible things.  Take Congress, for example.  Progressively whittling away our freedoms by imposing more laws, regulations, bans and instituting a police state is a cure far worse than the disease. As I see it, Connecticut is not even remotely close to being a gun owner’s paradise with its highly restrictive gun laws, onerous penalties for illegal possession and requirements for a permit. It is unlikely, however, that our mentally skewed perpetrator was at all concerned with any of Connecticut’s restrictive gun laws, the most laughable of which being the feel good measure of declaring an elementary school a “gun free zone”.  Oooooooh, there’s a deterrent.  The initial breakdown in this case was simply a matter of access.  The fact remains that the dear departed Mrs. Lanza legally owned this small collection of firearms.  Why she owned them is immaterial and the talking heads should just shut up about a subject that they clearly know nothing about.  One female pundit droned on about the Bushmaster .223 rifle that “only belongs in a war zone”. That may play well with the Starbucks liberals, but to those of us who actually know something about firearms, you sound like an idiot.  Shut up.  With great power, comes great responsibility, and it is here that she failed us.  Although Mrs. Lanza legally purchased these firearms (a Glock 20 10mm, a Sig-Sauer 226 9mm and the Bushmaster .223) she certainly did not demonstrate responsibility in securing them or the ammunition.  Knowing that her son was a full basket short of a picnic, it was her societal obligation to see to it that the firearms were either under lock and key or on her person. In that respect, she was irresponsible in the extreme and her failure cost her dearly.  And how is the government to react to that?  A total ban on firearms based on a mother’s indiscretion? Do we need the nanny state to conduct home inspections to see to it that firearms are secured properly?  We already have laws in some states that require purchase of a trigger lock with the purchase of a handgun.  Do we also need to require purchase of a gun safe and if so, how do we ensure the purchaser uses either one?  Do we extend the law that prevents those deemed mentally “defective” to own a firearm to entire households in which a mentally “defective” may reside?  How defective is defective and who decides that?  Do we need this level of government intrusion to make up for a lack of common sense? Hmm, maybe we need another government agency.  Another Czar perhaps.  

The second failure is the school itself.  With physical security measures in place it was apparent that they were not sufficient to discourage an individual intent on mayhem.  Where is a glass partition an effective barrier to such a single-minded assailant?  Perhaps a gatekeeper should be in place that is specifically trained or is actually some sort of security personnel.  A middle-aged office secretary or a filing clerk is not exactly suited for this level of responsibility. Now I’m not suggesting that we need another level of government bureaucracy, nor do I propose that teachers start packing heat, but the school district may consider hiring security in the form of a plainclothes officer of sorts.  The airlines did it with air marshals, why can’t we affordably do it in our schools?  I know, I know, more expenditures.  But short of educating our children inside fortresses, I see no other easy fix if this is to become the new normal.  Otherwise, our schools remain, in military parlance, soft targets.  And with new evidence suggesting that Mrs. Lanza had no relationship with the school, not taking into account some grudge the assailant may have had against said school, it appears that this is just that, a soft target.

And although all the details haven’t completely emerged on the mental status of our perpetrator, I suspect that anyone capable of this sort of thing is not of sound mind.  His brother indicated as much when he himself was mistakenly accused, and some reports have leaked from teachers that this kid wasn’t right.  But where were our mental health professionals?  Granted, the government has once again hobbled the medical profession’s ability to effectively communicate with the introduction of HIPAA, thanks largely to the efforts of Hillary Clinton’s pandering to the HIV infected gay community, a piece of legislation that makes the failure to identify the mentally defective in our society an unfortunate by product of a patient’s right to privacy.  But in light of the most recent mass murders, Aurora, Columbine, Virginia Tech and now Newtown, a more vigilant mental health community may be in order with enhanced abilities to identify and track these beasts among us.

But the gun control advocates will drone on, using Europe, their current model for fiscal responsibility as their model for gun control.  Why is it, they ask, that the US has the highest rate of gun violence amongst developed nations?  Why is it that the US is ranked 12th in the world for gun violence (9 deaths per 100K) as compared to the United Kingdom who is ranked 65th (0.25 deaths per 100K)?  Cue the liberals: It must be due to England’s total ban on guns.  If that is the case, then why does Mexico, with a similar ban on all firearms rank #9 with 11.4 deaths per 100 thousand?  If you follow the US government’s flawed and apparently fabricated logic, then it is Mexico’s unfortunate proximity to the US that is at fault, after all didn’t “Fast and Furious” prove that Mexico’s gun source is the US?  Oops, never mind.  But if that is really the truth, then how do you explain our neighbor to the north, Canada?  They rank 18th with 4.78 deaths per 100 thousand.  And if the US is 12th, then who ranks in the top three?  Answer:  El Salvador, Jamaica, Honduras in that order with El Salvador at a whopping 50 deaths per 100 thousand.   Interestingly, South and Central America are disproportionately represented with 12 of the top 25 spots, and 8 of the top ten. Could it actually be demographics or culture that is responsible for gun violence?  What is the actual make-up of the populations of countries with high versus low gun violence?  Peculiarly it would initially appear that homogeneous populations demonstrate lower rates of gun violence.  The UK at #65 and Germany at #51 have populations that are overwhelmingly European white at 86% and 88% respectively versus the US at 72.4%.  Japan, the poster child for ethnic homogeneity, has a population that is 98.5% Japanese and ranks 73rd in gun violence with a miniscule .07 per 100 thousand.  But that fails to explain the wildly high rate of gun violence in Central and South America, countries that are fairly homogeneous in their ethnicity, and their overrepresentation in the top ten.  Could it be culture alone, where America’s proximity to Central America’s Latin population, and with a 16.4% Hispanic population of her own, is skewing the statistics?  Is it coincidental that these countries are associated with high rates of drug trafficking? And what about population in terms of numbers.  We have 350 million people as compared to the UK at 65 million, and Germany at 81 million inhabitants.  But we are a large land mass, with violence tending to be located in the proximity of major metropolitan areas.  What Germany does not have is the sea of population density we have in the northeast corridor, the rust belt and California with such highlights as New York City, LA, Washington DC, Chicago and Detroit where, despite draconian gun laws, gun violence is extraordinarily high. But population density alone fails to explain why the extraordinarily dense populations found in Asia such as Japan, Singapore and Hong Kong have such a low incidence of gun violence.  And to further complicate matters, we can divide gun violence into two categories: the type of crime related gun violence with well-established motive, be it robbery, drugs or turf wars and then this psychopathic mass murder rampage, statistically lower in incidence, but where the motives are less clear.  The psychopathic carnage seems to reach across cultural divides, having been found this century in Scotland, Finland, England, Russia, China, Africa and Germany, to name a few, with the vast majority of the school shooters committing suicide.  The US is well represented, but again, with 350 million people, you would expect as much, if not more.  Despite our best efforts, as with terrorism, it remains extraordinarily difficult to keep the weapon of destruction out of the hands of an assailant intent on mayhem with no regard for his own well-being.  Indeed, “the price of freedom is eternal vigilance”.  (Thomas Jefferson)

