Category: Right Wing Idiocy

The road to hell and all that jazz…

The other day I was having a discussion with your usual idiotic collectivist retard whom couldn’t contain his admiration and fawning over Bernie Sanders and his idiotic socialist beliefs. Of course I pointed out how the stupid shit they believe is what will finally make the world a just and good place, always results in misery and evil. We discussed the good old USSR, China, Cuba, and of course, the more modern incarnations such as North Korea, Venezuela, and the western shitholes that decided to embrace a less virulent form of the disease which only differs from communism and fascism in how fast they reach the end result. The poor idiot would not be dissuaded. Mention the over 100 million killed and the billions turned into slaves of an uncaring state? A litany of excuses. Point out that the pursuit of equality of outcome, something that is impossible to do, and frankly more evil than the inequality it pretends to want to address? Even more excuses. Call attention to the fact that collectivism will always create a miserable entity with an elite on top that rack all the benefits and the rest serving as dispensable serfs of the state? And I got even more excuses, including the usual trope about how we have never seen the real outcome of collectivism in practice, because the reason that every collectivist experiment eventually degenerates into what we see in Venezuela, is only because the right people were not put in charge. And yes! Bernie would be the right person finally.

Man, did that poor idiots head explode when I pointed out that no, the big lie isn’t that we have not had the right people in charge, but that what we see is really what collectivism will always produce. There is no right leadership that will suddenly prevent collectivism from resulting in economic devastation and the destruction of life, and that is simply because while it pretends to be the solution to injustice, it is nothing but another vehicle to split people into the elite/aristocracy and the serfs. Sure, it does a great PR job by claiming it can create heaven on earth – and it does so because it is the new religion – but it can’t and will never deliver anything but pain and suffering. That’s because of the simple problem that always gets ignored: you will eventually run out of other people’s money with which to pretend you are a benevolent entity when you buy your power. What we see now in Venezuela is what happens once you have no more sheep to fleece. It’s not an accident that Chavez’s only child is a billionaire, Maduro’s and those he has chosen to bless, and a few people that help keep the serfs in line through force are loaded, while the rest are living in hell on earth. It’s what socialism will always end up as. Outside of the family unit, where some kind of instinct or true bond exists that allows most of us to make sacrifices for others, collectivism breaks and actually produces a system that has no equal in its ability to inflict pain, misery, and yes, even death. Read some history. And I don’t mean the propaganda the collectivist agents of the KGB have flooded the planet with in order to capitalize on the envy and greed of so many fools out there.

And before any of you followers of the religion of collectivism try to pretend the model was working in Europe or elsewhere, let me tell you that the cracks are not only there, but the writing is on the wall. The elite in Europe have even decided that to keep their power they are willing to make your lives even more miserable, if not outright sacrifice it, by doubling down on the idiocy while importing some of the planet’s most miserable people. I am sure you true believers, in a great tribute to Heinlein and his famous quote, will blame it all on “bad luck”. The universe is not a just place, and that is actually something sad, but you should fear, nay loathe, anyone that tells you they want to fix that. That’s because in the end, they will do far more harm than any incidental good they happen to cause, on the way to the inevitable. If you want to help others and buy into collectivism, do it with your own money and time. Leave the rest of us alone. Slavery is supposed to be an evil thing, but the collectivists seem unwilling to admit that the indentured servitude they have foisted on the productive is nothing but another form of slavery.

Thought On Oregon

Something strange is happening in Oregon.

It appears that we’ve got ourselves another militia standoff out West, this time in rural, eastern Oregon, where armed activists are taking issue with the federal government over control of a wildlife refuge and the fate of two ranchers who are supposed to be on the way to jail. Complicating the issue (at least in the eyes of the media) is the fact that the protest is being organized and led by three sons of Cliven Bundy, who I’m sure you all remember.

The short version is this: a few years ago, ranchers Dwight and Steven Hammond were convicted of arson for setting fires, one of which may have been an accident, the other of which may have been set to cover up illegal poaching on federal land. They served their sentences but a federal judge decided those sentences were too light and they deserved more prison time. There was a peaceful protest against it but the men seem to have agreed to go back to jail.

