Nemo me impune lacessit

No one provokes me with impunity

____________________________________

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

Article 1, Section 9, Constitution of the United States

If this is the law of the land...why in a republic (little r) and as republicans, do we allow mere POLITICIANS to the right to use a "title of office" for the rest of their lives as if it were de facto a patent of nobility. Because, as republicans, this should NOT be the case...just saying...

The Vail Spot's Amazon Store

Chris Muir's Day by Day

Sunday, September 30, 2012

Liberals...covering Obama Administration

Charles says it all:



Fast & Furious

The only news program wiling to actually cover the corrupt and probably illegal FBI/ATF gun running operation that was started by the Obama Dept of Justice is Univision.  Here's their preview of that news report.



People died...because of the actions and direct approval of our Dept of Justice.  So far Eric Holder has avoided having to take responsiblity, yet he HAS lied to Congress about what he knew, and when he knew it.  I suspect that he approved of the operation in order to charge that we needed curbs to the 2nd Amendment.   His deputy's resignation, I believe, is intended to deflect attention from him till after the election.  The fact that the MSM has so far minimized coverage just goes to show how damaging this is to the Obama regime.

Saturday, September 29, 2012

Bumps...



Lisa Benson via RCP

Hollywood...Are They ALL Liberals? No!

Here's a list of 30 people who work/ed in the entertainment "industry". Some of the names surprised me:
1. Stephen Baldwin
2. Jessica Simpson
3. Britney Spears
4. Tony Danza
5. Clint Eastwood
6. Sarah Michelle Gellar
7. Mel Gibson
  8. Kelsey Grammer
9. Drew Carey
10. Matthew McConaughey
11. Freddie Prinze Jr.
12. Heather Locklear
13. Arnold Schwarzenegger
14. 50 Cent 15. Bruce Willis
16. Adam Sandler
17. Sylvester Stallone
18. Vince Vaughn
19. Tom Selleck
20. Alex Trebek
21. Angie Harmon
22. Elisabeth Hasselbeck
23. Joan Rivers
24. Donald Trump
25. Chuck Norris
26. Ted Nugent
27. Marie Osmond
28. Gary Sinise
29. Shannen Doherty
30. Alice Cooper

Like I said some names here are surprising, some aren't...

Hat tip to the blogFather

Obama's Mom...

Meet Anne Dunham...



Friday, September 28, 2012

Obama's Contempt For Israel...

Susan Rice, the hard left anti-Israel Ambassador to the UN, blew off Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu's speech at the UN yesterday.



If nothing else, this should highlight the contempt that Obama has for Israel, and it's current Prime Minister. Yet Jews continue to vote for Obama at extraordinarily high numbers. That's a shame.

Elizabeth Warren Admits Not Licensed to Practice Law in MA

Elizabeth Warren has admitted that she's not licensed to practice law in Massachusetts.  After Legal Insurrection blog began recently to point out that Ms. Warren wasn't eligible to practice law in MA, she finally fessed up on a Boston radio show that she's not legally able to practice law in that state, yet has done so since she was hired as a law professor at Harvard Law School.

According to reports from listeners, she claimed that she does not maintain a law practice. She also "said that she gave up her New Jersey license because she could not keep up with the Continuing Education requirements," according to one listener who commented on Breitbart's Monday story, "Does Elizabeth Warren Have a Law License Problem?".
 
Yesterday, LI pointed out at least one case in which Ms. Warren had passed herself off as a licensed attorney.  That's enough for one of her most vocal supporters to throw in the towel.  First here:

UPDATE 4 9/27: Professor Jacobson has uncovered new facts that I view as a gamechanger. Although I stand by my above analysis as applied to the facts known at the time, Professor Jacobson’s discovery this morning answers my objections to his arguments.
and here,
Professor Jacobson:

I couldn’t figure out how to leave this as a comment at your site, but I wanted to let you know ASAP that I concede that your discovery this morning answers all of my arguments and is a gamechanger. Your diligence in investigating this matter is commendable.

Regards,
Mark Thompson
This woman is clearly a liar...moreover this may be the reason she decided  to terminate her NJ license.

The reason Warren resigned her NJ license should be clear: since the state has no “inactive” status, anyone who failed to pay their bar dues was listed as “ineligible” unless they resigned (which means they would have to re-qualify from scratch to practice there in the future). Being listed as “ineligible” is what she wished to avoid, the fact that resigning made the history of her activity unavailable was just unforeseen gravy.

Both these major ethical lapses serve to clarify the leftist mindset. They really do believe themselves morally superior to the rest of us due solely to their ideology, and therefore assume the rules which apply to us are no more than passive guidance to them.
Would you want her to represent your state?

Thursday, September 27, 2012

Islam: The Religion of Permanent Offense...

Pat Condell's brilliant rant...




...and this plays into this very subject:



“Mona, do you think you have the right to do this?” said Pamela Hall, holding a mounted camera as she tried to block the barrage of spray paint.

“I do actually,” Eltahawy calmly responded. “I think this is freedom of expression, just as this is freedom of expression.”

Hall then thrusts herself between Eltahawy’s spray paint and the poster.

Eltahawy -- an activist who has appeared on MSNBC and CNN -- engaged her in an odd cat-and-mouse dance, spraying pink every time she had an opening.

“What right do you have to violate free speech,” Hall pleaded.

“I’m not violating it. I’m making an expression on free speech,” an increasingly agitated Eltahawy shot back.

“You do not have the right!” Hall said.

“I do actually and I’m doing it right now and you should get out of the way! Do you want paint on yourself,” Eltahawy shot back.

As the poster defender bobbed and weaved to get in the paint’s way, Eltahawy mocked: “That’s right, defend racism.”
Muslims get offended by everything...and then get offended when we tell them to sod off...Freedom of Speech means that you have to permit even those with whom you disagree, the right to voice their opinions.

Saturday, September 22, 2012

Proving Media Bias

Tim Groseclose of Prager University has developed a formula to statistically, how mainstream media outlets are biased.  Here's the video.




Furthermore, he has a test that will give you your "Political Quotient", or where you stand on a scale of 1-100, 0 being far right conservative, most America's stand right in the centre at 50...where do you stand?   I'm fairly moderate, politically, since I'm far more libertarian than conservative but my PQ in this test is far right conservative,

Here’s my PQ: 0.6
Politicians with similar PQs are:
Michele Bachmann (R-Minn, 2007-09) PQ=-4.1
James DeMint (R-S.C. 1999-2009) PQ=5.1
This is because fiscally, I would like to see the size and scope of the federal government rolled back by a 50-70%.  Reduce the federal departments to Defense, Treasurey, Commerce, Justice and Transportation (because of the NTSB, and a couple of other effective agencies).  Terminate all those sucking off Uncle Sam's hind tit, and forcing them out into the work force...to do something productive.  Essentiall, I firmly believe most of the functions that the federal goverment has usurped, more properly, belong to the responsibility of the various states.

