Terry McAuliffe is an Idiot. But I Repeat Myself.

The “but I repeat myself” is because “Terry McAuliffe” is a synonym for “idiot.”

[Apologies for the watermark. I cut this lil snippet using a device I don’t usually use for video editing and used a freebie app to do it.]

McAuliffe demonstrates better than usual grasp of (alternative) facts (from the Bizarro Univese), for a Dhimmicrap pol.

Terry McAuliffe_ ‘We Lose 93 Million Americans A Day to Gun Violence’_cut

Are These the Best Candidates the Parties Could Find?

Many have asked the question, “Is this really the best the parties could come up with?” To answer this question, one must ask, “Best for what purpose?” The “parties” in question have for some time been little more than a Uniparty of statists concerned with little more than different tactics for enhancing their own power over society. As such, when the Uniparty selected its Anointed One, its Dhimmicrappic arm simply engineered its nomination. Now, how to assure its election? Hmmm, need a stalking horse. . . Oh, right! Make sure NOTHING, not even a legitimate challenge at convention, prevents the selection of an unelectable candidate by the Repugnican’ts!

And it was so.

And so the Uniparty has offered a fake choice of one of two evils for the presidency. (Oh, and down-ticket races are often not much better, just choices between two different statists).

#Don’tVoteForEvil

As Thomas Sowell, a genuine national treasure, IMO, has recently written,

“If a third party candidate could divide the vote enough to prevent anyone from getting an electoral college majority, that would throw the election into the House of Representatives, where any semblance of sanity could produce a better president than these two.”

Here. An article that might help: How Not to Waste Your Vote: A Mathematical Analysis

Vote for Johnson/Weld instead of throwing your vote away on either one of the two worst candidates ever put forth by the Uniparty.

The Trumpery’s Fav “Bible Verse”?

[Sidebar: it’s not just subliterate, lying politicians who make up “scripture.” I’ve known more than a few literate “preachers” who have done so wittingly.]

I hear that The Trumpery’s favorite verse from “Two Corinthians” actually starts out that way. Two Corinthians Two:Two (Trumpery Standard Version) “Two Corinthians walk into a bar. . . “

Silly Hivemind Podpeople

Saw a question posed by a Talking Head Podperson:

“Are the Presidential Debates ‘Rigged’ Against Trump?”

*duh*

If they were real debates, then The Trumpery wouldn’t have an even vain hope against even the worst public speaker on the national stage, the Queenie Cacklepants Cylon (Worst? Why, its Human Emulation Module is so defective that every time it engages, the thing looks and sounds like a deranged Bonobo chimp wearing a defective shock collar, that’s how bad the thing is).

As it is, with Mass Media Podpeople Hivemind Talking Heads posing their agenda-driven questions (no doubt directly from the Hivemind’s daily download from the mothership orbiting Uranus–well, it’s as ‘kind and gentle’ a spin to put on the Hivemind’s monolithic narrative as any), all The Trumpery has to do to energize his base s show up and berate the Hivemind Podpeople for their biased approach.

Nah, what would REALLY stack the deck against The Trumpery would be if Gary Johnson were included in the show trial “debates.” THAT would chap his gizzard no end. Oh, and the Queenie Cacklepants Cylon? It’d need a LOT more oil on its disposal chute’s hinges to try to dump enough fecal matter (salvaged from banal politicians, concentrated and stored for use in its pronouncements) to make any impact at all.

Urgent Need for Organ Donors

The Trumpery needs a brain. Anyone who has a brain to spare, please take note.

Meanwhile, The Queenie Cacklepants Cylon needs a new heart. It ate the heart of the little child it had sitting on its desk.

Marco Rubio Gives Me a Rash

I don’t trust Marco Rubio any farther than I can walk on water.

Rubio would make a decent vice president, with Cruz holding his leash and occasionally rubbing his nose in his messes, but his serial misrepresentations (OK, outright lies: saying one thing in English and another in Spanish, for example) of his own positions on alien invaders qualifies him only for a couple of terms being “paper trained,” IMO.