Now three of Cliven Bundy’s sons, along with what they claim are 150 militia sympathizers have seized an unoccupied building on the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in protests of both the sentences given to the Hammonds and general federal use of lands.

A few points to make:

First, many people are comparing this to Islamic terrorism. That’s absurd. The Bundys have not declared war on the United States. They have not taken hostages. They have not shot anyone. They have taken over a building. This is not terrorism. Robby Soave:

And here I was thinking liberals were just as skeptical as libertarians about the prudence of labelling everything and everyone a terrorist. Don’t they remember that every time someone brands someone else a terrorist, the Patriot Act gets a dozen pages longer? Government power relies upon such unfounded suspicions.

Keep in mind that the ranchers haven’t taken hostages, damaged property, or hurt anyone. The previous standoff between federal authorities and the Bundy family was resolved peacefully. It’s possible the situation at the wildlife headquarters escalates into something horrifically violent, but it seems wildly premature and speculative to assert that it will.

Nor is it treason, as some have claimed. They have not declared war on the United States. Nor have they treated with our enemies.

This incident has exposed a lot of the ugliness that underpins the Left’s supposed reasonableness. This is trending on Twitter as #OregonUnderAttack even though there has not, to this point, been any violence. Many of the liberals who were — rightfully, in my opinion — appalled by the tactics used against Occupy protesters are gleefully calling for an armed response. One of the comparisons being made is to the attack on MOVE in 1985. But a) MOVE had already engaged in armed conflict with police; b) the bombing of MOVE was a bad decision that destroyed a neighborhood and killed 11 people. Saying that the attack on MOVE justifies an attack on Malheur is basically saying that two wrongs make a right.

That’s not to say they aren’t wrong. They are occupying a federal building and demanding changes in federal laws before they leave. These are criminal acts and I believe they should be prosecuted. But I think, given how isolated they are and the lack of an eminent threat, it is perfectly reasonable to surround them and wait them out.

I also disagree that the federal use of lands is something that justifies this kind of reaction, as I noted in my post on the earlier standoff with the Bundy clan:

Whatever one may think of the Federal use of land (in this case, to protect an endangered tortoise) there is not much doubt that it is Constitutional. The federal government does have the power to buy land for public use (and, thanks to Kelo, private use too). Their land use may be stupid, but it’s Constitutional. Is Bundy arguing that the cattle aren’t on Federal land? Is he arguing that the Feds never properly compensated anyone for the land or that it is not a public use? Is he claiming that it was his family’s land and he was not compensated? It’s hard to tell since most of the media are ignoring the story so I only have fragmented reports from the edge of the blogosphere.

James Joyner:

I’m more libertarian than the next guy but don’t understand the fascination around such as the Hammonds and Bundys, who apparently think the entire country is some sort of commons for them to use as they please. We’ve had federal parks, wildlife refuges, and the like going back to the days of Teddy Roosevelt; how that has diminished our freedom of Americans is not clear.

It’s a little more clear to me, as I noted in my previous post. But even so, it does not seem to justify this sort of response. Jazz, from the link above:

But… with all of that said, I’m with John Hawkins on this one. This is crazy. (And I know that’s not going to sit well with those regularly spoiling for a fight with the feds.) Taking armed troops in to seize control of a federal building and essentially daring the government to come get you is pretty much the course of last resort. This is the fight you choose to draw the line in the sand over? If the Hammonds aren’t seeking protection and are planning to continue their appeal through the normal legal channels, this armed insurrection isn’t being done for their benefit. If you’re doing it to try to stop the feds from exercising control over a wildlife refuge, well… nope. Sorry. Still crazy.

Harness all of that energy and enthusiasm into getting a legal team to begin challenging the federal government in court over it. It will be a long, hard slog, but you’ll garner a tremendous amount of support around the nation, particularly among conservatives and libertarians. Taking up arms over this will produce just the opposite result. It’s time to get the troops out of the building before somebody gets hurt and this turns into a literally bloody debacle.

We have not slid down the slide of tyranny so far as to justify this.