Banning assault weapons, an exercise in esthetics alone, and a ban on large capacity magazines remain popular with the democrats but are largely ineffective beyond  feel good measures to make it appear that they are doing something.  In fact, assault weapons are difficult to conceal and mostly appear to be the weapon of choice for the rampage style assailant intent on video game style carnage.  They remain statistically insignificant in their use in crime overall and if banned, their firepower can be had with similar caliber weapons, albeit with lesser volume magazines.  Recall that the assault weapon used here was a .223, a round originally designed for varmint control, but was adopted by the military due to it’s smaller size, enabling the soldier to tote more rounds and experience a lesser recoil.  Our standard issue .30-06 in World War Two by comparison was a much more imposing projectile. The concern by the law-abiding gun owner is that once an assault weapons ban proves useless, the government will proceed with more restrictive bans in the name of public safety.  What started as a ban on military style arms in the UK, progressed to pistols, rifles, shotguns and finally air guns in that order.  The NRA likes to refer to it as “the camel’s nose under the tent”, and they have global historical precedent to back that assertion. But disarming the law-abiding has proven to be a bonanza only for the lawless.  England’s crimes involving a firearm shot up 400% after the gun ban was imposed, immediately turning the populace into………..yes, soft targets.  Although statistics are contested in the US, it appears that states with higher rates of concealed carry have lower incidents of crime, an effect that may be explained by author Robert Heinlein that “an armed society is a polite society”.  The popular quote that “God created man and Samuel Colt made them equal” should resonate with women who, when faced with a physically imposing, and most likely male assailant, can instantaneously level the playing field. Do we really prefer to cower in fear waiting for that 911 call to produce a police force that the Supreme Court has already ruled has no obligation to protect the citizenry? Ask LA’s Korean shop owners during the Rodney King riots how that worked out for them.

But recall that the Second Amendment is not in place for our own personal protection from our fellow man, rather to protect the people from government tyranny.  And as the world spins out of control with governments asserting their authority over their subjects, missiles tested in the sea of Japan while the North Korean people starve, Syria in the midst of civil war under a regime with stockpiles of sarin gas, an Iranian government intent on nuclear ambitions, or the recent vote by the International Telecommunications Union (where 193 UN member countries approved a treaty to allow government) to restrict access to the internet, is there any better time to applaud the wisdom of the Second Amendment?  As George Mason said in 1788: “To disarm the people….was the best and most effectual way to enslave them”  Smart men those Founding Fathers.  “When the people fear the government there is tyranny, when the government fears the people, there is liberty”  (Thomas Jefferson).  Take note.

But what is it about these recent twenty-somethings that when unhinged, find it necessary to commit mass murder?  Why is this becoming accepted as a product of our times, when this sort of thing was virtually unheard of a few of decades ago?  Mr. Swift recalls growing up with a loaded rifle at the back door for critter control, never once considering picking it up after a stern warning by parents.  Why, with firearms so prevalent in the post-war years, didn’t we hear of our youth rampaging through Woolworth’s with a wanton disregard for life?  With so much emphasis on gun ownership as a social stigma by the left why are we seeing so much gun violence, particularly in those blue states where gun control is so stringent? Could it be that the baby boomer generation, arguably the worst generation of parents that America has produced, a self-absorbed generation of over achievers with a 50% rate of divorce, has produced a generation of children, a higher percentage of which is without direction, without a moral compass?  These kids are only now coming of age, raised in day care, shuttled between disgruntled parents, pampered to the extreme, and rarely told “no” as that would interfere with the little “quality time” that their parents have substituted for quantity of time.  Plopped in front of the television and fed a steady diet of violence, sex and video games where points are awarded for jacking cars, shooting prostitutes, or graphically disemboweling your enemy, are we breeding a generation susceptible to sociopathology?  It’s all about me, my facebook page, my tweets, my music, my gaming, all my exaggerated accomplishments, in a world skewed to expect reward for just showing up.  After all, everyone gets a trophy. And government is not helping.  A steady diet from the left about the evil rich having taken what is rightfully yours, you not having worked for any of it notwithstanding, and the vilifying of the successful, the 1% for not paying their fair share, your fair share. Witness the vitriolic, personal attacks from the left on conservative candidates and the steady stream of vile ideologue-driven distaste for the tea party, a group of conservatives who as far as I can see appears to be a bunch of old patriotic white folks in baggy trousers. Class warfare is alive and well and it is being waged by an angry self-absorbed youth, intent on proving that it’s not their fault, while laying claim to that which is not theirs. It has been well documented that this generation is failing to develop people skills, having honed their ability to communicate through texting and emails.  What happens when they confront failure, when they are told no, when they finally realize that they are not the popular, attractive, genius that their parents have told them they are for twenty some odd years?   For most, their bolts are sufficiently tightened that they have an epiphany, they reset, they dial down the youthful exuberance and they develop those skills to survive in the modern day workplace.  But for some, why, you fall back on the only conflict resolution you have ever been exposed to:  violence.  We are failing our youth in this regard and gun bans will not correct our failure.  Just for a moment, let’s try actual parenting.  Now there’s hope and change.