This stems from the wording of the 10th Amendment of the US Constitution:

Amendment X


The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
That's pretty straight forward wording.  If it's not specifically permitted to the federal government by the Constitution, those powers are reserved to the states and the people...That's my main opposition to National Health Care...if a state (like Massachusetts) desires to build a state health care system, they have every right to do so, and they can require their citizens to participate in that system...much like buying auto insurance if you own a car. 

But, I strenuously object to the federal government usurping that power to itself...as current law stands, under legal precedent, the federal government require everyon to purchase a GM car...that's a fair reading of the US Supreme Court's recent ruling on ObamaCare being legal under the "commerce clause" of the Bill of Rights...

Think about that for a moment...but I digress.  This is about media bias.  You can't read a newspaper, or watch TV news without being bombarded by the bias of JournoList members. POLITICO.com is unashamedly a propaganda arm of the Obama administration...with the NY Times/LA Times and WaPo not far away...

Via The BlogFather...

Friday, September 21, 2012

Honey, You didn't Build That

"It's Important to destroy their sense of individualism while they're still young..."



Via the BLogFather

Wednesday, September 19, 2012

Obama The Communist

Video Music Box: The Sounds

and here they are:




Obama Is A Liar

watch the video...




What do you think?

All You Need to Know About Taxes...

Here's a graph that explains all anyone ever needs to know about taxes...



Instapundit has a host of links on this...and suggests that this should be widely distributed.

and then there's this:


Glenn Reynolds Keynote - Conference on the Constitutional Convention from Rootstrikers on Vimeo.

Tuesday, September 18, 2012

Under Way...

Under way...



BOSTON, Mass. (Aug. 19, 2012) USS Constitution sets sail for the first time since 1997 during an underway demonstration commemorating Guerriere Day. Constitution is the world's oldest commissioned warship afloat. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Michael Achterling)

This is Sustainability?

Via Vodkapundit:

Since Obama has taken office ….

[through Q2 2012 for comparative purposes]

–> For every $1 added to the economy, we’ve added more than $3 in debt

–> added $5.23 trillion in debt vs. $1.68 trillion to the economy

–> 50% increase in debt vs. 12% increase in economic output

Total Public Debt:

$10,626T [Jan 20, 2009]

$15,856T [Jun 30, 2012]

–> $5.23 trillion increase in debt
[source: Treasury Dept]
As Stephen says...this is "sustainability?"  How in the hell can Democrats justify this kind of spending?  Not terribly long ago, Mr. Obama said it was unpatriotic of George Bush to add $4 Trillion dollars to the debt...over 8 years.






WTF do you call adding almost $6 trillion dollars to the debt in just over 3  years?


Monday, September 17, 2012

GO NAVY!!!! Great Parody Dance Video

Here's a hysterical video of the  Midshipmen of the 22nd Company performing a parody of Korean pop sensation Psy, star of the viral Youtube video “Gangnam Style,”




Loved it well done gentlemen!

Black Pastors Urging Congregants to NOT Vote for Obama

Pastors of black churches are urging thier congregants to not vote, or to not vote FOR Barack Obama in this November's general election.  This is huge...if the black urban vote is depressed by this, it would greatly reduce Obama's chances at reelection.

For some African American Christians, this election truly is a matter of choosing between the lesser of two evils. On the one hand is Barack Obama, who claimed 95% of the black vote in his 2008 election, but whose support of same-sex marriage earlier this year has estranged some of those voters. Pastors claim their congregants question how Obama can call himself a true Christian and back gay marriage.

This could cost Obama the elction.  Hoping for a change.

Operation Market-Garden, Sep 17, 1944

Today is the 68th anniversary of Operation Market-Garden.  The attempt by Field Marshal Bernard Law Montgomery, 1st Viscount Montgomery of Alamein, KG, GCB, DSO, PC , to cross the Rhine River and end World War II in Europe by Christmas.  It was "less than successful."  It was in two parts, a massive airborne drop, in fact the largest in history, with a large scale ground assault by Gen. Sir Brian Horrocks, XXX Corps.




The 101st Airborne was to be dropped in the south of the single road corridor near the city of Eindhoven.  The 82nd Airborne Division would be dropped in the centre at Nijmagen, while the British 1st Airborne Division (the Red Devils) would be dropped outside of Arnhem, Netherlands.



From Wikipedia
Initially, the operation was marginally successful and several bridges between Eindhoven and Nijmegen were captured. However, Gen. Horrocks' XXX Corps ground force's advance was delayed by the demolition of a bridge over the Wilhelmina Canal, as well as an extremely overstretched supply line, at Son, delaying the capture of the main road bridge over the Meuse until 20 September. At Arnhem, the British 1st Airborne Division encountered far stronger resistance than anticipated. In the ensuing battle, only a small force managed to hold one end of the Arnhem road bridge and after the ground forces failed to relieve them, they were overrun on 21 September. The rest of the division, trapped in a small pocket west of the bridge, had to be evacuated on 25 September. The Allies had failed to cross the Rhine in sufficient force and the river remained a barrier to their advance until the offensives at Remagen, Oppenheim, Rees and Wesel in March 1945. The failure of Market Garden ended Allied expectations of finishing the war by Christmas 1944.[18]
The British 1st Airborne suffered nearly 80% casualties in killed, wounded and captured before crossing to the south side of the Maas (Lower Rhine) River...

My father was scheduled to fly as deputy commander of his troop carrier squadron, but ended up with an inner ear disorder and was grounded for several weeks prior and after the operation.  That's a good thing for me, because the pilot that took his place was shot down...and killed, but he  got his stick off before his plane went in.



McCain Was RIght

In 2008, John McCain said we'd have $4 a gallon gas prices if we elected Obama...he was right!

Mr. Obama promised us that energy prices would skyrocket and he has delived on his promise.



can we afford much more of this? I sure can't.

Hat-tip, Instapundit

L'Shanah Tova!

Today is the Jewish New Year...and begins the High Holy days for Judaism.

Here's a short video that explains the holiday and it's significance to Jews.




Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year, is celebrated in 2012 from sundown on Sept. 16 to nightfall on Sept. 18. The Hebrew date for Rosh Hashanah is 1 Tishrei 5773.

