Friday, December 14, 2018

Democrat disdain - a reflex for them

When one holds a thumb to an open spigot one cannot prevent some water from spewing. Similarly, Dems in any position which smacks of restoration to their "rightful" domination  are simply unable to restrain their disdain for any who venture to oppose them or to prevent their  snobbish antipathy from spurting forth with  haught and abandon. This was obvious in the recent confrontation of  MINORITY Leader Senator Charles Schumer and the  presumptive Prime Minister of the U.S., Madame Pelosi, with our President in our White House.  I do not imagine for a moment that a canny player like the President expected anything other than the gratuitous disrespect he was afforded by the Democrat duo and I do not fault his firm response to it - no, not at all.  More power to him. His example has helped to push the spineless RINOS to virtual extinction.

First of all, Charles was in manifestly revealing form, yes he was. He sniffed "When the President brags he won North Dakota and Indiana ( Senate seats), he's in trouble " with his signature unctuous sneer/smile .   A more revealing  and reckless statement of his stereotypical  NYC contempt  for "flyover country" can hardly be imagined (in saying this I know there are millions of down to earth people in NYC  for whom the stereotype does not apply- they showed that on Sept. 11 - but Charles is Charles.)    Ehh, Charles, each state gets two Senators, with votes equal to your's regardless of the size or political correctness of its electorate, dontcha know?

Now the frantic and, well perhaps, still hopefully alluring Nancy makes disparaging references to the President's "manhood". Oh my,my.  Surely she has decimated his fragile psyche, yes?

All of this is of course to be expected. Personal attacks on those who thwart them are de rigueur for leftists and President Trump is WELL aware of it.   Maybe one must refrain from faulting Charles and Nancy from acting as true products of their  coastal origins: the tumor on the Hudson and  smoky  dreamy Frisco. But they ought really to disabuse themselves of the self deception that they are widely perceived as anything other than totalitarian pretenders and  essentially anti American. That is, of course, a passport to celebration of them for some.

In a recent film depicting the very dark days of the American Revolution a patronizing British General says to Washington, during what he believes to be surrender negotiations, " Ah General, you cannot but have known your effort was doomed to failure; it is the better part of wisdom for you to admit as much".  Nancy and Charles embarked upon their parley with our President with much the same attitude.  They are certain that victory and consequent retribution is within their grasp due to their "decisive" takeover of Federal power in November in having accomplished temporary control of one 6th of  it (really?).

Let them be put on notice:  President Trump is OUR President;  and though he's not one of us he knows us and he stands by his promises to us.  He has proven time and again to be far more resolute than you, in your imperious detachment, can have imagined. You haven't begun to broach his political demise .  He's ours and when you attack him you attack us. How do we know? Because you and your ilk have been doing the same since the '60's . We in the real America know your destructive intent for what it is. Jack

Tuesday, December 4, 2018

Virtual revolution

Very plausible arguments, to the effect that revolution is highly unlikely in the U.S., are often made.  Factors such as the apparently increasing appeal of the Democrat party to wealthy people and the continuing material well being of most Americans  are often cited.  Revolutions such as the French, Russian and Chinese certainly were motivated by  actual and dominant destitution and injustice which  does not obtain in our country.  But what if you could convince enough Americans that it does?  Perception in a communication and information technologically rich society is powerful and often decisive. Is it enough to provide the perfectionist, ever revolution seeking American left the means to force unwarranted change on us?

In the book Fan Shen, William Hinton describes the extraordinary measures communist cadre took to persuade the  Chinese population that they had been oppressed far more than they had realized and that fundamental  change was necessary and just.  Intense public discussions known as "struggle sessions" were often the means employed, though torture and murder were, ehh, not unknown.  Hinton was a declared Marxist who appeared to think this process justified, despite such consequent "problems" as the malnourishment rife Great Leap Forward, which finished some 20 million lives and the insane Cultural Revolution of the '60's. Mao Tse-tung remained comfortably corpulent during the former  and he wasn't out there with the bustling mobs in the latter so there had to have been alot of perception changing going on to muster the needed coercive manpower.  I can imagine none but an intellectual sociopath maintaining it was  honest or positive.