They are all crooks

Just look at this and you will know what I mean..

This is another of the reasons why Trump has appeal as well..

The Donald’s Imagination

The longer this goes on, the more I think that Donald Trump’s candidacy is designed specifically to wreck the Republican Party and get Hillary elected. Either that, or this is a big publicity game to him. Either way, I’m rapidly losing patience with it.

This week, fresh off saying that we should be surveilling mosques and maintaining a database on Muslims, Donald Trump made the assertion — one he has since repeated — that thousands of American Muslims in New Jersey celebrated the fall of the Twin Towers.

First things first. This claim is totally false. The Trumpeteers have fixated on a paragraph from an old WaPo story that described the FBI investigating reports of people celebrating 9/11. But nothing came of that and there certainly weren’t thousands of people dancing in the streets. And it certainly wasn’t on television. You can read Kessler’s long article where he responds to various conspiracy theorists and Trumpeteers claiming that no, this totally happened. But it didn’t. Had Americans been celebrating 9/11, it would have been front page news, not buried in some obscure MTV broadcast or the 15th paragraph of a WaPo story or whispered by someone who knows someone who saw it. The objections are rapidly settling into “no Jews were in the Twin Towers” territory.

But … that’s really beside the point. The point of Trump’s statement is not whether American Muslims celebrated 9/11 or not. The point is that Trump, since the Paris attacks, has been blowing a dog whistle.

Let’s take a step back…

In the 1960 Presidential race, John F. Kennedy was only the second Catholic to ever run for President and the first to be elected. During the campaign and after his election, there were people who openly said that being Catholic meant his loyalty was to the Vatican, not to the United States (this for a man who fought in World War II and acted with genuine valor when his torpedo boat was sunk). Numerous religious organizations opposed Kennedy for this reason and it probably cost him hundreds of thousands of votes. Nixon, to his credit, decided to leave the religious issue alone. But it was garbage. Catholics have long proven to be just as loyal to the United States as anyone else.

As a Jew, I grew up having my loyalty to the United States questioned. Jews, I was told, were loyal to Israel not the United States. People told me this to my face. People said this about my family (which included my father, an Air Force Colonel who stayed in the reserves until they tore the uniform off his back). This clamor grew loudest when the traitor Jonathan Pollard was caught. But it was still garbage.

Similar but less intense bigotry surfaced in 2008 when Mitt Romney looked like he might become the first Mormon presidential candidate. His loyalty wasn’t questioned, but people openly mocked his religion and questioned his sanity regarding the so-called “magic underwear”. Thankfully, by 2012, this has calmed down. But there were decades when Mormons were seen as “the other”, a crazy cult that would do God-knows-what if they ever got power.

Donald Trump is simply continuing this long and disgraceful legacy of questioning the loyalty of a religious minority. This isn’t about facts; it’s about saying, over and over again, that Muslims are fundamentally disloyal to the United States and can’t be trusted. In doing so, he is wading directly into racially charged waters and appealing to a very ugly element of our society. This manifested over the weekend when he retweeted bogus and racist crime stats sent to him by an admitted neoNazi.

It was not American Muslims who attacked us on 9/11 (in fact, a few dozen Muslims died when the towers fell). It was not an American Muslim who tried to detonate a bomb in his shoe or in his underwear. It was an American Muslims who definitively proved that Al-Qaeda has caused 9/11. And we have seen thousands of Muslims serve our country with honor and many die fighting the War on Terror.

original

Now, it was an American Muslim who murdered 13 people at Fort Hood. It was an American Muslims who tried to bomb Times Square (and it was also one who alerted the police to the danger). There’s certainly a case to be made for keeping an eye on radicals. But over the past 25 years, we have lost way more people to crazed “right wing” terrorists (Oklahoma City) or white supremacists (Charleston) or our own damned government (Waco) than we have to American Muslims.

As I noted in a previous post, George W. Bush was very careful, after 9/11, to walk the line of denouncing extremism while not casting aspersions upon American Muslims. It was walking that narrow line that allowed him to be as effective as he was in destroying radical terrorists. It’s a pity to see the Republican front-runner abandon this. Because, in the end, it’s not only bad for the War on Terror, it’s bad for the Republican Party. People won’t forget that, at a tense time, Donald Trump was perfectly willing to play to bigotry and prejudice.