Though Rosh Hashanah literally means "head of the year," the holiday actually takes place on the first two days of the Hebrew month of Tishrei, which is the seventh month on the Hebrew calendar. This is because Rosh Hashanah, one of four new years in the Jewish year, is considered the new year of people, animals and legal contracts. In the Jewish oral tradition, Rosh Hashanah marks the completion of the creation of the world.

Rosh Hashanah is the beginning of the Jewish High Holy Days, or Yamim Noraim (the "Days of Awe"), and is followed 10 days later by Yom Kippur, the "day of atonement." The Mishnah refers to Rosh Hashanah as the "day of judgment," and it is believed that God opens the Book of Life on this day and begins to decide who shall live and who shall die. The days between Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur are viewed as an opportunity for Jews to repent (teshuvah, in Hebrew) and ensure a good fate.
To me, its the time I use to reflect upon the last year....the good I've done...and the bad.  A time to think about how I would like to spend the coming year and what I would like to accomplish...

9-11, A Personal Story...

From Zilla of the Resistance:

This is my personal story of September 11, 2001 and what happened after – as I experienced it 60 miles away from Ground Zero…

My father’s grandparents, (both sets) Irish Catholics, somehow managed to survive the Famine in Ireland which killed so many. They came to America to escape the oppression in Ireland and landed in New York City. It would be a hundred years before anyone in that family line ever moved out of the City to other places.

My mother is from a tiny country called Grenada. She saw there were few opportunities for a young lady there, so she packed her bags and came to find the “American Dream” in New York City. She found it. She also found my father and it was love at first sight. They met at the famous Rainbow Room in NYC and were married a few months later.

They started their family in New York City and they started with nothing.

My parents managed to find success in their lives and eventually moved out of the City to give us kids some fresh air and a taste of the “good life”.

My father continued to work for the City until his retirement despite moving to the country and then the suburbs.

I grew up on Long Island in the shadow of New York City and made frequent trips into the City to see relatives and also to have fun. In sixth grade it was a rite of passage at my school to take a field trip to NYC. I got to go to South Street Seaport, and the Empire State Building. The highlight of the entire day was going up to the top floors of the magnificent World Trade Center, the Twin Towers. The view was incredible. To be at the top of the City looking down on the world is a memory I will always cherish. Even from the ground looking up at those buildings was an experience in itself. Nearly twice as tall as the tallest buildings, they were! As a teen, taking the train into Manhattan and wandering around the village or seeing a concert at Madison Square Garden was the most fun you could have on a Friday or Saturday night.

When I grew up, I eventually left the Island and moved to where I live now, in the Hudson Valley, about 45 minutes north of the City.

As the blogfather says READ THE WHOLE THING!


Disabled WW2 Vet Faces Eviction

A disabled World War II and Korean War veteran, faces eviction.  Freddie Mac refuses to return his phone calls.

“I worried. You can’t sleep at night. With my husband being disabled, you try to go on with things as normal as you can. And keep my husband and my daughter, who is mentally handicapped, as stable as can be,” said Sally Scott.

That stability vanished with an eviction notice from Freddie Mac, the giant home loan lender that was bailed out by taxpayers to the tune of $120 billion.

“I haven’t been able to get hold of Freddie Mac. And basically, SPS, the loan servicer, said if you can get Freddie Mac to rescind the foreclosure, we’ll work something out with them,” Sally stated.  
FOX 2 also tried to contact Freddie Mac about the Scott’s foreclosure. No one got back to us. So Sally Scott turned to community groups to try and stop the foreclosure.
“Not only Freddie Mac, but other large banking institutions, I mean, they would not be around if it weren’t for our tax dollars,” said Zach Chasnoff with Missourians Organizing for Reform. “And you know, I think it’s important that they don’t take that for granted.” 
So far, Freddie Mac won’t budge.

But, they can't get Freddie Mac  to return their calls.  If you remember, Freddie Mac was bailed out with hundreds of billions of dollars of tax payer money yet, they are going to evict a disabled veteran?  That's plain bullshit.

Friday, September 14, 2012

On The MSM...

The credibility of the Jurasic Media (aka MSM) has eroded a great deal over the last decade.   Until now, most JournoListers, held grimly onto the facade of impartiality.  But starting with the 2004 election in which the internet played  a huge role in disseminating John Kerry's  anti-American activities, alternative sources of news and information began to spread. 

Today, with nearly all JournoListers carrying water for the Obama administration to the extent that only one major television outlet (FoxNews) will dare to carry any coverage that is critical of either the Democratic Party's agenda or that of the Obama administration.  Here's how one woman in Virginia put it:




This view is very wide spread, even in my very heavily Democratic/Jewish neighborhood.  The media has dropped it's curtain, and is now openly biased  against anything remotely conservative.  This week, we have reporters, on an open mic, freely coordinating between themselves, trying to make sure that they get certain questions asked of Mitt Romney,
Newsbusters says the the CBS News reporter is Jan Crawford and she was discussing this with the NPR reporter Ari Shapiro
This has become common over the past 10 years, yet after 3 1/2 years of a Democrat in the White House, NOT one JournoList is asking Obama anything remotely difficult.  Gas prices are soaring, yet nary a word  from the media about it....but in 2008, during an GOP administration, it was all over the news...




It doesn't fit the carefully contrived media narrative...that's why I don't buy newspapers.  If I want to read propaganda, I'll go to DNC/Obama websites, not a damn news outlet.

Wednesday, September 12, 2012

Bill Whittle, After Burner, Envy...

Here's Bill Whittle's Afterburner.




Tuesday, September 11, 2012

Never Forget, Muslims Did This...

On this day, we must never forget that Muslims did this...





and this...

video


We must never forget what they did to Americans on this day twelve years ago

Sunday, September 09, 2012

FEDERALIST No. 25

The Same Subject Continued
(The Powers Necessary to the Common Defense Further Considered)
From the New York Packet.
Friday, December 21, 1787.
Alexander Hamilton
 To the People of the State of New York: IT MAY perhaps be urged that the objects enumerated in the preceding number ought to be provided for by the State governments, under the direction of the Union. But this would be, in reality, an inversion of the primary principle of our political association, as it would in practice transfer the care of the common defense from the federal head to the individual members: a project oppressive to some States, dangerous to all, and baneful to the Confederacy. The territories of Britain, Spain, and of the Indian nations in our neighborhood do not border on particular States, but encircle the Union from Maine to Georgia. The danger, though in different degrees, is therefore common. And the means of guarding against it ought, in like manner, to be the objects of common councils and of a common treasury. It happens that some States, from local situation, are more directly exposed. New York is of this class. Upon the plan of separate provisions, New York would have to sustain the whole weight of the establishments requisite to her immediate safety, and to the mediate or ultimate protection of her neighbors. This would neither be equitable as it respected New York nor safe as it respected the other States. Various inconveniences would attend such a system. The States, to whose lot it might fall to support the necessary establishments, would be as little able as willing, for a considerable time to come, to bear the burden of competent provisions. The security of all would thus be subjected to the parsimony, improvidence, or inability of a part. If the resources of such part becoming more abundant and extensive, its provisions should be proportionally enlarged, the other States would quickly take the alarm at seeing the whole military force of the Union in the hands of two or three of its members, and those probably amongst the most powerful. They would each choose to have some counterpoise, and pretenses could easily be contrived. In this situation, military establishments, nourished by mutual jealousy, would be apt to swell beyond their natural or proper size; and being at the separate disposal of the members, they would be engines for the abridgment or demolition of the national authcrity.