Monday, December 17, 2012

Sandy Hook and the UASS

This Sandy Hook tragedy has us all scratching our heads, and asking what's happening to us? Careful it's not just us, it is a world wide penchant for all sorts of premeditated and spontaneous mayhem. With us it is exacerbated by endless media coverage of subjective amateur sociologist and hidden agenda talking -heads! We simply don't want to admit our morality, our lack of godliness, our lack of discipline, our failure at parenting and educating, our lethargy has fostered a mindless deviate element of our society. We look to control the club, the knife, the gun, the whatever the instrument of potential death and destruction (D&D), more than I could mentioned here or anywhere! Yes, impose stringent qualification on possessing those instruments of D&D not unlike the automobile, the ultimate instrument of death and destruction, as well as punish those violating those rules and regulations swiftly to the full extent of the law. But know the root mean cause of any form of mayhem is the human psyche! We have to do something fundamental to altering the course we are on! Which brings me to my oft stated premise:

....We have lowered the bar, educationally, culturally, morally! We have degraded success socially, politically, as well as commercially. We have divided our once nationally united citizenry in to bickering factions. And, in doing so have curbed our ambitions, our appetite for hard work, risk taking, our independence, our tolerance for competition and adversity, our self reliance. As a result we have become soft, compliant and dependent. All the things that once made us, as a nation exceptional, have been superseded by a seemingly compelling survival attitude of "go-along-to- get-along" lethargy, fostered by a socialist bent government as both benefactor and beneficiary. Our model Europe, our narrative socialism! What will it take to snap us out of this funk? You recent immigrants to this country, is this what you came here for, more of what you were escaping from? Once the government dole can no longer be sustained and it's recipients have reached critical mass, our once prosperous, self reliant, capitalism driven Republic will devolve slowly, and I suspect violently, to a socialism quagmire. Welcome to the UASS (how appropriate); the certain to be, not so united, United American Socialist States. How does that sound to you, UASS! 

A 2013 Preamble

Just a reminder. Let me once again assure you of my intentions, my informality, my spontaneity in my blogging: 9 out of 10 times when I'm egged on by an email comment, or a request for comment (usually the triggering mechanism for my blogging) I hit the reply icon and spout off! Only when a series of events, circumstances, pent-up angst or incredulity gets the best of me will I interrupt what I'm doing and try to be more erudite in my response. I am not a "professional" blogger or journalist, that should be obvious to you by now, nor do I want to be. I say this to be true to what I said this Blog was all about in the first place; as stated in it's masthead margin-, just venting my conservative spleen here, thus the caveat, in my spontaneity please forgive my wanting spelling, grammar, syntax and creative punctuations. Mea Culpa!

A few baseline comments this near 2013 : Know (as if I had to tell you) although I have zero tolerance for this president or his administration's vision of a United States of America to come, I have infinite confidence in it's citizenry's ability to eventually sort out their seditious intent and take whatever corrective action necessary! Maybe not as rapidly as I'd like, but in due course. Admittedly although that confidence took a major hit this election past, I do sense a palpable resurgence of we Conservatives trying to regain our footing. If for no other reason than our detractors are uncloaked, their agenda transparent, their ranks identified, their commitment to a socialized America dire and foreboding. My biggest concern of the moment however is the Grand Old Party (GOP) has seemingly given up on it's fiscal conservative agenda and it's partizans and has adapted benign opposition to the liberal Democrat party's determined march toward socialism. In that I have given up on the GOP itself, at least the GOP leadership of the post 2012 elections! I am now desperately seeking a cognitive relationship with a movement, a standard bearer, to rally around, that is equally determined to stem this tide of socialism and reckless fiscal irresponsibility! Come out, come out where ever you are!

In closing: As President Obama said, in so many words he was out to fundamentally change America, and to date proven true to his word. By the same token, our intent and purpose must be to return America to it's original fundamentals! Time to close our ranks you patriotic albeit hyphenated Americans no matter your ancestry, and be heard at every level of government. Preserve our United States of America, our ambitions for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness-, here in the land of the free and home of the brave!To be redundant: we must always keep in mind President Obama and his administration's endgame, that of our country's transformation from capitalism to socialism! We must constantly be aware of their faints and deceptions to lead us to believe otherwise! Once our economic engine is stifled, our free enterprise system thwarted, our society at odds with one-another we will fail to flourish and prosper-, our Republic's legend written! They know how easily distracted we are, how naive and gullible we can be, how our benevolence can be used against us-, and are persistent in taking advantage of those foibles. The major obstacle to their effort, our Constitution! An early warning to us all that sedition is afoot, is when our Constitution is challenged, misinterpreted, attempts to amended it! Read it, live it! It is our life line!

Thursday, December 6, 2012

Take a Breather

Enough said for this 2012! What with President Obama threatening to drive us off a financial cliff; Banghazi questions hanging heavy in the air; Israel and Iran on the brink of war; the UN fanning the flames of middle-east dissension, Europe sinking slowly to it's knees under the weight of Socialism; American cities and states facing bankruptcy-, what a mess!! And here we are running up on Christmas, the holidays are upon us; although as advised, a long way off from peace on earth, good will toward men-, let's take a breather! Let this Blog take a reprieve from it's strident, albeit justifiable exception to everything Obama, everything thought to be politically correct, and wish it's readers a Merry Christmas, the happiest of holidays and a healthy and prosperous, what promises to be a challenging New Year! Until January, I remain your faithful Conservative Tom Swift.

Wednesday, December 5, 2012

Sad, but apparently true

I was called out recently for my comments referencing our voting demographics, saying they were divisive! I quote: "Aren't we all Americans first and foremost, deemed: created equal by our Declaration of Independence, only to have you point out our biases, our preferences categorized statistically in such a fashion to imply otherwise".(?) I'd like nothing more than have those statistics as presented prove otherwise, but they simply don't! and mind you they are not my statistics! We apparently not only vote our everyday acceptable variety of preferences and biases, but we also vote by our, not so flattering unacceptable ethnic and color prejudices! Surprisingly Caucasians, now identified as White for some reason, are seemingly more tolerant than Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and the statistical category, Others, when it comes to ethnic and color preferences. One can rationalize this result to a degree in the knowledge, Whites, the Caucasians,are the dominate majority of our electorate (72% although declining at a rapid rate), if it were not for the minorities so disproportionately voting either in favor of ethnicity or color, or heaven forbid are simply accused of prejudice against Caucasians/Whites. And we are not talking within the margin of error here. For instance the President garnered 93% of the Black vote, 70% of the Hispanic vote, 74% of the Asian vote. So I don't know what to tell you other than-, make of it what you will, but that's what the numbers are leading us to believe.The magnitude of the preference to be kind, is what makes it so damning! It just would be too coincidental to be other than race driven. As I commented once before our great melting pot appears to have boiled over! Ironically more apparent since our first president of color took office.

