Wednesday, July 17, 2019

The New Revised American Un-PC Dictionary

In this divided country new political words and terms are emerging almost daily and many of them are confusing to the uninformed reader.  As a descendant of the famous Webster family (yes, really) I hereby seize this unique lineage qualification and appoint myself chief cook and bottlewasher of the new Un-PC dictionary until further notice. Complaints about this appointment can be made on the 3rd Tuesday of every month, except in months with a vowel in their name.

Affirmative Action: The placement of lesser-qualified people over higher-qualified people into a job or position based simply on having non-white skin. In specialized fields such as medicine or air traffic control, this results in a higher mortality rate.

Anchor Baby: A legal citizen of the United States with parents that aren't.

Antifa: A group of violent fascists dedicated to anti-fascism and the cessation of violence by using violence. While violently protesting, they cover their faces with hoodies and do-rags because they are proud of themselves. Like cockroaches, they slither away into the cracks and crevasses until their next planned riot.

Bisexual: A person that engages in sexual intercourse once every 6 months, or 2 years if they misunderstood what "bi" means.

Boomerang Generation: Young to middle-aged adults who have had every resource given to them while growing up and yet somehow end up moving back into their parents house, often in the basement. See also Failed Fledglings and Parasite Singles.

Colin Cancer: A disease resulting from wearing or purchasing anything with the Nike logo on it.

Doxx: Collect and/or display private information about somebody on social media, or what Antifa likes to do to others but does not want done to themselves.

Food Stamps: Formerly, expensive small pieces of paper meant to purchase food that often ended up being exchanged at a discounted rate for beer or cigarettes. Now, a plastic card loaded with money from taxpayers that allows non-working people to have their cake and eat it too.

Free Health Care for Illegals: The new idea Socialist-Liberal Democrats want after forcing citizens to pay for health insurance under penalty of a fine if they don't. Americans will not only continue to pay for health insurance for themselves but also pay increased insurance premiums as a result of those illegals who don't have to pay.

Gaslighting: Psychological manipulation that encourages a person to ignite their own flatulence.

Helicopter Parents: Parents (usually liberal) who hover over their children so much that they cut their heads off with the rotors of the helicopter without intending to do so ... rendering their children ineffective for the rest of their lives.

Illegal Alien: An extraterrestrial being with an unregistered ray-gun.

Metrosexual: A musical time-keeping device used to regulate the rhythm of sexual intercourse.

Millenial: A young adult in the 21st century who thinks the world owes them a million dollars.

Late-Term Abortion: The entire NY State Legislature and Governor ... and many blues states also.

Liberal: A copious quantity. Ex: Please butter my popcorn liberally. Or, a person who wants you to pay for the butter on their popcorn and ... their popcorn too. Somehow, they never manage to pay for yours. See also Socialism.

Libtard: A colloquialism derived from Liberal and Retard;  Liberal, meaning free with other peoples money and Retard, meaning slow, as in mental capacity.

Obama Happy-Meal: The free meal the person in line ahead of you gets when they order whatever they want and then tell the counter person to hand you the bill.

Obama-Phone: An electronic device that involuntarily takes money out of taxpayers pockets.

Racist: See white supremacist below.

Reverse Racism: Hating people of any color while backing a car up.

Sanctuary City: A high-tax and high-crime area with prosperous camping-equipment merchants and fecal-laden sidewalks. See also Tent Cities.

Snowflake: A delicate symmetrical 6-sided ice crystal that falls from the sky and melts unpredictably, not unlike some easily-offended liberals.

Socialism: A system whereby able-bodied people who refuse to work legally steal from those who do. Also know as Communism lite.

TDS: Trump Deranged Syndrome. See also

TMI: Too much information, a term that describes the false notion that others need to be informed about your personal lives, including your sexual preferences and what you had for dinner last night.

Tribal: A derogatory label usually used on social media to describe a conservative who made better arguments in an on-line debate.

Undocumented Worker: A person ignoring the immigration laws of the United States who promises to follow the laws of the United States if we just ignore the law.

Welfare: A system of economic redistribution that is neither well or fair for those who pay for it but receive nothing in return.

White Privilege: A term describing an imaginary state of racial superiority that OJ Simpson, Jussie Smollett, Michael Jackson, Al Sharpton, Jessie Jackson, Kim Foxx, Ilhan, Rashida, Alexandra and other famous POC use (or have used) but don't quite understand the irony of.

White Supremacist: Every white person that was ever born.