Reasons have been already given to induce a supposition that the State governments will too naturally be prone to a rivalship with that of the Union, the foundation of which will be the love of power; and that in any contest between the federal head and one of its members the people will be most apt to unite with their local government. If, in addition to this immense advantage, the ambition of the members should be stimulated by the separate and independent possession of military forces, it would afford too strong a temptation and too great a facility to them to make enterprises upon, and finally to subvert, the constitutional authority of the Union. On the other hand, the liberty of the people would be less safe in this state of things than in that which left the national forces in the hands of the national government. As far as an army may be considered as a dangerous weapon of power, it had better be in those hands of which the people are most likely to be jealous than in those of which they are least likely to be jealous. For it is a truth, which the experience of ages has attested, that the people are always most in danger when the means of injuring their rights are in the possession of those of whom they entertain the least suspicion. The framers of the existing Confederation, fully aware of the danger to the Union from the separate possession of military forces by the States, have, in express terms, prohibited them from having either ships or troops, unless with the consent of Congress. The truth is, that the existence of a federal government and military establishments under State authority are not less at variance with each other than a due supply of the federal treasury and the system of quotas and requisitions.

There are other lights besides those already taken notice of, in which the impropriety of restraints on the discretion of the national legislature will be equally manifest. The design of the objection, which has been mentioned, is to preclude standing armies in time of peace, though we have never been informed how far it is designed the prohibition should extend; whether to raising armies as well as to KEEPING THEM UP in a season of tranquillity or not. If it be confined to the latter it will have no precise signification, and it will be ineffectual for the purpose intended. When armies are once raised what shall be denominated "keeping them up," contrary to the sense of the Constitution? What time shall be requisite to ascertain the violation? Shall it be a week, a month, a year? Or shall we say they may be continued as long as the danger which occasioned their being raised continues? This would be to admit that they might be kept up IN TIME OF PEACE, against threatening or impending danger, which would be at once to deviate from the literal meaning of the prohibition, and to introduce an extensive latitude of construction. Who shall judge of the continuance of the danger? This must undoubtedly be submitted to the national government, and the matter would then be brought to this issue, that the national government, to provide against apprehended danger, might in the first instance raise troops, and might afterwards keep them on foot as long as they supposed the peace or safety of the community was in any degree of jeopardy. It is easy to perceive that a discretion so latitudinary as this would afford ample room for eluding the force of the provision. The supposed utility of a provision of this kind can only be founded on the supposed probability, or at least possibility, of a combination between the executive and the legislative, in some scheme of usurpation. Should this at any time happen, how easy would it be to fabricate pretenses of approaching danger! Indian hostilities, instigated by Spain or Britain, would always be at hand. Provocations to produce the desired appearances might even be given to some foreign power, and appeased again by timely concessions. If we can reasonably presume such a combination to have been formed, and that the enterprise is warranted by a sufficient prospect of success, the army, when once raised, from whatever cause, or on whatever pretext, may be applied to the execution of the project. If, to obviate this consequence, it should be resolved to extend the prohibition to the RAISING of armies in time of peace, the United States would then exhibit the most extraordinary spectacle which the world has yet seen, that of a nation incapacitated by its Constitution to prepare for defense, before it was actually invaded. As the ceremony of a formal denunciation of war has of late fallen into disuse, the presence of an enemy within our territories must be waited for, as the legal warrant to the government to begin its levies of men for the protection of the State. We must receive the blow, before we could even prepare to return it. All that kind of policy by which nations anticipate distant danger, and meet the gathering storm, must be abstained from, as contrary to the genuine maxims of a free government. We must expose our property and liberty to the mercy of foreign invaders, and invite them by our weakness to seize the naked and defenseless prey, because we are afraid that rulers, created by our choice, dependent on our will, might endanger that liberty, by an abuse of the means necessary to its preservation. Here I expect we shall be told that the militia of the country is its natural bulwark, and would be at all times equal to the national defense. This doctrine, in substance, had like to have lost us our independence. It cost millions to the United States that might have been saved. The facts which, from our own experience, forbid a reliance of this kind, are too recent to permit us to be the dupes of such a suggestion. The steady operations of war against a regular and disciplined army can only be successfully conducted by a force of the same kind. Considerations of economy, not less than of stability and vigor, confirm this position. The American militia, in the course of the late war, have, by their valor on numerous occasions, erected eternal monuments to their fame; but the bravest of them feel and know that the liberty of their country could not have been established by their efforts alone, however great and valuable they were. War, like most other things, is a science to be acquired and perfected by diligence, by perserverance, by time, and by practice. All violent policy, as it is contrary to the natural and experienced course of human affairs, defeats itself. Pennsylvania, at this instant, affords an example of the truth of this remark. The Bill of Rights of that State declares that standing armies are dangerous to liberty, and ought not to be kept up in time of peace. Pennsylvania, nevertheless, in a time of profound peace, from the existence of partial disorders in one or two of her counties, has resolved to raise a body of troops; and in all probability will keep them up as long as there is any appearance of danger to the public peace. The conduct of Massachusetts affords a lesson on the same subject, though on different ground. That State (without waiting for the sanction of Congress, as the articles of the Confederation require) was compelled to raise troops to quell a domestic insurrection, and still keeps a corps in pay to prevent a revival of the spirit of revolt. The particular constitution of Massachusetts opposed no obstacle to the measure; but the instance is still of use to instruct us that cases are likely to occur under our government, as well as under those of other nations, which will sometimes render a military force in time of peace essential to the security of the society, and that it is therefore improper in this respect to control the legislative discretion. It also teaches us, in its application to the United States, how little the rights of a feeble government are likely to be respected, even by its own constituents. And it teaches us, in addition to the rest, how unequal parchment provisions are to a struggle with public necessity. It was a fundamental maxim of the Lacedaemonian commonwealth, that the post of admiral should not be conferred twice on the same person. The Peloponnesian confederates, having suffered a severe defeat at sea from the Athenians, demanded Lysander, who had before served with success in that capacity, to command the combined fleets. The Lacedaemonians, to gratify their allies, and yet preserve the semblance of an adherence to their ancient institutions, had recourse to the flimsy subterfuge of investing Lysander with the real power of admiral, under the nominal title of vice-admiral. This instance is selected from among a multitude that might be cited to confirm the truth already advanced and illustrated by domestic examples; which is, that nations pay little regard to rules and maxims calculated in their very nature to run counter to the necessities of society. Wise politicians will be cautious about fettering the government with restrictions that cannot be observed, because they know that every breach of the fundamental laws, though dictated by necessity, impairs that sacred reverence which ought to be maintained in the breast of rulers towards the constitution of a country, and forms a precedent for other breaches where the same plea of necessity does not exist at all, or is less urgent and palpable. PUBLIUS.