And by the way: Why the race designations of Black and White in the first place,when their vast membership are neither black or white in color. As I understand, it at one time their was no specific color distinction. If your skin tone was dark you could be of a number of ethnic groups and you were not distinguished by the shade i.e beige, okra, tan, brown, ebony, etc. So where did Black come from! We all know don't we! It's the preference of the once Negro designation for those of African decent for Black as opposed to Negro because of it's close connotation to the disparaging "N" word. and that in itself makes sense! But why White for those Caucasians, isn't it's close connotation to the disparaging "W" word, at least equally insensitive in the same context? Now there in my estimation is a contrived divisiveness built into our American lexicon that is as intentionally dividing as it can get! For what purpose are Polish-Americans, Lebanese-Americans, French-Americans, Italian- American, Irish-Americans etc. lumped into this White demographic? Does it not smack of a divisive agenda? " It's just a generalization", yeah right! I'm sure the social engineers and statisticians would advise otherwise. I'm just saying.

Tuesday, December 4, 2012

What Are We Waiting For?!

Our Declaration of Independence, our Constitution, such beautiful instruments! They proclaimed such lofty ambitions for our fledgling nation, assuring such unbridled freedom to it's citizens. And how about Emma Lazarus's poem "The Colossus", emblazoned on our Statue of Liberty, so inspiring, so welcoming to those then seeking refuge from poverty and oppression with but the promise of freedom and opportunity. In turn see what this nation and it's citizens accomplished in that freedom and opportunity-, like no other on the face of the earth! Yet here we are at the threshold of pissing it all away! How many of you have even read those documents, that poem?How many of you have been inspired to unshakable patriotism by the meaning of those words alone, not many apparently! I cringe in disappointment that I've yet to hear a ground swell of indignation over proposed legislation to further push America to the left, toward socialism. All I hear is talk of compromise, when their is no compromise in our detractors! Don't you get it, they have seized the moment and intend to run roughshod over us! We seem to be sitting here in a stupor waiting for the inauguration with some kind of blind hope that something miraculous is going to happen. 

Could any of us have foreseen a government aggressively soliciting membership in it's welfare dole, in it's entitlement gifting on one end, while taxing it's citizens into government dependency on the other! A diabolical plan of "Catch 22" destined to create a critical mass of haves and have nots sure to go nuclear in civil unrest! All while insane government spending goes on unabated! Harvey Mansfield of Harvard of all places put the results of our election most succinctly, they voted for dependency, for lack of ambition and for insolvency! Can this be seen as anything other than a death wish by our country, our society, our government! We've got to get a grip somewhere along the line here! Understand you nincompoops the primary objective of this President is Socialism, plain and simple, and his tactics to that end are wealth redistribution, expanded government bureaucracy, government dependency, government spending in the 50% range of the GDP, stifling America's economic engine, stirring the pot of dissension and division for political gain, whatever, wherever!

Monday, December 3, 2012

Jamie's False God

It astonishes me to no end that liberals all suspect that they are some kind of intellectual elite as opposed to we conservatives, that we poor simpletons have no appreciation of President Obama's peerless leadership, his grasp of our socioeconomic woes and his plans for their correction! When in reality (there is that word again) it's the liberal's intellect that should be brought into question in their failure to do the math, to see the disastrous results of this President's failed polices. Once more to borrow from Patrick Henry: have eyes but don't see; have ears but don't hear! After a lifetime of being fed socialist fodder, the liberals all fall into lockstep with whatever the socialist's call to arms is: tax the rich, pay their fair share, war on women, pro-choice etc, etc, whatever dumbed down slogan and contrived social inequality the socialist propagandist offer is taken as gospel despite evidence to the contrary. No better example of failed liberal/socialist policies exist than the current plight of France, whose national health care, weak immigration laws and Keynesian government policies have propelled debt beyond comprehension with an ever-increasing percentage of GDP. Oppressive taxation of the rich is leading to their flight and the definition of rich is creeping into the middle class as national debt continues to climb. Yet our liberal cadre insists that can't happen to us, Obama wouldn't let it! Oh contraire, yes it will, and it's Obama who is greasing the rails for it's fruition! You pathetic fools, what have you wrought! And you Jamie Foxx, who has proclaimed President Obama a deity, are destined for a rude awakening-, as are we all.

Saturday, December 1, 2012

Liberal Celebration Continues

I think my head is going to explode.  First I get Steve Inskeep, he of NPR, interviewing a Republican senator trying to get him to admit that the Republicans are willing to compromise to avoid the fiscal cliff by allowing tax rates to go up for the rich.  After the Senator remarked that raising tax rates would be disastrous for the economic recovery, he explained that a small business owner that makes 300 to 400 thousand dollars per year would be unlikely to invest in their business when faced with such a tax increase. Inskeep chimed in that he failed to see how a mere 1200 dollars would have any effect on hiring or business expansion for someone making that much money. Huh?  I am thoroughly convinced that liberals can't do simple math.  I keep hearing of tax rates that will jump 3 to 5% in addition to the punitive Obamacare "surcharge" of 3.8% for the "wealthy" making more than $250000.  By my calculations, that amount comes out to alot more than 1200 dollars, Mr. Inskeep.  3.8% of 400000 dollars is $15200, and even if you apply the suggestion that only the amount above 250K is taxed, it still amounts to $5700, hardly pocket change. But what's a few percentage points amongst the redistributionists? And if you recall, the "rich" are already paying at rates such that the top 5% are paying nearly 60% of the taxes, despite making only 32% of the salary, and you still think that they need to pay a "little bit more" to pay their "fair share" then you are significantly math impaired. And stupid.  How about the 144 million not paying any taxes at all.  Think maybe they could come up with a couple of bucks and help us out, or as Obama likes to say, get some "skin in the game"? Because even to the uninitiated, it appears that the "rich" are getting skinned.

Then I hear old Lincoln Chafee, the current governor and previously failed Senator of the dysfunctional state of Rhode Island ranting at Bill O'Reilly, a world class ranter himself,  defending his politically correct, renamed "Holiday Tree"in front of the State House in Providence.  He even resorted to calling Fox News an "angry" network, as if that isn't just preaching the party line. He should have added "old white men" to complete the generalization.  Now, if Mr. Chafee only had one-half the veritas of his father, I would consider listening to his opinions.  Otherwise, in a state where over half of the population is employed by the state itself, I suspect that the inmates are already running that asylum. 