White Supremacy: A term used by lazy or noncompetitive people who failed in life to shift blame from themselves to others that actually worked for what they have.

Monday, July 1, 2019

Elections and Money

I'm not thinking this is what our Founding Fathers had in mind. The current condition of our governments (Federal and State) fool us into thinking we, the people actually cast ballots for candidates and somehow the idea of a representative government has lasted for well over 200 years.

In reality, money has taken over the electoral process and yes, Virginia: Money can and does buy elections. How, you ask?

Political campaigns are based on getting information out about their candidate. One Congressman told me decades ago that name recognition in election was priority number one, and further, you had to present your name at least 7 times to the electorate before they were really familiar with your name. This could include TV and press coverage (news and purchased ads), lawn signs, door-to-door campaigning, billboards, bumper stickers and so on. The idea was to have your name visible to as many people as much as possible.

This, of course, takes money, and we all know  ... money is the root of all evil.

Or is it? Google Ayn Rand's idea of what money is (Atlas Shrugged, Francisco's speech about money) and you may come away with a different view. To me. it's a survival tool and just like any other tool, it can be used for both good and evil.

Back to the topic: Political money. In the last Congressional election in my district, well over $20 million dollars was spent. The vast majority of that money came from outside the district. The Republican incumbent was outspent by at least 2 to 1 and lost by less than 4,000 votes out of a quarter-million or so votes. Money made the difference. The job pays $174,000/year and to see $20 million spent tells anybody with an IQ over room temperature it's not about the pay, it's about the power. Specifically, it's about the block of power. If you can't tell, there's one hell of a power struggle going on in this country right now. While it may seem removed from you at the moment, if it continues look for it to come to a city or town near you real soon now.

When that kind of money is spent, something is expected in return: An assured vote. There is no way that kind of money is spent without an expectation of a return. That means that what the district may really want and need are very often bypassed in a vote to repay political debt, not advance the district. To influence the perception, the bought and paid-for spin doctors go to work transforming shit into shinola. Very often, these spin doctors publish newspapers or air TV "news" shows.

And so the winners are a bloc of people who don't live here and really don't give a damn about you or me, our daily lives, our daily struggles and most of all, our daily needs.

I have a solution, and it's not to completely remove money from elections.

It's to remove outside the district money from elections.

Business and political PACs would be the first to fall under this idea. Raise the money from the people and businesses that actually are in the district. NY Congressional district 22 is quite large and has a good mix of both inside its borders. For a business to donate, I think it should have an actual brick and mortar presence in the district. Post Office box and internet presence businesses would be excluded in my thinking.

This, of course, would lessen the amount of money spent on these races, and I'm not thinking this is a bad thing.

It's quite clear money raised from outside my Congressional district won the race last November. Much of this money came from New York City and believe me, NYC is not interested in what is good for Upstate; it is interested in what is good for them. To return the ability of the district to control its Representative, outside money should be removed from the equation.

And, as I predicted in an earlier blog, our freshman Democrat mendicant wasted no time in holding out the tin cup, as in this begging for alms plea found on a DC street recently:

Until the practice listed above is ended, we will always be in line behind the large financial interests that really don't give a shit about you or me.

Don't hold your breath on this one. I don't think I'll live to ever see it changed, and that's ok. When the power struggle is over in this country and one side definitively wins, then it might be time to talk about political financial reform. Until then, I can only hope.

Thursday, June 27, 2019

Everything Old is New Again

Some of my friends say I'm cheap. In reality, I don't mind spending money but I do demand one thing in return: Value. If I don't see value in something, I generally pass. When it comes to household bills, like others, I don't like to overspend in comparison with others. There are, to be certain, some household bills that are not easily managed. Property taxes, car payments, food and utilities are some of them.

Or are they manageable? The house you live in is taxed on its value. Lesson here is, live in what you can afford. Don't buy more house than what you need and can reasonably afford. Car payments? Ditto. Don't buy an S Class Mercedes if you're tight on money. The Chevy will get you to the same places just as fast. Food? This is a rough one. We all like to eat and we all have favorite foods. But again, with care you can manage your grocery bill. Grocery stores have sales every week and it's up to you to figure out where you're shopping that week.

Ah, utilities. Electric, phone, natural gas or oil for heat, and cable/internet.