The Trunk Monkey

video

Dirty Jobs & America

Mike Rowe is the host of a show called "Dirty Jobs."  In that show he goes around the country working in various industries and does the dirty work...that needs to be done.  Recently, he wrote Mitt Romney as letter...here's the letter:

Dear Governor Romney,
My name is Mike Rowe and I own a small company in California called mikeroweWORKS. Currently, mikeroweWORKS is trying to close the country’s skills gap by changing the way Americans feel about Work. (I know, right? Ambitious.) Anyway, this Labor Day is our 4th anniversary, and I’m commemorating the occasion with an open letter to you. If you read the whole thing, I’ll vote for you in November.

First things first. mikeroweWORKS grew out of a TV show called Dirty Jobs. If by some chance you are not glued to The Discovery Channel every Wednesday at 10pm, allow me to visually introduce myself. That’s me on the right, preparing to do something dirty.
When Dirty Jobs premiered back in 2003, critics called the show “a calamity of exploding toilets and misadventures in animal husbandry.” They weren’t exactly wrong. But mostly, Dirty Jobs was an unscripted celebration of hard work and skilled labor. It still is. Every week, we highlight regular people who do the kind of jobs most people go out of their way to avoid. My role on the show is that of a “perpetual apprentice.” In that capacity I have completed over three hundred different jobs, visited all fifty states, and worked in every major industry.

Though schizophrenic and void of any actual qualifications, my resume looks pretty impressive, and when our economy officially crapped the bed in 2008, I was perfectly positioned to weigh in on a variety of serious topics. A reporter from The Wall Street Journal called to ask what I thought about the “counter-intuitive correlation between rising unemployment and the growing shortage of skilled labor.” CNBC wanted my take on outsourcing. Fox News wanted my opinions on manufacturing and infrastructure. And CNN wanted to chat about currency valuations, free trade, and just about every other work-related problem under the sun.

In each case, I shared my theory that most of these “problems” were in fact symptoms of something more fundamental – a change in the way Americans viewed hard work and skilled labor. That’s the essence of what I’ve heard from the hundreds of men and women I’ve worked with on Dirty Jobs. Pig farmers, electricians, plumbers, bridge painters, jam makers, blacksmiths, brewers, coal miners, carpenters, crab fisherman, oil drillers…they all tell me the same thing over and over, again and again – our country has become emotionally disconnected from an essential part of our workforce. We are no longer impressed with cheap electricity, paved roads, and indoor plumbing. We take our infrastructure for granted, and the people who build it.

Today, we can see the consequences of this disconnect in any number of areas, but none is more obvious than the growing skills gap. Even as unemployment remains sky high, a whole category of vital occupations has fallen out of favor, and companies struggle to find workers with the necessary skills. The causes seem clear. We have embraced a ridiculously narrow view of education. Any kind of training or study that does not come with a four-year degree is now deemed “alternative.” Many viable careers once aspired to are now seen as “vocational consolation prizes,” and many of the jobs this current administration has tried to “create” over the last four years are the same jobs that parents and teachers actively discourage kids from pursuing. (I always thought there something ill-fated about the promise of three million “shovel ready jobs” made to a society that no longer encourages people to pick up a shovel.)

Which brings me to my purpose in writing. On Labor Day of 2008, the fans of Dirty Jobs helped me launch this website. mikeroweWORKS.com began as a Trade Resource Center designed to connect kids with careers in the skilled trades. It has since evolved into a non-profit foundation – a kind of PR Campaign for hard work and skilled labor. Thanks to a number of strategic partnerships, I have been able to promote a dialogue around these issues with a bit more credibility than my previous resume allowed. I’ve spoken to Congress (twice) about the need to confront the underlying stigmas and stereotypes that surround these kinds of jobs. Alabama and Georgia have both used mikeroweWORKS to launch their own statewide technical recruitment campaigns, and I’m proud to be the spokesman for both initiatives. I also work closely with Caterpillar, Ford, Kimberly-Clark, and Master Lock, as well as The Boy Scouts of America and The Future Farmers of America. To date, the mikeroweWORKS Foundation has raised over a million dollars for trade scholarships. It’s modest by many standards, but I think we’re making a difference.

Certainly, we need more jobs, and you were clear about that in Tampa. But the Skills Gap proves that we need something else too. We need people who see opportunity where opportunity exists. We need enthusiasm for careers that have been overlooked and underappreciated by society at large. We need to have a really big national conversation about what we value in the workforce, and if I can be of help to you in that regard, I am at your service – assuming of course, you find yourself in a new address early next year.

To be clear, mikeroweWORKS has no political agenda. I am not an apologist for Organized Labor or for Management. mikeroweWORKS is concerned only with encouraging a larger appreciation for skilled labor, and supporting those kids who are willing to learn a skill.

Good luck in November. And thanks for your time.

Sincerely,
Mike Rowe

PS. In the interest of full disclosure I should mention that I wrote a similar letter to President Obama. Of course, that was four years ago, and since I never heard back, I believe proper etiquette allows me to extend the same offer to you now. I figure if I post it here, the odds are better that someone you know might send it along to your attention.
Mike is right.  America has been fooled into thinking that a college education is the be all end all of employment opportunity.  Our educational system has failed this country...and it is becoming more evident every single day.  You want a job?  There are hundreds, if not thousands of "dirty jobs" looking for people to work every single day.  Just look in the news papers.  Unfortunately, most of them go unfilled. 

I'm a cabinetmaker.  I build commercial cabinetry.  The median age in my industry is above 40 years old.  That's not a good thing as it's unsustainable.  When the "old guys" retire, without passing on their skills and knowledge, that knowledge and skills are lost...because there isn't anyone to take on the burden of learning how to work hard. 