Doomsday Clock

I'm throughly convinced reality will trump the promises of the utopian socialist state this President and his administration wish for us. The question how much reality will it take before that happens? An appropriate analogy: When one's bills are not payed, debts are not honored, yet the debtor blithely goes about his or her own business feeling immune and/or undeterred by retribution, reality is never fully appreciated. Not until the debt collector is at your door demanding payment, the repossessor towing your car away and you find yourself on the street, does reality really sink in! When our government taxes it's citizens until the burden is rebuked, prints currency to the threshold of the dollar having but marginal value, expands upon and extends its welfare provisions, defaults on it's loans, inflation runs rampant, civil unrest palpable and destructive; where along this path will we see the reality of our situation and say enough and take evasive action? By the look of things it better be sooner then later! Remember during the election they had that doomsday clock ticking toward our record, untenable 17 trillion dollar deficit, the deficit President Obama had no plan to slow let alone set back (at least not in our life time) well it's still ticking! 

Friday, November 30, 2012

The Irrational Won The Day Hands Down!

Now in the wake of the elections, how can anyone in hindsight conclude President Obama had a better plan for America than that of Governor Romney? In the result of the election alone did we see the usual surge of confidence when the die had decidedly been cast, manifested in economic, social, and international indicators? Have we seen any indication we have turned the corner on our national distractions as President Obama has professed?Have we learned nothing other than showering enough gifts on the thought to be disenfranchised minorities of the electorate that they will vote for you no matter what your ulterior motives might be! The Obama campaign was not so much brilliant as it was diabolical in playing to our selfish weakness'. Who would have thought, least of all Mitt Romney that such a puny opponent in stature, proven accomplishment, and credentials, to say nothing of running against precedence would win the day, albeit was President of the United States of America! To the rational it was a mismatch from the getgo. But isn't the keyword word here rational, who could have accounted for the irrational-,not any of us, that's for sure! We became tangled footed in social issues that were inconsequential in the scheme of our real threatening national challenges, but apparently not so to the irrational!

You must grow tired of my incessant Obama bashing, but know, as I've said before I see him as the anti-Christ to all things I feel American holy! I grow impatient for someone to pickup the Romney/Ryan banner, that resonated with me, and run with it! Must we wait another four years for someone to come out of the woodwork to champion our cause? I don't think America has that kind of time!

Thursday, November 29, 2012

...while we fiddle!

Never once did I suspect there was a seditious movement within our country to fundamentally change it's governing principals-, not even when President Obama said it ("....fundamentally transform America"). But here we are in the process! Worst, like sheep we are standing by and letting it happen. Apparently all that was needed to bring this sedition to the light of day was the catalyst, Barack Husain Obama! Can our Republic survive this movement in tact, our founding Constitution remain the rule of the land, our people assured of their freedom and liberties? Why were we so naive in not seeing it coming?I blame it all on the career politicians! Their was never meant to be a Career Politician, it was a career created by our lethargy in demanding a growing need for public servants to tend to our thought to be required governing practices.That insatiable need breed a servant mentality aspiring to specialize and unionize, so to speak, to expand its ranks and influence in those practices through a hierarchy, a pecking order to being the leader of the servants: the ultimate leadership roll, the Presidency! And that has been the order of things for the most part with the occasional General of the Army breaking the ranks. It always was a precarious balance between tyranny in it's many forms and democracy but America always managed to walk that fine line until now, our Constitution being the bulwark of our existence. Now that Constitution, our very Republic as we know it, is in jeopardy! And most of use, me included, fiddle while America burns!

Duvall Patrick for President in '16?

Is anyone outside Massachusetts paying attention to the Democratic Party trial ballon in it's latest pandering to the burgeoning Latino vote? College admission entitlements for illegal immigrants! Not legal or green card holding immigrants mind you, but illegal immigrants! Can the unconditional amnesty ballon be far behind. And further,are we witnessing the grooming of Obama 11 four years hence in the person of Governor Duvall Patrick? Hell the State supposedly spawned Obamacare why not go for the whole Latino affirmative action enchilada as well! And I'm sure you noticed Governor Patrick is a man of color and does bear a physical resemblance, as well as admirable political traits to that of our President, does he not? Ahaaa Massachusetts you're such a Democrat Party bellwether. And to think they now have young Mr Kennedy in the wings! I guess our only hope he is more John than Teddy!

Tuesday, November 27, 2012

My Friend Larry

My friend Larry persists it's the message we are sending and who is sending it, that is the Conservative/Republican Party's failings with the electorate. He sights Ronald Reagan's successes of over 20 years ago as his example of the right message and the right messenger. And let me say I agree with him, to a point. At that time it was the right message and the right messenger, no doubt!The caveat, at that time, is where our differences lie! This time, is a vastly different time on so many levels, to attempt a comparison would be futile! My friend's retort, so adjust your message and choose your messenger accordingly. Easier said than done I contend! As my previous blogs have alluded to on this subject: the demagoguery of intervening administrations; the demographics of our nation, of the world, have so drastically changed; social and political differences grown so sharply delineated to defy comprehension! Again his retort, "so stop your whining and adjust"! The question how do you adjust and maintain your principals, morals, patriotism and integrity -, your freedoms, when your opposition is so seemingly diametrically opposed to them and committed to the gains in self-service. Yet again, the surmised worn ethereal retort, "just adjust will ya"! Please tell me how you do that? Yes, I suppose we Conservatives could dress in Liberal clothing and try on subterfuge, division, and deception for size, but I for one wouldn't know how to do that! A little to much of the Patrick Henry spirit in me I suppose. History tells us Freedom can only be gained by fighting for it! Tell me, show me, how to fight for it in this malaise of socialism and patriotic indifference-,this side of civil war that is! I get the yips just thinking about it!

We Are Star Crossed

At face value alone can anyone look at Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and tell me these are the best elected officials America has to offer?! Take a good close look: do their mannerisms, their rhetoric, the timbre of their voices, their apparent intellect, their overall presentation inspire confidence, suggest strong national leadership qualities? Forget their politics for a moment: Examine their accomplishments when butordinary citizens like the rest of us struggling to make our way in the private sector. What singled them out for their lofty ascension to elected office. I don't get it, it is as if a curtain was drawn and there they are, a cast of characters in a Gilbert and Sullivan operetta fumbling and bumbling along in an endless plot of pratfalls and misadventure! Less than towering pillars of virtuous convictions and harbingers of great thoughts this lot. Save for a notable talent for self-aggrandizing and securing personal gain through inside trading and power brokering, career politicians through and through, as opposed to statesmen of proven expertise and impeccable credentials. Again politics aside, see them and their supporting friends and acolytes for what they are, who they are, and the tenor of their demonstrated social agenda and personal morals. Step back and take a good hard look. Now add their political record of intent, purpose and accomplishment to your appraisal. Ask yourself: do you see a marked separation of personal gain and professed biases to that of national interest in their legislation and policy making-, or a suspicious commonality? Has office holding disproportionately established their good fortune or inordinately amplified it? What do you see? What I see is more personal gain in not only petitioning for the job but holding the job, and again that word inordinate, in describing government perks in keeping the job. And in that I contend their constituency in kind anticipate personal gain over that of national interest in their voting preference. Voila, the Socialism stars have aligned! 