You can lower your electric bill somewhat. I replaced all the bulbs in my house with LEDs. The bill went down. I turn off lights and the TV when I leave a room. For heat, I use a setback thermostat with a program to turn down the heat when we're sleeping and in the days we're not here. I also replaced all my windows and bettered the insulation; this will pay for itself in savings in just a few short years.

Up until last year, I bundled my phone with my internet and cable TV supplier in a combo plan. My anniversary with them was every March, and I could count on Time-Warner (the predecessor to Spectrum, the current company) to send me a letter telling me how much money they were saving me while raising the rate.

So every March, I would call up T-W and complain. The representative would always try to find me another "promotional" package; this approach was wildly successful. Somehow, they managed to roll me back to where I was and often, they would throw additional product to me at the same time. I got my bandwith increased from 30mbs to over 100mbs and I got a free DVR.. A few times, they got me to a lower-cost package for the 3 things they provided me. And I confess, the DVR was a nice touch. It allowed us to record some daytime TV shows we would otherwise miss. We grew fond of it quickly.

When Spectrum took over T-W a few years ago, things changed. The March phone call was a waste of time; it became a take-it-or-leave-it attitude. I didn't care for this. But I lived with it for a year while researching my options. And there were options, as there usually are.

I've had the same landline phone number since 1978 and didn't want to lose it, so I took it back from Spectrum and put it into a Trac-phone. The phone cost me $20 and the prepurchased 1-year time card was less than $100. FWIW, my other cell phone (a smart phone) is also a Trac-phone, ditto on the cost. 

I boned up on antenna TV. I bought a small plastic antenna (Clear-TV) at a garage sale and tried it. Surprisingly, I got 28 channels on the living room TV and 32 on the TV in the den. Shortly after, I took the cable box back to Spectrum and told them ... well, I kept it polite. I told them goodbye. I bought a high-speed gigabit cable modem and took theirs back also. My cost dropped from almost $200/month to $65/month. Doing the math, I think I'm saving almost $1500/year now.

When I built my house, there was no cable TV on the rural road I live on. First I had an old Radio-Shack antenna shoved up in a crawl space and when satellite dishes became popular, I installed one. For years this was how I watched TV. When cable arrived (and how it arrived is another story for another time, one in which I played a definitive role in), I signed up. I canned my dial-up internet provider and went to high-speed cable. And I bundled my phone into the triple-combo platter they offered. And for almost 20 years, I paid the bill they sent me every month.

I've been tethered to the small plastic antenna for over a  year. But I did climb up in the attic and take down that old Radio-Shack antenna. It sat there for a while until the next light bulb went off in my head: What if I put that antenna up and tried it? I'm quite used to living with 28 or 32 channels, even with the handful of shopping channels that my TV stumbled across when I scanned.

So I tried it. I put the antenna up on the chimney via a mast that holds my weather station (you can find it on Weather Underground). I pointed it Northwest at about a heading of 300 degrees and rescanned the TV.

I got more channels; quite a few from Syracuse (~60 miles away). Remember, I'm up on a hill at about 1100' above sea level. But I lost one set of local channels I was used to getting: WKTV, channels 2.1 through 2.4. But I liked the increase in Syracuse channels and didn't really want to lose them, so I climbed back up on the roof with a good military compass and tried again. With my wife watching TV, I moved the antenna to the south until I lost Syracuse, and then brought it back. The antenna now faces about 260 degrees.

I rescanned ... and to my surprise, I got 43 channels. A handful of them are home shopping channels, and maybe 3 or so are straight religion. But I never got 43 channels over the air before.

Sadly, I still lost the NBC/CBS local Utica feed (WKTV) ...but I have them from Syracuse. I have all the major networks (NBC, ABC, CBS, Fox) along with plenty others. In quite a few cases, I have channels I could not subscribe to on cable TV, namely:  Grit, Comet, Charge, AntennaTV, Cozi, and Heartland.

Yeah, it's not great looking. But it's functional, and it's free. Johnny Carson reruns are on Antenna-TV every night at 10pm, and he's way better than the hateful malcontents who rag on Trump every night at 11:30. Nostalgia is great, isn't it?

I plan on constructing a small add-on to this antenna to see if I can recover the local NBC-affiliate (WKTV) by aiming it to the north where their towers are. Maybe it will work, maybe it won't.

But still, with 43 free over-the-air HD digital channels ... color me happy.

Here's a picture. That contraption above the antenna with the anemometer is my Wx station.

Yeah, I know, the chimney needs some work. Thanks for reminding me.