I'm 50 years old (or I will be in a couple of weeks).  I haven't had an apprentice working with me in years...that's a telling  problem right there...if we, as a nation, don't begin right now, to change how we educate and prepare our children to take over the burden of running this country, and I don't mean the excerable political class that we've foisted upon ourselves, I mean the abillity to build those roads, build those houses and skyscrappers, bridges, power grid...then we're doomed not just as a nation, but as a society.

UPDATE:  From the comments, keep in mind that I do have a college education...an A.A., B.A. (History), M.A. (History) & Ph.D. (Medieval European History)...I took a 50% cut in pay when I became a cabinetmaker.  I went through a vo-tech school program (not offered any more...not enough students) in Tallahassee, FL.  Sooo...I've been through the edumacation mill myself.  I think that America has made a huge mistake in emphasizing college education, to the detriment of our country.  It's not too late turn this around, though we are close to the tipping point. 

Skills are being lost every day with each "old guy" who retires without passing on his knowledge and skill to a new generation of craftsmen and women...it's not too late, but we're close...

Saturday, September 08, 2012

Obama: GOP Stuck in the Past




Says who?

via OC Register

Obama Forward or Forwarned

 
 
 or
 
 
 
 


Pollywood: Obama's America 2016

Here's the Pollywood review of this documentary:

Friday, September 07, 2012

Palin Was Right!

In October 2008, Sarah Palin, in the VP debate said that the Obama jobs plan was a jobs killing plan...



We're no in our 43rd straight month of 8.0+ unemployment...and the current rate is 8.1% only because there are now far fewer people in the labour force than 1948.

Here's a graphic that shows what Mr. Obama claimed would happen is his $860,000,000,000.00 "stimulus [that wasn't] package" was passed by a Democratic Party controlled Congress:


He has utterly failed to do what he promised and he wants another 4 years?  Here's some information from the August 2012 BLS unemployment report:

– Nonfarm payrolls increased by only 96,000 in August, the Labor Department said, versus expectations of 125,000 jobs or more. The manufacturing sector, much touted by the president in his convention speech, lost 15,000 jobs.
– Since the start of the year, job growth has averaged 139,000 per month vs. an average monthly gain of 153,000 in 2011.
– As the chart at the top shows, the unemployment rate remains far above the rate predicted by Team Obama if Congress passed the stimulus. (This is the Romer-Bernstein chart.)
– While the unemployment rate dropped to 8.1% from 8.3% in July, it was due to a big drop in the labor force participation rate (the share of Americans with a job or looking for one). If fewer Americans hadn’t given up looking for work, the unemployment rate would have risen.
– Reuters notes that the participation rate is now at its lowest level since September 1981.
– If the labor force participation rate was the same as when Obama took office in January 2009, the unemployment rate would be 11.2%.
If the participation rate had just stayed the same as last month, the unemployment rate would be 8.4%.
This man demands that we give him another 4 years to finish the transformation of America...into what? A perpetually high employment state, just like Europe?  The president works for us.  He has failed in his task...it's time for him to go.

Thursday, September 06, 2012

The Party Of Intollerance: The Democratic Party

Even Jon Stewart is getting tired of the hypocrisy of his party of choice.  The intollerance shown at the DNC by delegates is stunning:

<

WOW!

Wednesday, September 05, 2012

Reason TV: The Machine

Another edition of Reason TV:


Debbie Wasserman-Schultz...Is An Idiot

This woman is an idiot.  An old friend of mine from her district in Florida can't believe this moron has been elected to Congress, much less re-elected several times.  Here's why she's an idiot.  She flat out lies more or less, continuously.  In a training session for Jewish members of the Democratic Party, she said, here's the recording...you decide is she said it,



As she was wrapping up her remarks, she claimed that, “We know, and I’ve heard no less than Ambassador Michael Oren say this, that what the Republicans are doing is dangerous for Israel.”

The Washington Examiner could find no such public reference by Oren accusing Republicans of being “dangerous” to Israel. The Israeli embassy would not respond to a request for comment. (Update: The Israeli embassy has responded.)

Wasserman Schultz went on to elaborate that Republicans were “undermining Israel’s security by suggesting that the United States and Israel don’t have anything other than a unique and close and special relationship. It undermines Israel’s security to its neighbors in the Arab world and to its enemies. And we need to make sure that the fact that there has never been and will never be daylight between the two parties or the support for Israel that we have in the United States, that that is conveyed to Jewish Americans across this country. That’s our responsibility. It’s the responsibility we’re asking all of you to take
Then had the temerity to go on FoxNews and try to deny it.




She just can't help herself.  Philip Klein, of the Washington  Examiner, recorded the conversation she was having which clearly shows that she's lying.  How in the hell can she think that she can get away with that?  She's an idiot...

Government Is The Only Thing We All Belong To...

Here's the latest DNC ad:



I don't know about you, but I don't trust the government to do shit. In 2009, after my business went under, and I lost my house, my wife and I were told we "made too much money"...she'd been out of work at that point for 7 months, and I'd been out of work for 4...

Yet, the Democrats want us to believe that we can trust them to run things...$16,000,000,000,000.00 in public debt says otherwise.

The Obama Hypocrisy...

Here's the real hypocrisy  of both Obama and the Democratic Party. 



If it was unpatriotic to add $4,000,000,000,000.00 to the debt over the eight year G. W. Bush presidency, what do you call adding $5,700,000,000,000.00?  That's the thing.  Over the past THREE years, Mr. Obama has added more to the public debt than every other presideng prior to  Bush combined.  In 2008, Obama called that a terrible thing.  Since then, he's more than doubled that.

Mr. Obama and the Democratic party are a threat to America and it's past time to do something about it.  They work for us and their policies have failed and have mortgaged the future to pay for today.  We've run out of other people's money.  It's time for them to go...

Monday, September 03, 2012

Obama Led Lawsuit Fueled Sub-Prime Housing Bubble!

Barack Obama, as a "community organizer" (communist PC speak for economic saboteur) filed a lawsuit in 1995 that was a moving force that brought on the Sub-Prime Mortgage meltdown in 2008.

President Barack Obama was a pioneering contributor to the national subprime real estate bubble, and roughly half of the 186 African-American clients in his landmark 1995 mortgage discrimination lawsuit against Citibank have since gone bankrupt or received foreclosure notices.
This from the guy who blames his predecessor for all the economic woes of this country.

In the White House, Obama has continued to intensify regulatory pressure on banks to provide more risky loans to African-Americans and Latinos. He has used lawsuits to fund his allies. And taxpayers are now unwittingly contributing to a re-inflation of housing prices.