Like most proponents of amnesty for alien invaders (and despite his “nuanced” lies, that’s exactly what he holds for), he also sets straw men up as the only alternatives to his amnesty (no matter what he disingenuously calls it) proposals.

Moreover, He makes some good “Christ talk” from time to time, but his lies say his “Christianity” is suspect.

Do note: Rubio talks a good game on many policy issues, and even when making moral arguments, but his outright lies on the issue of alien invaders and amnesty call all his “good game talk” into question, for

He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much: and he that is unjust in the least is unjust also in much. ~ Luke 16:10

Rubio has proven he cannot even be trusted to keep his lies straight, and that’s no little thing.

Will the Last One Out. . .

. . .please turn out the lights?

I got a call from a client this A.M. They’ve sold their house/acreage and businesses and are moving to Panama ~September 15. Giving up on the U.S. and just need a lil “exit work” on their tech. Doomsday Preppers? No, just worn down by “gummint bureaucrappy” created and encouraged by Left AND Right (neither of which is either “progressive/liberal” or “conservative”) and fearing more “quantitative easing” and other “feddle gummint meddlin'” in the economy will wipe out their retirement years.

They are not alone in their fears.

One of the most obvious symptoms: A president is–or has been–mostly just emblematic of the direction of the country, but King Putz’s unconstitutional diktats (and recent diktats spewing from the agencies he rules) have certainly demonstrated a complete lack of respect for the rule of law and expanded–thanks to a supine Congress–the powers of the presidency far, far beyond any level seen before (save, perhaps, for the Lincoln Years). Reversal of the Obama Blight will take decades, and many, MANY down-ticket elections of honorable people (though where those can be found, I can’t say), to reverse. . . if it is possible at all, especially given the propaganda machines of the Mass MEdia Podpeople Hivemind and Academia Nut Fruitcake Bakeries.

For the 2016 presidential race, I could hope for a clear choice between an openly blatant socialist and a genuine conservative, but I’m unsure where we could get one of the latter on the ticket, nowadays. . . Heck, just FINDING one would be a task for Diogenes.

Some Non-Random Musings on the Current Scene

N.B.: I frankly DGARA about foreign affairs, except where developments might have a local effect because of “feddle gummint” stupidities or deliberately malicious intent (toward citizens) in policies. So, by “current scene” you can expect me to comment on what was once quaintly known as “the home front,” for the most part.

Today’s topic: Censorship, “feddle gummint” skulduggery, Sharyl Atkkisson, First Amendment, Fourth Amendment, and a possibly appropriate citizens’ response.

By now, anyone with at least one firing neuron who’s not been living under a rock knows that our dear “gummint” placed spying software on Sharyl Atkkisson’s computers. Anyone in denial about the runaway skulduggery in effect in nearly every agency of the “feddle gummint” is either delusional or a part of (or expects to benefit from) the underhanded, nefarious, unscrupulous behavior that seems to now be the norm for “feddle gummint bureaucraps.” Heck, even the WaPo is “viewing with alarm” the appallingly stupid, criminal “feddle gummint” spying on a journalist.

If the feds can do it to her, they can do it to you. “Evidence” of “computer crimes” on ANYONE’S computers is now subject to The Sharyl Atkkisson Caveat: if the feds can plant things on her computer, who’s to say they didn’t plant stuff anywhere else they wanted to?

From now on, any claims by the “feddle gummint” to have found “evidence”–of ANYTHING–on a citizen’s computer should be loudly and raucously mocked.

Citizen response? So far, just the usual “view with alarm” stuff like the WaPo article. Sound and fury, etc. What would be appropriate, I think would be for a “vigilance committee” of patriotic hacker citizens to engage in a “Manhatten Project”-style effort to crack open every government computer system possible and flood the net with everything they want to hide from us. Snowden? He should be so far back he wouldn’t even be visible in the rear view mirror. Of course, it could happen that _some_ secrets could be minimally detrimental to national security, but I seriously doubt there are many such. Most “national security” secrets are more than likely just bureaucratic turf building/protecting.