Wednesday, June 19, 2019

I Changed my Mind. I Want Reparations

Sanity is history; the inmates are running the asylum now. Ideas that wouldn't have seen the light of day only a  few years ago are now in mainstream discussion, and sadly many of them are now etched into law where I live (a blue state and yes, I'm pretty blue about living here).

As the Presidential election season starts, we are seeing some really radical ideas coming from the left. One of them is the idea of paying reparations to those we wronged long ago. Mostly, it's about paying off descendants of slavery. Judging from my Ancestry DNA test, I don't qualify. So if reparations are going to be paid, it looks like I and other Wonder-Bread skin colored people are going to be cut out of the deal.

Harrumph, say I. If there's gonna be free dough, I want some. And after considerable thought, I've figured out a convincing way to get some: If we're going to pay off millions of slave descendants, then we ought to pay off those that fought and died to free the slaves also. It's estimated 2% of the US population died fighting in the Civil War. In real numbers, that's said to be about 620,000 human beings. NY State had the highest number lost, and of the 51,000 lost at Gettysburg, my maternal grandfathers uncle was lost in the early hours of fighting on 1 July 1863.

Private William Cameron Fox enlisted in October, 1861 at Cortland, NY in Company A of the 76th NYS Volunteers. He was all of 19 years old at the time and Abraham Lincoln needed him, or so he was told. From his muster and payroll papers I've obtained from the National Archives, he spent time in NY City and moved down through Maryland. He was in the DC area for a while, but fate called him along with many others to the northwest corner of Gettysburg in June of 1863. Unfortunately for him, Robert E Lee descended upon Gettysburg in the early morning hours of July 1, 1863. Lee sent a massive force in from the west with a pincer movement from the north and by 10'o clock (or so) in the morning, Private Fox took a rebel bullet in the throat and died shortly after.

He was one of 51,000 casualties in the 3 days of fighting at Gettysburg. He was one of those 620,000 lost in the Civil War. The north won, the slaves were freed and generations did their thing which brings us to the present day.

Ah, reparations. I've already written about these in a previous blog. Yes, I don't take a liking to the idea of them. But if there's 1 cent doled out in the name of reparations, damn sure I want some.

Private William Cameron Fox was all of 21 years old when he was KIA. He never married, never had children and his future was robbed from him. In all reality, he probably forfeited 3/4 of his life.

What's worse? Being a slave or dying to end slavery? I don't know.

But I do know one thing: If the kooky and utterly insane idea of reparations ever really sees the light of day (and not as an election bait issue), it would be unfair to pay one group without paying the other. And in that light, where do I and all my sibling descendants of the Fox family sign up?

Yeah, I'm being sarcastic. In reality, I am still 100% against reparations. But again, if 1 cent is ever doled out for them, color me deserving of them also.

I scanned in all of William Foxes paperwork I got back from the National Archives. They make for good reading. Here's a few pages of them:

Thursday, May 23, 2019

Who Do You Think is the Biggest Murderer of All Time?

It's a rather short list. Maybe you're thinking Hitler, or Stalin. Maybe Mao. Or if you go back far enough in time, perhaps Attila the Hun or Vlad the Impaler.

Hitler certainly comes in with high numbers. Stalin and Mao are right up there also. Vlad or Attila, probably not.

Bzzz. Time's up. The biggest murderer of all time is, in my opinion (now I'm covered for libel) is a portly senior citizen named Sarah Weddington. She has silver-gray hair, a nice smile and looks like somebody Norman Rockwell might use as a grandmother serving pie after dinner. I'd even bet she's polite and kind to animals. Oh yes, she's very much still alive as I write this article.

Who, pray tell, is Sarah Weddington and why do I think she is the greatest murderer of all time, you might ask.

She's not an everyday household name, but she is famous in one circle. She is the attorney who argued successfully in Roe v Wade at the Supreme Court, which opened the door to legal abortion in America. Initially, only in the first trimester, but we all know how a door ajar quickly gets kicked wide open ... which, of course, it did. BTW, the vote was 7-2 and if you want to blame the court, feel free - but remember, they would not have been able to even hear the case had Sarah not filed the legal briefs first.

If you think abortion is not murder, that's your right. It's also an opinion just as mine is. If you're like me and think that abortion on demand of a viable human being is, in fact, a form of murder, then read on. If not, stop reading further; you won't like more of my thoughts about this subject. Viability is, of course established at some date in utero. We were all there once, and as Ronald Reagan notably said, I've noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born.