Meanwhile, the president has blamed the housing bubble on supposed GOP deregulation, even though President George W. Bush expanded the regulation-expanding, anti-redlining policies established by progressives during Bill Clinton’s presidency.

“Governor Romney’s plan would… roll back regulations on big banks,” Obama says of his Republican challenger Mitt Romney in a 2012 TV ad titled The Choice.”

“But you know what? We tried that top-down approach. It’s what caused the mess in the first place.”<
But then, it's all Bush's fault, isn't it?

Obama's Empty Chair: Hope & Change Ediition

This is the best I've seen yet:


via Craig Carrol on Twitter,

The Truth Wins Out...

Here's what is happening to the Liberal Left in a nutshell:



...this was taken in Berkley, CA by Zombie,  and it epynimous of what the Left represents now...faded, old ideas that just don't work.

FEDERALIST No. 45



The Alleged Danger From the Powers of the Union to the State Governments ConsideredFor the Independent Fournal. James Madison
 To the People of the State of New York:  HAVING shown that no one of the powers transferred to the federal government is unnecessary or improper, the next question to be considered is, whether the whole mass of them will be dangerous to the portion of authority left in the several States. The adversaries to the plan of the convention, instead of considering in the first place what degree of power was absolutely necessary for the purposes of the federal government, have exhausted themselves in a secondary inquiry into the possible consequences of the proposed degree of power to the governments of the particular States. But if the Union, as has been shown, be essential to the security of the people of America against foreign danger; if it be essential to their security against contentions and wars among the different States; if it be essential to guard them against those violent and oppressive factions which embitter the blessings of liberty, and against those military establishments which must gradually poison its very fountain; if, in a word, the Union be essential to the happiness of the people of America, is it not preposterous, to urge as an objection to a government, without which the objects of the Union cannot be attained, that such a government may derogate from the importance of the governments of the individual States? Was, then, the American Revolution effected, was the American Confederacy formed, was the precious blood of thousands spilt, and the hard-earned substance of millions lavished, not that the people of America should enjoy peace, liberty, and safety, but that the government of the individual States, that particular municipal establishments, might enjoy a certain extent of power, and be arrayed with certain dignities and attributes of sovereignty? We have heard of the impious doctrine in the Old World, that the people were made for kings, not kings for the people. Is the same doctrine to be revived in the New, in another shape that the solid happiness of the people is to be sacrificed to the views of political institutions of a different form? It is too early for politicians to presume on our forgetting that the public good, the real welfare of the great body of the people, is the supreme object to be pursued; and that no form of government whatever has any other value than as it may be fitted for the attainment of this object. Were the plan of the convention adverse to the public happiness, my voice would be, Reject the plan. Were the Union itself inconsistent with the public happiness, it would be, Abolish the Union. In like manner, as far as the sovereignty of the States cannot be reconciled to the happiness of the people, the voice of every good citizen must be, Let the former be sacrificed to the latter. How far the sacrifice is necessary, has been shown. How far the unsacrificed residue will be endangered, is the question before us.

Several important considerations have been touched in the course of these papers, which discountenance the supposition that the operation of the federal government will by degrees prove fatal to the State governments. The more I revolve the subject, the more fully I am persuaded that the balance is much more likely to be disturbed by the preponderancy of the last than of the first scale. We have seen, in all the examples of ancient and modern confederacies, the strongest tendency continually betraying itself in the members, to despoil the general government of its authorities, with a very ineffectual capacity in the latter to defend itself against the encroachments. Although, in most of these examples, the system has been so dissimilar from that under consideration as greatly to weaken any inference concerning the latter from the fate of the former, yet, as the States will retain, under the proposed Constitution, a very extensive portion of active sovereignty, the inference ought not to be wholly disregarded. In the Achaean league it is probable that the federal head had a degree and species of power, which gave it a considerable likeness to the government framed by the convention. The Lycian Confederacy, as far as its principles and form are transmitted, must have borne a still greater analogy to it. Yet history does not inform us that either of them ever degenerated, or tended to degenerate, into one consolidated government. On the contrary, we know that the ruin of one of them proceeded from the incapacity of the federal authority to prevent the dissensions, and finally the disunion, of the subordinate authorities. These cases are the more worthy of our attention, as the external causes by which the component parts were pressed together were much more numerous and powerful than in our case; and consequently less powerful ligaments within would be sufficient to bind the members to the head, and to each other.