Sadly, I do not have the skills necessary to make a contribution to the effort, and nor do I any longer have an audience/readership to influence toward that effort, since my work to remake this blog into nothing more than exercise space for “the voices in my head” has borne fruit. *heh*

In further mind-boggling abuses of rights supposedly protected under the First Amendment, while a student who is a Sikh has rightly received a pass on carrying a knife (“ceremonial dagger”) in pubschool, for religious reasons, Christian students who carry or read their Bibles, share their faith with other students or who are seen or heard praying or even just expressing opinions informed by their faith are continually oppressed. (Sure, schools pretty regularly lose in lawsuits over this, but the push against Christians practicing their religion in a pubschool setting is regularly, improperly, assaulted).

And cognitive dissonance never sets in with the left, because. . . it requires cognition? *sigh*

Reality-Based Fantasy, or Lies, Damned Lies and Politics

One of the things that most disturbs me about politics nowadays is the consistent brutality politicians and Hivemind Podpeople (but I repeat myself; Mass MEdia Hivemind Podpeople are just political operatives with bylines *sigh*) perpetrate upon language and reason by means of corrupting terms. For example, there are very (very) few “conservatives” who espouse anything even remotely resembling conservative values or policies, and there are even fewer “liberals” who have any even remote connection to liberal values or policies. (Democrats who continually try to poison democracy by vitiating voting integrity commit vile calumny of democracy by claiming “democratic” principles, for example.)

My mind was “tainted” as a lad when both my extended family of pastors and theologians and historians, and my readings of Aquinas, Mill, and many others led me to think that calling things by honest terms is really the only way to approach finding true things, and that finding that which is true is a Very Good Thing.

Nowadays, in politics, The Hivemind (in all its forms), in the groves of Academia Fruitcake Bakeries, etc., lies in the form of words used to cloak their opposites are the norm.

Consider a fair definition of “speech codes” often in effect on so-called “liberal” campuses, nowadays,

“. . .a “speech code” [is] any university regulation or policy that prohibits expression that would be protected by the First Amendment in society at large. Any policy—such as a harassment policy, a protest and demonstration policy, or an IT acceptable use policy—can be a speech code if it prohibits protected speech or expression.

“Many speech codes impermissibly prohibit speech on the basis of content and/or viewpoint. An example of this type of policy would be a ban on “offensive language” or “disparaging remarks.” Other speech codes are content-neutral but excessively regulate the time, place, and manner of speech. A policy of this type might limit protests and demonstrations to one or two “free speech zones” on campus and/or require students to obtain permission in advance in order to demonstrate on campus.”

As against such statements as these from the prototypical classic liberal, John Stuart Mill:

“If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind. . .

“He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them. But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion… Nor is it enough that he should hear the opinions of adversaries from his own teachers, presented as they state them, and accompanied by what they offer as refutations. He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them…he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.”
~ John Stuart Mill, On Liberty

Mill, in his essay, “On Liberty” expands on the very principles the Founders sought to carve into the law of the land. Interestingly, Edmund Burke, the prototypical English conservative recognized that the Founders were expressing their understanding of the rights of individuals within the framework of conservative values. (“Conciliation with the Colonies,” March, 1775)

GENUINE liberalism and GENUINE conservatism BOTH hold free speech to be a cardinal liberty, due protection by the state. So-called “liberals” nowadays most certainly do not (though they lie and say they do), and many so-called “conservatives” today are not much better.

One can simply list fundamental individual rights and go down the list checking off those that so-called “liberals” genuinely demonstrate support for or that so-called “conservatives” genuinely attempt to protect and find little in the way of liberal efforts to support expression of individual rights or conservative efforts to protect existing expression of individual rights. What one is more likely to find is both camps saying they are doing so while really simply trampling individual rights in the process of creating privileged classes.

I really tire of these lying scum. One suspects such behavior would only be amenable t amelioration by means of citizens’ vigilance committees bringing back tar and feathers. Like that’s gonna happen. . . *sigh*