Depending on your view of how we got here (creation, evolution or a mix of both), your views on abortion may vary. Biological systems are complex, and one of the important functions of biology is reproduction. The bible says Go forth and multiply and certainly mankind has accomplished that task. To ensure the continuity of the species, our creator added lust to the recipe and so far it seems to have worked marvelously.

When the topic comes up in conversation, sometimes I ask Why does a carrot grow?

Nobody gives me the real answer. I hear everything from that's what they do...  to we can eat them.

Answers like that miss the point. A carrot grows for one main purpose: To reproduce. Everything else is a support system to accomplish that end. And so it is for the human race: We are programmed to reproduce. It's not learned, it's innate. History proves that even without educated bulb-heads telling us how it works, somehow our primitive ancestors figured it out. If they hadn't, you wouldn't be reading this right now.

When medicine advances far enough to make it a routine procedure, and the law changes to remove legal consequences, is it acceptable? To some, yes. To others, no.  IMHO, elective abortion is homicide and as the numbers increase, then it becomes genocide. Not that it matters, but most Christian churches agree with me ... which is kind of ironic in that Sarah's father was a Christian minister. I suspect with that upbringing she was more than familiar with the 6th commandment.

I was puzzled when I saw the picture below. New Yorkers all know (or should) who the lawmakers are in it: Gov. Andrew Cuomo, Lt. Gov. Kathy Hochul, Legislative leaders Carl Heastie and Andrea Stewart-Cousins. But who is the dowdy old lady sitting next to Cuomo, and further, what is she doing there? Why are they all smiling?

The politicians are smiling because they passed the late term abortion bill (aka legal infanticide) and Cuomo was signing it into law. FWIW, this bill failed repeatedly until NY Democrats took control of all 3 branches of NY government. Ironically, they called this the Reproductive Justice bill ... Well, not for some still in utero. Sucks to be you, sorry.

Even more ironic are the politicians whose own religion opposes it. The guy with the pen in the picture above, for example. Or our own (former NY Assemblyman who previously co-sponsored the bill) Congressman Brindisi. Both of these people are practicing Catholics, and until the church decides to enforce their own dogma, seeing these people in the communion line won't be an unusual sight.

The double-chinned smiling lady in the picture confused me. Who was she? Why did she make the cut?

It took me a while to find out that's Sarah. She was there as an invited VIP to celebrate the legality of late-term abortion. Like Adolf Hitler, she wasn't at the front lines doing the hands-on work (except for her own Mexican abortion in 1967, according to wiki). Her work merely started the ball rolling.

And that is why, in my humble opinion she rings the bell as instigating the biggest and longest genocide of all time. 46 years and counting ... and every day, every week, every year the number keeps growing.... Kind of like the debt clock, but with a different cost: Human life.

What Hitler did to his victims was evil and worthy of the term holocaust. What Sarah Weddington did in 1973, in my opinion  put Hitler in second place.

This is probably the largest moral political issue of our time. If you absolutely don't want children but choose to engage in sex, I strongly advocate judicious use of contraceptives to avoid dealing with this issue. But ladies, if you somehow find yourself in an untenable situation, please seriously consider adoption as an alternative ... and, if after considering all the options, you are bound and determined to abort ... Please, please  do it right away. Physically tearing developed arms and legs off a late-term fetus or having a pair of scissors end the life of a human being during abortive-birth is grotesque, not to mention the pain a living being feels during surgical vivisection. That's cruel and inhumane torture; ironically, we treat our pets better. At that point, you're not an abortion patient anymore, you're the parent of a dead human. As I write this, the Michigan legislature has passed bills intended to outlaw fetal dismemberment during abortion, but the Governor (a Democrat) has said she will veto it ... which is not surprising. Georgia and Alabama recently went the other way restricting abortion to pre-heartbeat development (about 6 weeks). This issue is pretty much divided along party lines, and in these states legal battles will certainly begin shortly. I'm hoping the Supreme Court revisits this again; they have reversed themselves on occasion and it would be interesting to see a fresh ruling.

As you can plainly see, while I don't like abortion, I especially abhor late-term abortion of viable human beings because a developed nervous system does feel pain and dismemberment while alive ... is ... simply ... barbaric.

Make no mistake about it: A fetus is not a tumor or unknown growth. These are living beings renting space in a uterus just as you did in your mother. It's God's pay-it-forward system of ensuring we continue as a species.