In the feudal system, we have seen a similar propensity exemplified. Notwithstanding the want of proper sympathy in every instance between the local sovereigns and the people, and the sympathy in some instances between the general sovereign and the latter, it usually happened that the local sovereigns prevailed in the rivalship for encroachments. Had no external dangers enforced internal harmony and subordination, and particularly, had the local sovereigns possessed the affections of the people, the great kingdoms in Europe would at this time consist of as many independent princes as there were formerly feudatory barons. The State government will have the advantage of the Federal government, whether we compare them in respect to the immediate dependence of the one on the other; to the weight of personal influence which each side will possess; to the powers respectively vested in them; to the predilection and probable support of the people; to the disposition and faculty of resisting and frustrating the measures of each other. The State governments may be regarded as constituent and essential parts of the federal government; whilst the latter is nowise essential to the operation or organization of the former. Without the intervention of the State legislatures, the President of the United States cannot be elected at all. They must in all cases have a great share in his appointment, and will, perhaps, in most cases, of themselves determine it. The Senate will be elected absolutely and exclusively by the State legislatures. Even the House of Representatives, though drawn immediately from the people, will be chosen very much under the influence of that class of men, whose influence over the people obtains for themselves an election into the State legislatures. Thus, each of the principal branches of the federal government will owe its existence more or less to the favor of the State governments, and must consequently feel a dependence, which is much more likely to beget a disposition too obsequious than too overbearing towards them. On the other side, the component parts of the State governments will in no instance be indebted for their appointment to the direct agency of the federal government, and very little, if at all, to the local influence of its members. The number of individuals employed under the Constitution of the United States will be much smaller than the number employed under the particular States. There will consequently be less of personal influence on the side of the former than of the latter. The members of the legislative, executive, and judiciary departments of thirteen and more States, the justices of peace, officers of militia, ministerial officers of justice, with all the county, corporation, and town officers, for three millions and more of people, intermixed, and having particular acquaintance with every class and circle of people, must exceed, beyond all proportion, both in number and influence, those of every description who will be employed in the administration of the federal system. Compare the members of the three great departments of the thirteen States, excluding from the judiciary department the justices of peace, with the members of the corresponding departments of the single government of the Union; compare the militia officers of three millions of people with the military and marine officers of any establishment which is within the compass of probability, or, I may add, of possibility, and in this view alone, we may pronounce the advantage of the States to be decisive. If the federal government is to have collectors of revenue, the State governments will have theirs also. And as those of the former will be principally on the seacoast, and not very numerous, whilst those of the latter will be spread over the face of the country, and will be very numerous, the advantage in this view also lies on the same side. It is true, that the Confederacy is to possess, and may exercise, the power of collecting internal as well as external taxes throughout the States; but it is probable that this power will not be resorted to, except for supplemental purposes of revenue; that an option will then be given to the States to supply their quotas by previous collections of their own; and that the eventual collection, under the immediate authority of the Union, will generally be made by the officers, and according to the rules, appointed by the several States. Indeed it is extremely probable, that in other instances, particularly in the organization of the judicial power, the officers of the States will be clothed with the correspondent authority of the Union. Should it happen, however, that separate collectors of internal revenue should be appointed under the federal government, the influence of the whole number would not bear a comparison with that of the multitude of State officers in the opposite scale. Within every district to which a federal collector would be allotted, there would not be less than thirty or forty, or even more, officers of different descriptions, and many of them persons of character and weight, whose influence would lie on the side of the State. The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State. The operations of the federal government will be most extensive and important in times of war and danger; those of the State governments, in times of peace and security. As the former periods will probably bear a small proportion to the latter, the State governments will here enjoy another advantage over the federal government. The more adequate, indeed, the federal powers may be rendered to the national defense, the less frequent will be those scenes of danger which might favor their ascendancy over the governments of the particular States. If the new Constitution be examined with accuracy and candor, it will be found that the change which it proposes consists much less in the addition of NEW POWERS to the Union, than in the invigoration of its ORIGINAL POWERS. The regulation of commerce, it is true, is a new power; but that seems to be an addition which few oppose, and from which no apprehensions are entertained. The powers relating to war and peace, armies and fleets, treaties and finance, with the other more considerable powers, are all vested in the existing Congress by the articles of Confederation. The proposed change does not enlarge these powers; it only substitutes a more effectual mode of administering them. The change relating to taxation may be regarded as the most important; and yet the present Congress have as complete authority to REQUIRE of the States indefinite supplies of money for the common defense and general welfare, as the future Congress will have to require them of individual citizens; and the latter will be no more bound than the States themselves have been, to pay the quotas respectively taxed on them. Had the States complied punctually with the articles of Confederation, or could their compliance have been enforced by as peaceable means as may be used with success towards single persons, our past experience is very far from countenancing an opinion, that the State governments would have lost their constitutional powers, and have gradually undergone an entire consolidation. To maintain that such an event would have ensued, would be to say at once, that the existence of the State governments is incompatible with any system whatever that accomplishes the essental purposes of the Union. PUBLIUS.

New Obama Bumper Sticker

From Linda D. comes a new bumper sticker:



That pretty much sums up my position at this point.

Alinsky's Rules For Conservatives....

It's about time we turned the Left's weapons against them.  Last week's RNC Convention did just that.  Clint Eastwood in a brilliantly delivered "rambling speech" (as an actor, I suspect that the delivery was on purpose).  He used Rule 5...ridicule your oponent.  Just for shits and grins, and not having to read through all of Alinsky's crypto communistic bulllshit, here are the "rules":

  • RULE 1: “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.” Power is derived from 2 main sources – money and people. “Have-Nots” must build power from flesh and blood.
  • RULE 2: “Never go outside the expertise of your people.” It results in confusion, fear and retreat. Feeling secure adds to the backbone of anyone.
  • RULE 3: “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.” Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty.
  • RULE 4: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules.
  • RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions.
  • RULE 6: “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.” They’ll keep doing it without urging and come back to do more. They’re doing their thing, and will even suggest better ones.
  • RULE 7: “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.” Don’t become old news.
  • RULE 8: “Keep the pressure on. Never let up.” Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new.
  • RULE 9: “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.” Imagination and ego can dream up many more consequences than any activist.
  • RULE 10: “If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive.” Violence from the other side can win the public to your side because the public sympathizes with the underdog.
  • RULE 11: “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.” Never let the enemy score points because you’re caught without a solution to the problem.
  • RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions.

  • It's well past time we use this "rules" to finish off what's left of the Liberal Left...pun intended.  With the media all in on keeping Obama in office, we should use those tools they've used on us for the past 50 years.

    Sunday, September 02, 2012

    Farewell, from all of us at Paragon Studios

    I just found out today that a game, a MMORPG, that I've been playing online for the past 8 years is being shut down.

    This morning we announced that Paragon Studios will be taking to the skies of City of Heroes for the last time.

    In a realignment of company focus and publishing support, NCsoft has made the decision to close Paragon Studios. Effective immediately, all development on City of Heroes will cease and we will begin preparations to sunset the world's first, and best, Super Hero MMORPG before the end of the year. As part of this, all recurring subscription billing and Paragon Market purchasing will be discontinued effective immediately. We will have more information regarding a detailed timeline for the cessation of services and what you can expect in game in the coming weeks.

    The team here at Paragon deserves special praise for all that we have accomplished over the last 5+ years. These developers are some of the most creative and talented people in the gaming industry. By now, we've all been given this news internally, but to anyone who may be reading this message after the fact; know that your hard work and dedication has not gone unappreciated or unnoticed. To any potential studios looking to grow your team; hire these people. You won't regret it.

    To our Community,

    Thank you. Thank you for your years of support. You've been with us every step of the way, sharing in our challenges, encouraging us to make City of Heroes better, more than everyone else thought it could be. We couldn't have come this far without you. I implore you all, focus on the good things of CoH and Paragon Studios. Don't dwell on the "how" or the "why", but rather join us in celebrating the legacy of an amazing partnership between the players and the development team.

    Thank you, and I'll see you in the skies, one last time.

    Andy Belford
    Community Manager
    Paragon Studios
     
    I for one, will miss the game, it was a hell of a lot of fun running around like a bunch of 4 year olds, playing super heroes and super villains.  On November 30th, City of Heroes, City of Villains will be no more...

    Are You Better Off?

    Are you better off now than you were 4 years ago?  Even David Axelrod can't so yes to that.


    Saturday, September 01, 2012

    Jane Edmonds, Liberal Democrat...for Romney

    Here is a great speech that wasn't aired by ANY news channel...Mr. Romney's former Secretary for Employment and Labour, Massachusetss.




    Jane Edmonds, Liberal Democrat...supports Mitt Romney.