But … if his goal is to pave the way for Clinton, it suddenly all makes sense, doesn’t it?

That was by design, you idiots.

So, Bloomberg has an article titled “Obamacare Insurers Are Suffering. That Won’t End Well.” which basically points out that the dire predictions by everyone that was not a collectivist Obama cock-sucking bitch are not only panning out, but panning out much faster than expected, and wondering how this could have happened. After all, with a name like “Affordable Healthcare Act”, how can this boondogle be sucking up money down a black hole while delivering no measurable improvements of any kind other than the usual debunked donkey talking points?

It now looks pretty clear that insurers are having a very bad experience in these markets. The sizeable premium increases would have been even higher if insurers had not stepped up the deductibles and clamped down on provider networks. The future of Obamacare now looks like more money for less generous coverage than its architects had hoped in the first few years.

But of course, that doesn’t mean insurers need to leave the market. Insurance is priced based on expectations; if you expect to pay out more, you just raise the price. After all, people are required to buy the stuff, on pain of a hefty penalty. How hard can it be to make money in this market?

Let me answer that: Impossible. And that’s by design. This thing, from the very start, was design and put together by people that had to pass it in secrecy, so they could have avoided any scrutiny that would have shed light that what they had obviously was intended to destroy the existing US health insurance market. And as the title of my post points out, they did it by design, because the end goal for these crooks has always been a government controlled single-payer system that would allow government to control the lives of its citizens with even more impunity.

They will keep coming after the serfs, and they will get us to bow down to their will. We peasants should be glad our masters are throwing us these table scraps.

What is the most common fear of Americans in the age of Obama?

When Americans was surveyed about their greatest fears, the survey found the top issue was corrupt government.

The researchers asked a random sample of 1,541 adults to rate the level of fear for 88 different fear options across a variety of domains (like crime and natural disasters). Based on their findings, here were the top 10 fears for 2015:

• Corruption of government officials (58.0%)
• Cyber-terrorism (44.8%)
• Corporate tracking of personal information (44.6%)
• Terrorist attacks (44.4%)
• Government tracking of personal information (41.4%)
• Bio-warfare (40.9%)
• Identity theft (39.6%)
• Economic collapse (39.2%)
• Running out of money in the future (37.4%)
• Credit card fraud (36.9%)

I wish this was something we could just joke about, but I am actually surprised that the number of people that are aware of how corrupt our government has become – willy nilly enforcing laws to benefit the connected few and screwing everyone else over – was so low. And I am certainly not saying that republicans can’t be corrupt, but they are amateurs when it comes to taking government criminal activity to the levels democrats do, and then, they can’t even compete when you put them against the shit done by this administration and the sycophants that help do its dirty work for them.

Notice what was definitely missing? Panic about the collectivist manufactured “Gaia is going to burn up and drown us all unless you allow us to turn you peasants into serfs of an almighty state” big government types that want to sell the AGW fiction needed to scare people into giving up their rights and money.

Another Shutdown?

Wut?

Congress is running out of time to agree on a spending plan that keeps the government open, as Republican leaders attempt to defuse the threat of another shutdown – this one over Planned Parenthood.

Dozens of conservatives in the House and Senate have already pledged not to vote for a spending bill that includes money for Planned Parenthood. But both House speaker John Boehner and Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell have rejected such proposals, worried that moderate and independent voters may blame the Republican party for a government shutdown.

Ya think? Shutting down the government two years ago accomplished little but had some support from the public. Shutting down the government over Planned Parenthood will accomplish nothing and have almost no support (current polling shows 70-20 opposition).