Yes, I'm a man. No, I don't know everything female. This is how God has us reproduce. We don't get to redesign reproduction, only use (or abuse) it. Arguments about woman's rights in this matter leave out one important group: Those that can't defend themselves at the debate table. The other argument that men shouldn't be able to make laws about women also falls short. There are plenty of men and woman in the legislature, not to mention there are plenty of both sexes on the street that view things the other way.

Is everything legal also moral? Think about it. The answer is pretty obvious.

Oh. The number, you want the number: Over Sixty million since 1973 according to the majority of google hits.

So much for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness ... those unalienable rights given to us by our creator, as written in the precursor to our Constitution (The Declaration of Independence) in 1776.

It's not really pro-life versus pro-choice. It's pro-life versus pro-death. Let's call it what it really is. The lines are drawn, folks. Like holocaust survivor and famous Nazi-hunter Elie Wiesel said:  We must take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.

Choose wisely. There is no middle-of-the-road on this issue. You either value all human life ... or you don't.

Wednesday, May 15, 2019

Are You a Nazi?

The word Nazi is bandied about frequently and is often (incorrectly) used to insult a person, an idea or a philosophy somebody strongly disagrees with. Both Democrats and Republicans have hurled the insult at each other at some point. After the 2016 Presidential election, it became commonplace to see Donald Trump compared to Hitler and most Americans now simply dismiss this as 21st-century political warfare. Neither side actually believes the other are real Nazis; more often than not it is used for pure shock value. Picture it as the new F-bomb of politics, if you will.

Rather than simply dismissing the word, I thought perhaps we ought to look at some characteristics of Nazism and see which side more closely resembles the Nazi Hallmarks of governing. Let's begin with some of Hitler's basic ideas about how a country should be run.

One of the tactics the Nazis used was to control the media. They knew controlling movie, newspaper and radio content (there was no television or internet at that time) was so important that their message should dominate. Upon Hitler's rise to power, German media almost immediately began regurgitating Nazi propaganda. How does this compare with today?

In America, it is no secret that the news media and Hollywood predominantly leans left. The liberal message clearly dominates the majority of what we see and hear every day. The few conservative media outlets pale in comparison to the number of left-leaning outlets. News reporters aren't Huntley and Brinkley anymore; they're editorial reporters with a slanted narrative of whole lies and half-truths they want to persuade people with. They don't want to just tell you what happened, they want to tell you what to think about what happened. CNN and MSNBC are clearly tainted beyond the point of no return. ABC, CBS and NBC are not too far behind. They have marginalized themselves with their words, their imagined-conspiracy news and their patently transparent and vapid reporters. I'd go as far as to say the media in America today is corrupt in their everyday slanting of the news, pretty much like Hitler's media was. Or maybe keeping spicy news quiet like Reuters did as they sat on a story for two years that would have hurt Democrat Senate-candidate Beto O'Rourke (he lost anyway) is an acceptable trade (to them) to make in their quest to sell unfair and unbalanced "news."

With very few exceptions, Hollywood is one big rats nest of liberalism. Late-night TV shows like the 2 Jimmy's, Rachael MadcowSNL and The View regularly display their hatred of the America they loathe. Unhappy with the upset result of an election they abetted in rigging, they assail those they disagree with in the worst of terms. If the world were flat, they would have fallen off the left side long ago.

Control of internet content is still debatable. It's kind of like the wild west right now, but make no mistake about it: Liberals largely own social media sites (Facebook and Twitter, ie) and they simply delete content they don't like and/or put the authors in limbo (Facebook jail or Twitter account deletion). This is the modern version of Nazi book-burning - simply eradicate what somebody sitting in front of a computer screen deems inappropriate. There are things that should not be on the internet (child porn, for example) and we deal with those using law enforcement. That excepted, political social media isn't in Nazi territory - yet. But the censorship of thought emulates one of the major signatures of Nazism that most likely will only get worse.

Conclusion: Similar to the Nazi control of the media, the left dominates what gets disseminated as news in 21st-century America. They do parrot the liberal slant in reporting. Need more convincing? Just look at their take on the Mueller report. Even though it exonerated Trump, they refuse to get the message or apologize for wasting 2 years of our time on a nothing-burger. They still scrape the bottom of the barrel trying to prove their point. Just look how many times CNN and MSNBC put sleaze-lawyer Michael Avenatti on TV as some sort of go-to person. (~250 appearances before he was arrested and relegated to the junk heap).