Monday, November 26, 2012

Tom Swift, Full throttle: In the aftermath

Admittedly I have been in a funk since the elections.  But I've recovered, I’m back, I’m bad and I’m pissed off.  It has become clear that in a nation of changing demographics, our fate is being decided by a peculiar amalgamation of young, single, college educated females, blacks, and non-Cuban Hispanics. Despite amassing the largest percentage of the white vote in recent history, there are apparently just not enough whites for that to matter anymore.  Obama’s campaign manager prophetically announced just prior to the election:  we have the Black and Hispanic vote.  We just need to be “competitive” with white voters. Savvy computer geeks for the democrat party analyzed the demographics, divided voters into categories, targeted them, and then told them what they wanted to hear.  Rush Limbaugh called it “Santa Claus”. Romney called it “gifting”.  And the democrats actually objected to the characterization.  Stop it.  In an entitlement society of your own making you dumbed down the issues and promised young women reproductive nirvana, the lesser compensated more handouts, the blacks more social programs, the Hispanics looser immigration policies, the students forgiveness of their college loans and, oh yeah, how about free health care for all.  And they bought it.  Hook, line, and sinker.  The economy?  What economy.  Never mind about jobs, we’re going to tax the rich.  They’re going to pay their fair share.  Unemployment?  Under my plan it’s improving.  A work in progress. Look at that, it’s only 7.8%. And besides, I saved Detroit. That national debt figure?  Just a number, my friends.  In the words of that modern day philosopher Forrest Gump:  Stupid is as stupid does.  Welcome to the United States of Entitlement.

On Catholics and Hypocrisy

Mr. Swift is often amazed by the habits of the Catholic faithful, particularly in the northeast United States.  Seemingly pious, regular, church going Catholics pack the pews, wish one another signs of peace, smear their foreheads with ashes, confess their sins, and accept the communion host as the body of Christ every Sunday, and yet they remain the most ardent, ferocious supporters of the democrat party.  You know, the party that is pro-choice and all about Catholic institutions tossing their archaic church doctrine aside in favor of distributing buckets of condoms, oral contraceptives, and paying for abortions.  Yeah, that democrat party.  As far as I know, the Catholic Church is pretty clear on the issue:  abortion is a sin and contraception by any means other than the preposterously ineffective rhythm method is forbidden. No further discussion.  Hmmm.  It seems to me that what we have here is pretty much the standard definition of hypocrisy.

I have a friend who once said that he was often amused by the faithful who, after shaking his hand and wishing him peace moments before, were obviously willing to kill him to get out of the parking lot faster.  Why is that?  How are the seemingly pious able to separate Church from their daily lives?  Perhaps it is the mixed message that the Catholic Church sends.  Mr. Swift has often been subjected to a sermon on the evils of accumulating wealth and the special place in heaven for the poor, as if the wealthy will somehow be denied access by a benevolent God, based solely on their portfolios.  “I’m sorry sir, but it seems that St. Peter has noticed that you scored big on that Microsoft stock back in the 90’s” Please proceed to the elevator on the right.  Going down”.  And let’s not even get involved in a discussion of  the Church’s disastrous handling of rogue priests and their pedophilia. But all this is particularly entertaining when viewed through the lens of charitable giving.  It seems that those pesky evangelical Republicans aren’t just getting naked and rolling in their stockpiles of cash, but actually donate large amounts of that cash to charitable organizations.  And at a significantly higher rate than their democrat counterparts despite the Church’s insistence that you give it all away in favor of a vow of poverty and a life of service.  And in an interesting feat of accounting, the very priests that have taken that vow are part of an organization that, if thought of as a country, would be one of the wealthiest on the planet.  Yes, that country would be the Vatican. If defined by redistribution policies, then isn’t the Catholic Church by definition also a socialist organization?  And that’s not to say that socialism in this context is a bad thing. In fact, charitable giving used to be the only thing before government cut in on their action. The fact remains that we are not obligated to give our wealth to the church despite some subtle coercion in the form of eternal damnation.  Thus, our contributions that are redistributed for the maintenance of the organization and to the needy are just that: our contributions.  They are clearly not taxation.  They haven’t been taken from me against my will and used for purposes that I may find personally reprehensible.  And therein lies the rub.  Can we regard charitable giving and redistribution to the poor by the Church as being evidence of our true character, whilst simultaneously supporting a government that allows redistribution not only to the poor, but for programs not consistent with our core beliefs?  If so, then perhaps it is not hypocrisy that you liberal Catholics are practicing but instead you are suffering from schizophrenia.  Mr. Biden may be your template.  You decide.

On the Female Vote

Now at the risk of being accused of being a sexist, out of touch elderly white male, allow me some observations and you are welcome to object and express your opinion just as I am mine. Young single, college educated, white women tend to be single issue voters and apparently think with their uterus.  There, I said it.  And that single issue is S-E-X.  I’m talking sex in all forms.  The act of, with whomever, and the consequences thereof. Why is it that young females are so preoccupied with reproduction, rape, abortion, contraception and homosexuality to the exclusion of all other issues?  The entire fabricated “war on women” was a clever tactic by the democrats foisted on an apparently gullible demographic.  Talk about recognizing your target audience.  Bravo. The entire Sandra Fluke episode was so pre-mediated and heavy handed that it remains a remarkable achievement in that it led the way for the media propagated lie that Republicans somehow don’t care about women’s health.  Really? The quantum leap from contraception to a woman’s overall health aside, the facts remain that Ms. Fluke was formerly employed by the Clinton administration, was certainly aware that Georgetown University is a prominent Catholic institution prior to her matriculation, and undoubtedly saw an opportunity to promote a secular agenda by forming her organization for reproductive rights knowing full well that she was bucking Catholic doctrine.  She was, pure and simple, an operative. The additional fact that Ms. Fluke is of Jewish faith is not often mentioned but leaves one wondering what the reaction would have been had an evangelical Christian enrolled at Yeshiva University and demanded that the cafeteria serve pork.  With cheese. And where were you Catholics on this issue? Crickets.