A recent article  presented a debate over the desirability of a carbon emissions tax in the U.S.  The opposition  presented the reality of the U.S. being a leading cutter of carbon emissions through the wisely increased use of  our abundant natural gas enabled by now proven technology and the  thwarting of those for whom all fossil fuels are "icky'". Here indeed is a test of the "unquestionable" responsibility of mankind (but especially of profligate U.S.kind) for perceived "global warming", yes?   In support: "why this evidence is but nothing, nothing; we are just getting started toward the environmental perfection we know to be unattainable but without which our lives of noblesse will be bereft of meaning.  Accordingly we are blithe to advance to the full the perception that sans revolutionary change, planetary immolation is assured and  that 'ANY means necessary 'to meet it is justified and if you disagree you deserve complete legal, social, economic, intellectual and perhaps existential proscription."  

It has been argued well by Dr. Nicholas Waddy that the Dem party does not purpose the elimination of the wealthy and  that many of the rich believe they stand to benefit from the porcinely expanded government  assuredly the mission of the Dems to force on us. But that party put Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, both very possibly convinced Marxists, at the executive pinnacle and willingly employs openly declared Communists. ( Why not Nazis then; Marxists are historically proven  equal to them in subhumanity) The Bolsheviks were but a faction of a Social Democrat party which might have brought somewhat less draconian  change to Russia.  But the Reds did not acquire their murderous  power by heralding Stalin, universal suffering and the Gulag.Instead, they promised unattainable ultima.

In his blog Waddyisright, Dr. Waddy, as I see it, recently  asserted that the climate change lobby is a conduit for the transfer of wealth from those the left disfavors to those it does and that the left's egalitarian rhetoric is a sham .  I believe that but would note in addition that leftists are ineluctably perfectionist (why? in America  maybe it was all that flouride in the water in the '50's) and that consequently environmentalists will never cease their meddling, never. Second, that leading  leftists always presume mundane profit for themselves (eg. Madame Mao and Daniel Ortega with his multitudinous designer sunglasses, ad nauseum across the detestable proven Marxist spectrum), while forcing"heroic"sacrifice on their  unwilling subjects.  And as long as general and reasonable material well being is readily available to all willing to live positive lives, as it is in the U.S., inequality of income is not, I think, a national fault. Why should we care if others have more than us as long as most have enough to lead the decent lives purposed by the just?  The left trumpets the certainty of blasphemy in that but in power  cynically thrives(remember "Comrade" Leonid and his 100 cars in a time when everyday Russians saved ten years to buy a charcoal burning Soapbox Derby contraption, in a country able to put men into space?).

Most Dems and their public supporters are not totalitarian monsters but their party has its Bolsheviks who see in it a convenient vehicle for disingenuous passage to a far left future. To use Lenin's term "useful idiots" for Dems who naively countenance this is reasonable.

The far left has grievously  infected the MSM , the American academy, including secondary and elementary education and librarianship,  publishing,  the entertainment industry and the governments and judiciaries of several of the states.  The Federal deep state has a certain leftist cast and the struggle to repel the imminent radical takeover of the Federal Judiciary has yet a long road to victory. The business management world shows alarming symptoms of spineless surrender to an ideology which loathes it. In all of these settings leftists command harrowingly powerful organs of manipulation of perception and its ancillary, opinion.

In consequence: the slanderous calumny that the police are essentially and endemically determined to oppress minorities and that the only just reaction to that is forceful resistance to them and discrediting of their mission, despite the anarchy promised by the same and amply demonstrated! And: that a plutocratic 1% of the population controls all American financial security and plenty and that it requires an "impoverished" 99% underclass for its continued dominance.  And:  that all elections lost by Democrats are now by definition  suspect because of the manifest determination of the atavistic and primitive real America to suppress dissent. And: well, this  putatively miraculous and painfully evolved American  haven of life as it should be is nothing of the sort.  It is a seething "racist" , "sexist" and you fill in the blank at your pleasure,  hell hole and is overdue for complete "transformation" on a model which caused one hundred million in country murders in the 20th century.

The generation of such virtual misconceptions could be the road to a virtually generated revolution with very concrete , onerous and disastrous consequences for all who embrace solidly evolved  American institutions and values. Jack