Another of the tactics the Nazis employed was controlling education. They knew that early and repeated doses of propaganda were more likely to engender lifetime support to keep their regime functioning. How does this compare to education in America now?

You'd have to be deaf, dumb and blind to not realize schools in America lean left. Liberal education starts in the local school system and by the time a young person enters a college or university, it progresses into wholesale brain-washing. Professors are overwhelmingly liberal and students have to adapt to get past them. By graduation time, the job is complete. Liberal Arts degrees are aptly named because if you earn one, you will likely be liberal. Benjamin Franklin, using the alias Silence Dogood warned us of the dangers of higher education in his fourth essay printed in 1722. Of course we need doctors, architects, lawyers, engineers and other specialty-skilled people. But we don't need more people with debt-laden generic liberal arts degrees. These people come out of college with a different perspective and are soon shocked into the cold-hard realities of the world, which often disillusions them when they have to find employment and pay off (often, 6 figure) student debt. Many of these people would have done far better with trade jobs.

Conclusion: Much like the Nazi regime did, the left dominates the educational system and has for many decades now.

Hitler also knew that an armed citizenry was dangerous to absolute control. He implemented gun control and sold it to the German population as a good thing in that they would be safer without guns. He wasted no time in disarming those he deemed dangerous to him. Soon after, he ramped up his pogrom, started WW2 and we all know how the story ended. In America, we are governed by the US Constitution, and our forefathers wasted no time in adapting the first 10 Amendments which we recognize as the Bill of Rights. Does anybody wonder why they put the right to own guns right after the right to free speech, religion and press? Because it was that important to them. They had just finished fighting a war against tyranny and weren't real fond of the idea of doing it right away again. They weren't worried about deer uprisings, they were worried about bad government and the ability of the citizenry to be able to fight it ... with guns, if it came down to that again.

So how do liberals and conservatives view gun control now? Almost along party lines, with some exceptions. Liberals are always calling for more gun laws (thinly veiled confiscation schemes, as per Senator Feinstein who said if she could grab them all, she would). Conservatives are the ones defending the constitutional right of keeping arms.

There is some real irony in this one. It is absolutely moronic for liberal protesters to say Donald Trump is Hitler while demanding he disarm the American populace. And, of course, this is why the Supreme Court is so important in defending our rights. It falls upon the conservative members of the court to defend the 2nd Amendment, because it is patently obvious the liberal members won't. It is no coincidence the liberal media signs on to the idea of more gun laws, and further, use their resources to advance the idea of disarming the citizenry. Big media is, of course, mostly owned by liberals.

Conclusion: Like Hitler, liberals want to remove guns from private ownership in America. Conservatives don't.

The worst plank of Hitler's Nazi government was, of course antisemitic murder. For reasons we may never fully understand, Hitler hated Jews to an extreme. The Third Reich governed for 12 years, but Hitler began well before his 1933 rise to power. His struggle as outlined in Mein Kampf began in the 1920s and he never went out of his way to hide his anti-Semitic feelings. When he seized control, he implemented his plan of Jewish genocide piece by piece. But where did it begin? With anti-Semitic words, of course.

How does this compare in 21st-century America? Are anti-Semitic words being spoken by anybody of prominence or power today?

The answer is, of course, yes. When Jesse Jackson uses terms like Hymietown, when Al Sharpton inflames a tense racial situation over the killing (by blacks) of a young Rabbinical student by saying If the Jews want to get it on, tell them to pin their yarmulkes back and come over to my house ... These are outrageously anti-Semitic remarks. When Ilhan Omar made anti-Semitic comments about Israel, the house Democrats couldn't even muster up the votes to condemn her remarks and instead came out with a watered-down generic resolution that meant nothing. When AOC opened her mouth and stuck her foot in it about Israel, it's another indication she's not Jewish-friendly.  When Rashida Tlaib says the holocaust gives her a calming effect, it's pretty clear what she means: She hates Jews. These people are, by the way, all prominent Democrats. Conservative Republicans are aghast at the tone and intent of these words and say so at every practical chance. In Obama's last term, he was not known for his good relations with Israel (maybe because he meddled in Israeli elections?), and Hillary Clinton wasn't very Israel-friendly either. When Trump won, Israeli PM Netenyahu was elated when he said Donald Trump is a friend of Israel.