Now Mr. Swift is not saying that the critics are completely wrong about the Republican stance regarding women’s health, but it may be a matter of semantics.  Mr. Swift actually agrees that the majority of Republicans don’t care about women’s health in this context. But they don’t care in the true libertarian fashion: not my business, not my problem, not my check.  Now I know that in an effort to appeal to the evangelical base, it is necessary to stand on the stump and object to abortion as is preached by the faithful, to object to artificial means of contraception. But no thinking voter could possibly suspect that a personal opinion by a candidate, and a pandering one at that, would translate into an outright assault on contraception and Roe v Wade.  Seriously, they are not going anywhere.  A true libertarian recognizes your right to do whatever you want with that uterus of yours, as long as it doesn’t affect me. Use contraception, don’t use contraception, sex with him or her, abort or don’t abort.  But in exchange for me not meddling in the affairs of your sex organs, I shouldn’t be financially responsible for your decisions regarding the consequences of your sexual exploits.  Your decision.  Your responsibility.  Period. Now if you want to press me on my personal opinions, allow me to digress: Contraception is, in my humble opinion a good thing.  Keeping reproduction in check yields a twofold benefit, less people on an already overpopulated planet, and less offspring that many of us, but mostly you, cannot afford to raise.  And despite the Catholic Church’s widespread objection to contraception, it never ceases to amaze me that the countries well-known for sexual exploits and contraception are those most often associated with Catholicism.  Witness Italy and France as the poster children for modern romance.  So have at it, kids.  But once again listen carefully: not my decision, not my financial responsibility.

Abortion is a much stickier issue.  Mr. Swift is a man of science, and has a particular, shall we say, histologically acute insight into this issue but recognizes that human nature being as it is, mistakes will happen when biology is set in motion.  But when it is, that is the time to demonstrate some level of common sense and humanity.  For the very reason that pro-choice advocates went apoplectic when it was suggested that pregnant women considering abortion would be required to see pictures of fetal development, the pro-life folks recognize that you’re actually engaged in the process of growing a human.  Thus, the cut and dry reduction of the argument to pro-life/pro-choice is inherently preposterous.  The Catholic doctrine that life begins at conception notwithstanding, exactly where in this process does it become human to the secular? Somewhere along the line, what starts as aborting a bundle of cells progresses rapidly to something that is considerably closer to baby than zygote.  So as far as I am concerned, if it has hands and feet and purposeful movement, you may have missed the window of opportunity to be, what is in my estimation, morally responsible in your actions.  If you’re going to do it, put on your big girl britches and do it early in development.  This 20 week stuff is, in my humble opinion, bordering on the obscene. Have a look at those photos. Why is it that we are so outraged by infanticide yet we are numb to a similar insult that differs by 5 months and a few hours of labor?  And once again, if I didn’t get you into this mess, then it certainly isn’t my financial responsibility to get you out.  So once again repeat after me: when it comes to your sexual exploits…..not my problem and not with my tax dollars.  And besides, the government shouldn’t be messing around in your uterus anyway.  And neither should the candidates. Yuck.

On Youth

Ah, the children of baby boomers.  The offspring of the worst generation of parents in history. The entitlement generation. But then again, what would you expect from a group that has been pampered, coddled and grown to expect that everything they say or do has been incredibly important, and all their needs should be provided for them.  This is the “everyone gets a trophy” generation. Even IBM lamented that this generation of workers has to be handled carefully with a new set of parameters.  Where at one time it was understood that you started at the bottom and worked your way up to a title and the corner office, this generation expects immediate gratification.  They need to feel included from the start and have to have a sense of contribution and worth and most importantly recognition.  In today’s world, young entry level employees expect to be regarded as something special.  But the missing ingredient is the work ethic of generations past and the accomplishment to warrant that sort of respect.  They want to be your equal in the corporate hierarchy on arrival and have little respect for the old dog that has attained a position of authority by busting his ass. Years of being catered to by Mom and Dad and being taught to question authority has made today’s job applicant self-important, self-indulgent and a potent over estimator of one’s own talent.  It’s all about me, the wonderful things I’ve done, my meaningful tweets, my cellphone, my music and the number of friends I have on my facebook page.  So in their evaluation of a presidential candidate, is it any surprise that their vote will be cast with emphasis on “what’s in it for me?” Thus the democrat party, the party of entitlement is a perfect fit for a demographic that expects immediate reward without having contributed to their own well-being, or anyone else’s for that matter.  After all, once they leave the nest, someone has to take the place of their parents in the provider role.

On Culture

We are in an age of easy celebrity.  Guidos and Guidettes on the Jersey Shore, fat precocious, overindulged, pre-pubescent beauty queens, genetically fortunate, vacuous, super-models, obnoxious, uninhibited, pregnant teenagers, dysfunctional, drug addled pop stars, and a host of rehabbed, over-compensated, serial marrying, Hollywood bubble-heads all achieving instant celebrity status in a reality TV world gone amok.  Entertainment Tonight, American Idol, People Magazine, MTV, even the Disney Channel are places where celebrity is manufactured, promoted, and worshipped. Style has replaced substance and self-promotion in the vein of “any publicity is good publicity” is the rule of the day.  What has happened to us? Has class been replaced by crass?  Has humility been shoved aside in the name of self-aggrandizing, shameless, self-promotion?  Has accomplishment been overshadowed by appearance, by the perception of cool, by the rock-star persona?  Is it then any surprise that, with overwhelming support from the youth vote, we have elected a president devoid of accomplishment, devoid of credentials, but oozing that X-Factor, praised for his ability to read from a teleprompter?  Where are all the adults?  When interviewing for a company, or in this case a country, in economically dire straights, do you hire the successful CEO with experience in righting the ship or the charter member of the “Choom Gang”? And while on that subject, t is well documented that our current Commander-in-Chief was, at least during his high school years, a “stoner”.  What is truly amazing is not the fact that he was a prominent member of an organization that indulged in the wicked weed regularly, it is how the media reacted to the news.  He wasn’t condemned and raked through the headlines like George Bush for his youthful indiscretions.  He wasn’t lambasted in the press like Romney was for his unsubstantiated incident of supposed high school bullying.  No, on the contrary he was praised for his “innovation”. For those of you drinking the liberal Kool Aid allow me to enlighten you.  Whilst most of us were participating in varsity athletics, becoming members of the chess team, or playing the clarinet in the high school band, your President was a founding member of a group known as the “Choom Gang”, “choom” being Hawaiian slang for pot smoking.  And this is not anecdotal.  This is very well documented through interviews and period photographs.  Ironically, no hysterically, a documentary on the two candidates appeared on PBS (of all places) where the narrator actually lauded Obama for not just being a charter member, but for introducing innovations like “roof hits” (where after finishing smoking a joint in a closed car, you place you head against the ceiling and inhale any residual smoke), and “intercepting” (where one gets up from the circle when the joint is being passed around and cuts into the other side of the circle to get another hit before your turn).  He was also praised for his introduction of punishment for a member who exhales too quickly (thus wasting the THC load in the smoke) by not allowing the offender his next turn.  And we are to believe that he just up and quit.  While living in the People’s Republic of Cambridge? Wow. You can’t make this stuff up (Go ahead….Google it).