This is entirely about Planned Parenthood. The parties are in agreement on the budget, which basically sustains the fiscal path that has cut the budget deficit by 70% over the last six years. Right now, the leadership are trying to schedule a separate vote on defunding Planned Parenthood. Even if that passes, however, the President would veto it. And even if he didn’t, Planned Parenthood would almost certainly sue over it. Most of their government money come via Medicaid, for medical services they provide to poor women (this does not include abortion, for which funding is forbidden). So this would amount to singling them out among many providers for activities which, so far, are not illegal. Moreover, stripping this funding would not stop a single abortion, since Planned Parenthood’s abortion business is a separate revenue stream.

I have no idea where the Republican Party is headed right now. The two men leading the polls are Donald Trump and Ben Carson, neither of whom has any experience and neither of whom has shown much policy knowledge. Meanwhile, the campaign of several promising governors — Christie, Perry, Walker — are imploding. And now we’re talking about a government shutdown to stop an admittedly unpleasant abortion provider from … also providing health services and birth control. And while the GOP is flailing around like this, the Democrats are getting ready to put forward Hillary Clinton or, God help us, Bernie Sanders, as a Presidential candidate.

Give the culture cons their vote on Planned Parenthood. But once that fails, just pass the damn budget. It’s one thing to shut down over spiraling deficits. I didn’t support the shutdown over Obamacare but at least that was partially defensible. But this … this is just silliness. And with an election coming up, it could prove to be very costly silliness.

Cantor loses to Tea Party challenger in major upset

Cantor, the republican Senate minority leader, in a first ever case, lost in the primary in VA to an unknown and upstart Tea Party candidate. The NYT is flabbergasted. After all, they have been telling us that the Tea Party is dead, after all.

With just over $200,000, David Brat — a professor at Randolph-Macon College in Ashland, Va. — toppled Mr. Cantor, repeatedly criticizing him for being soft on immigration and contending that he supported what critics call amnesty for immigrants in the country illegally. The Associated Press declared Mr. Brat the winner.

Going into the elections, most Republicans had been watching for how broad Mr. Cantor’s victory would be, with almost no one predicting that he would lose.

Mr. Cantor’s defeat — the most unexpected of a congressional leader in recent memory — will reverberate in the capital and could have major implications for an immigration overhaul.

There is a lesson here for all politicians: Americans are not liking the current immigration strategy employed by either party. Amnesty for these law breaking border jumpers should be a no-go. We were already promised in the 80s it would not happen again, and here we are today with central American nations all happy that Obama’s administration has decided not to enforce immigration laws. It’s insane.

Cantor losing is about the greatest thing that could have happened right now. It will force the politicians in DC to abandon their strategy to reward criminals in order to buy potential future votes. And democrats should be even more weary about this. A large section of their voter base views these border jumpers as direct competition for their livelihood, and they will not just accept the new comers, despite what the elite hoi-polloi on the left tell them they should believe.

Good riddance, and lets make sure the amnesty plans are derailed.

Seriously? This is news how?

Gallup has a poll/study titled “In U.S., Depression Rates Higher for Long-Term Unemployed” which makes the claim that “Mental health poorest among those jobless for six months or more” as seen here:

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The longer that Americans are unemployed, the more likely they are to report signs of poor psychological well-being. About one in five Americans who have been unemployed for a year or more say they currently have or are being treated for depression — almost double the rate among those who have been unemployed for five weeks or less.

These findings are based on surveys with 356,599 Americans, including 18,322 unemployed adults, conducted in 2013 as part of the Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index.

Gallup finds that unemployed Americans are more than twice as likely as those with full-time jobs to say they currently have or are being treated for depression — 12.4% vs. 5.6%, respectively. However, the depression rate among the long-term unemployed — which the Bureau of Labor Statistics defines as those who have been seeking work for 27 weeks or more — jumps to 18.0%.

Is this another incidence of common sense seems fleeting to these people? Look, nothing is more devastating to someone that feels pride in doing work and taking care of themselves than the ability to do that. None of the bullshit “safety nets” put in by liberals can compete with the ability to actually stay gainfully employed by people that value such a thing. Sure, if you are one of those perpetually sucking at the government teat types, depression will come when you no longer can mooch off the productive, but I fucking could care less about those people being depressed. In fact, I would love to see a whole lot more of that, and a lot less formerly productive people being depressed because economy crushing psuedo-marxist-fascist nanny state progressive government expansion have ravaged the employment landscape.