Conclusion: Anti-Semitic words and deeds are on the rise in America, not unlike Hitler with his anti-Semitic words as he began his entrance onto the world scene. This is dangerous to our Republic. Sadly, the rhetoric seems to be coming from the liberal left. Small fringe groups on the radical right may also be anti-Semitic, but they have not elected anybody or elevated any of their members to everyday national prominence as the anti-Semites residing on the left have. Overall, the anti-Semitic voices we are hearing in America today are on the liberal side of the scale. The American Jewish community would do well to take note of this and vote accordingly.

I'm sure this essay is going to upset many liberals. Knowing that it will offend some people I value, I debated whether or not to write it. Nobody likes to be called a Nazi, and for the record I am not saying liberals are real Nazis. Nobody is putting political dissidents in concentration camps or exterminating them, even Hillary Clinton who has a remarkable record of associates getting murdered or suddenly and inexplicably committing suicide. I'm pointing out that that a good portion of 21st-century American liberalism shamefully copies much of what the Nazis thought important. Control of the media and education, gun confiscation and antisemitism were all part of the Nazi grand scheme. Considering everything, America is not in a good place right now. Things need to change; a balance has to be restored or repeating many of the evils of the last century is almost certain to occur. Whether it is in my lifetime or not, I don't know. I'd guess not, but then again, looking at the almost even division that exists in America right now, of that I'm not even certain.

History does have a funny way of repeating itself. Many civilizations have come and gone before us. America is not in any way immune, and if we don't get our house in order, we will eventually join them when our future becomes our past.

Coming Attractions (next blog): Who do you think is the biggest murderer in history?

Hint: You're not thinking out of the box enough.

Thursday, May 9, 2019

Professing Themselves to be Wise, They Became Fools

These are crazy times we live in. Almost every day, another pearl of wisdom rolls out of the mouth of one of the announced Presidential candidates seeking the Democrat nomination. It appears that each one is trying to outdo the others with loony ideas, and further, isn't embarrassed to share these gems with the American public. I'm probably writing this too early because I'm sure more dimbulb ideas will emerge between now and convention time.

Some of these escapees from the lunatic asylum have proposed:
  • Allowing jailed prisoners, including felons to vote
  • Free health care for illegals (as if they don't already show up at ERs with no money)
  • Sanctuary cities and even worse, sanctuary states (Except Florida. They just said 'No thanks')
  • Abolishing the electoral college (Yay! Then only 4 states will elect Presidents!)
  • Lowering the voting age to 16
  • Reparations for slavery that occurred over 150 years ago (or, how to sew up the black vote)
  • A slew of new guns laws, including putting gun owners in jail (Hitler, Mao and Stalin ring a bell?)
  • Universal basic income (Is this a new name for Welfare?)
  • Medicare for everybody ... or age 50, depending on the temperature that day
  • $600 given to every voter so they can "donate" to election campaigns (Suddenly, everybody is running and giving themselves $600, Senator Gillibrand)
  • The NEW green deal that only costs $93 trillion (A bargain! Only $600,000 per household)
  • Abolishing ICE, the Federal Immigration Police (Oh sure, that will help stem the flow of illegals)

The leftward march of Democrats is alarming, because if history is any teacher some of these ideas are eventually going to be law. As I look at the list of candidates, I'm tempted to start a betting square on who is going to drop first ... and then second through five. There are about 20 or so in the race at the moment, but that number will slim down fast next year as we get to the serious contenders. Biden is in the lead as I write this, but that can change in a heartbeat (if it happens, figuratively, not literally I hope). Keep in mind most of these people are in the race for 2 reasons: 1, national name exposure and 2, Vice-Presidential wanna-bes.

The candidates from the solid blue states can probably forget about being tapped for VP. Their electoral votes are already pretty safe, so you can figure that the VP selection is most likely going to come from a toss-up state to try to secure their electoral votes. Thankfully, that takes Kamala and Fauxcahontas out of the VP race, and I wouldn't bet on them locking up the #1 slot any time soon either. It also takes De Blasio and Cuomo out of consideration also, which, as a New York resident allows me the privilege of applauding for.

But I digress, something I'm famous for. I'm going to close by posting a map of the 2016 results with this comment: This looks more like a cat-scan of a cancer patient than it does America. And no, for the doubters, the healthy area is red and the cancer is blue.

As a final thought, I'm going to tell you where the title of this blog came from: Romans 1:22.

It seems they had their share of idiots back then too.

The New Revised American Un-PC Dictionary

In this divided country new political words and terms are emerging almost daily and many of them are confusing to the uninformed reader.  As...