But hilarity aside, how is it that Obama got a free pass in the media and more importantly a free pass by the electorate?  The perception of celebrity, that’s how.  He’s perceived as cool.  He shoots hoops, hangs out with ballers, he doesn’t walk, he struts, he drinks beer, he even smoked weed, man.  Now if I was at all interested in basketball, partying and getting stoned, then perhaps Obama would get my vote, although I suspect that I would be stuck with the tab.  For that matter, I think Bill Clinton is probably the better choice, although I don’t particularly care for cigars or his taste in interns.  But let’s be adults for a moment here.  We are electing a man to the most powerful position in the free world, a man that can shape the future of America, and world economy.  A man with his finger on the switch.  And we elect the stoner?  Seriously? This is not a popularity contest.  This is not the prom king. This is not funny, kids. This is the President of the United States of America.  Grow up.

On the Hispanic Vote
Mr. Swift is a fan of Mexico.  He vacations there, he does business there.  But if he wants to go to Mexico, he will go to Mexico.  He does not want to bring Mexico here. Therefore, he can’t understand the Hispanic vote.  I always suspected that they immigrated to this country to get a better life.  But then they want to import their former country here with all the problems they fled from.  Huh? Newsflash: It’s not the country, it’s the people in it. And that segment of the Mexican population that wishes to immigrate is most likely not your skilled, upwardly mobile, intelligentsia. I don’t see too many Mexicans climbing over the border fence wearing Armani. Maybe I’m old fashioned.  When I go to a foreign country, I don’t expect them to cater to me, to offer me health care, to provide me with a translator, to give me free stuff.  Hell, I don’t even like it when I see a McDonalds. But it appears that Hispanics have become single issue voters and support the democrat party solely on the basis of a loose immigration policy and we are luring them here with the promise of work and benefits.  And why not?  Let’s break up this rant with an exercise:  Google “government benefits”.  First hit is “your path to government benefits at www.”.  Click on that.  Big letters: “Looking for Benefits? Upper left hand corner: “En Espanol”. In other words, your roadmap to entitlements. This is your tax dollars at work, my friends.   And if you don’t think that the democrat party hasn’t identified this demographic as a quick and easy way to retain power in perpetuity, recognize some startling statistics.  Puerto Rico, an island of 4 million has voted in favor of statehood, potentially injecting 2 million welfare recipients into the voter rolls.  Wonder which way they will vote.  Democrats are also in favor of gifting our illegal alien population citizenship.  It is currently estimated that there are 11 million illegal aliens in the United States, although that estimate ranges from 7 to as much as 20 million.  Wonder which way they will vote.  And Hispanics are, if anything, prolific.  They can effectively reproduce and are doing so at a remarkable rate, becoming the fastest growing segment of the US population.  Wonder which way they will vote. So in short, continued democrat policy toward looser immigration is fostering an invasion of sorts.  Mexico is taking territory back and the democrats are apparently good with that, as long as they get their vote and retain power.  Just imagine the rush on the border on December 31 if suddenly the democrats decide that anyone in the country as of January 1, for example,  is granted immigration amnesty.  Not a good day to be Border Patrol. And deny it all you want, but Rush had an interesting thought in the name of comromise.  If democrats truly want illegal aliens to be granted citizenship on the basis of humanitarian reasons alone, then grant it to them.  BUT, and that’s a big but, you can’t vote for twenty years.  Brilliant.  See what kind of support that gets.

On Legacy

The political pundits, having rejoiced in the re-election of their savior, are now philosophizing on the direction his final term will take. The consensus amongst the democrat talking heads is that Obama will no longer be concerned about campaigning, will be less concerned about partisan politics and will be focused more on his legacy.  They unanimously think that he will want his legacy to be similar to that of Bill Clinton, a second term of moving towards the middle, a coming together for the benefit of the country, a setting aside of our differences in favor of bipartisan efforts to restore our nation to its former glory, economically as well as in the eyes of the world.  Even Obama’s immediate post-election banter was all about meeting with the vanquished republicans to hash out the differences, to avoid the fiscal cliff, to invite Romney to the White House for a discussion, to embrace John Boehner as a partner in charting America’s course.  That didn’t last.  Within days it became apparent that Obama’s position remained unchanged, there would be no compromise, and the socialistic ideals of increased taxation and redistribution will remain basic tenants of this administration.  Economy be damned.  And why would his policy suddenly change?  Mr. Obama has not met with Boehner since back in June and has only spoken to him on the phone since September.  And how about all those off the cuff remarks he made prior to the election that were unknowingly recorded (and given yet another pass by the media)?  Comments such as the one to Putin: “I will have more flexibility after the election” or the pucker to Sarah Brady about “flying under the radar” regarding gun control. Obama has shown himself to be aloof and clinical, he is not a people person, and he has no desire to work with Republicans.  His style is heavy handed, with policies rammed through Congress in the dark of night. He looks at the election results as a mandate that his policies are what America wants, regardless of the 27 states and 47.5% of the electorate that felt otherwise. He is a loose cannon no longer concerned with campaigning for a second term.  Obama is an ideologue, pure and simple. A man so firmly rooted in socialist policies, so possessed with a visceral drive to alter the fabric of America, that compromise is not likely to appear in any of his future dialogue. Obama is not a man who wishes to have compromise or moving towards the middle associated with his legacy. He wants his legacy to be that of the man who fundamentally changed America. And that will be an America that our Founding Fathers will not recognize.

                                                    So there I'm vented !!