Nothing is free. No system that rewards negative behavior will ever do anything but encourage more of it, no matter how noble the intent behind it. Life is harsh. People that want to forget or mitigate that always make it worse. Ben Franklin pointed out how one should never trade freedom for security, because you would end up with less of either, but I think this philosophy applies in a far broader sense than he meant it (or perhaps as we understood what he meant).

Our current social system is broken. It doesn’t exist to serve those productive members of society that are temporarily afflicted with bad luck or circumstances that require them to seek help – in fact, it often punishes those people, harshly, requiring them to lose everything before they qualify for help – and actually exists to prop up an ever growing segment of people that feel entitled to the fruits of other people’s labor, simply by the virtue that they were born. Romney got demonized, obviously by the special interests that gain the most from the existing broken system, for pointing out that a very dangerously large portion of our population now votes for a living, but he was dead on. Unemployment compensation, food stamps, and any other such government assistance are a poor substitute for gainful employment, but you can’t buy votes from people that have economic freedom and don’t want to be ripped off by your unicorn fart sniffing cult.

The most important thing that our government should have been doing over the last 6 years was to make changes that would encourage economic growth and employment. Instead they pretended to implement things to “help” people that did the exact opposite and cost us economic growth. And that was all done while incurring massive and insurmountable new debt levels. Obamacare is the biggest economy killing government scam to come our way. We should get used to European level unemployment here, as this system can’t avoid causing that, while watching the quality, access to care, and improvement of care go down, while costs, waiting times, and pain go up. Don’t take my word for it: the horrible happenings that amount to the VA scandal, which was so conveniently removed from the public eye recently, is Obamacare as a Proof of Concept. And Obamacare has plenty of help from other economy crushing progressive agenda schemes and scams, like the recent EPA regulations that have continued to make the cost of energy skyrocket.

Unemployed, and those unemployed for a long time, are going to be depressed. They have been robbed of their dignity by a system that feels it is more important to protect those that vote to keep the nanny state big and fat than to actually help them.

Another class warrior caught manipulating data?

The left, including our own Right Thinking leftists, have been telling us how bad the income inequality has become, thus justifying their believe they should be allowed to play god, and providing data from the fabled class warfare book recently put out by Thomas Piketty director of the Paris School of Economics and a self avowed marxist class warrior to make the case for their wealth redistribution schemes.

Pickity’s work makes the claim that income inequality is at it’s highest level now and needs to be dealt with before things get worse. That means the left should pick winners and losers, and hammer those trying to join the ranks of the wealthy by confiscating as much of their income as possible. Note that the left always focuses on earnings, but never wants to go after the fortunes of the super wealthy which always, without exception, tend to be leftists themselves. Something has to be done! Can’t have the world be injust and all that.

But Pickity’s work has a big problem according to people that have taken a closer look, and now they are saying that the errors he made are not accidental but manipulations of the facts to make the case for the class warrior’s agenda.

Can’t say I am surprised. This is the way the left works. I can’t put my finger on it but there is another one of the pillars of the church of the envious and greedy classists that has been exposed as suffering from the same lack of scientific rigor. There too they manipulated data and conveniently lost it. Amongst other things, but tell us their conclusions are accurate and fact despite all the evidence to the contrary. If we go bye how the left reacted to that kick in the pants, I expect them to make the claim Pickety is right, regardless of what he has done, and that those that have shown he is full of it are at fault. Probably even sponsored by some special interests, while again ignoring that Pickity’s work serves to justify theft by the biggest special interest organizations on the planet: nanny state collectivist governments.

If the left produced it, question it. And yes, if the right did it, do the same. But do it on scientific grounds. Don’t let the people that tell you because it is funded by special interests it has to be lies frame the argument against science. And you can bet your ass that whatever agenda of the left it is, from undermining the 2nd amendment to pretending we need more class warfare, they will argue that the other side is funded by evil special interests. All while they are funded by the people with the deepest pockets ever: collectivist run nanny states that stand to benefit from these fabrications.