Brown v. The Board and Liberal Racism Revisited

The demise of democracy, at least as it might be imagined from a reading of the Constitution, was nearly consummated yesterday in the Senate when our learned elected representatives tried to secretly craft a slimy deal to do who knows what, but, certainly, to feather the nest of these vultures, who roost in the Congress and White House. Amidst an uproar from the public they tried their best to pass some phony Immigration Bill that did nothing but allow illegals to remain here, not sign up for anything but welfare and freebies and continue to work or sell dope at their pleasure. There was blanket amnesty everywhere in the bill. Usually, such anti-democratic posturing and law-bending is reserved for other elements of government, way out of their original power base, like the Warren Court of the United States Supreme Court[SCOTUS ] and certain agencies like EPA and FDA.

The bill died missing several votes needed to form even a simple majority from Democrats who defected as the roar of the polis heightened. The eyes were upon them and they faded. On the same day, the SCOTUS tore away a bit of Brown v Board, as it should have. The retorts were loud and clear as the Party of Democrats, having little to do with democracy when they get their way, were as such:

"There is so much left to be done and for anyone to assert that race is not a problem in America today is to deny the reality in front of our very eyes."—Hillary Clinton 6.28.07[1]

Liberalism survives only on their racist mechanism. They want race to be a determining factor in jobs, hiring, contracts, schools and anything else that will appease their victims and give them more votes. This comment from a Saul Alinsky Communist.

"Let me just put this in perspective: If HIV-AIDS were the leading cause of death of white women between the ages of 25 and 34 there would be an outraged, outcry in this country."—Hillary Clinton 6.28.07[2]

Let me just put this in perspective: Why not substitute the words black African-American males for HIV and put in that 1/3 of them will go to prison and then talk about that outcry Hillary? This already happens. More die in gun battles in our 20 largest cities than all the lost soldiers in Baghdad since the start of the War on Terrorism, which the liberals never fail to defeat piece by piece.

Racism, of course is the heart and soul of the left-liberal movement in America and elsewhere.[3],[4],[5] They have little else but to implement their phony social programs, financed by the taxpayers, of course, and then to blame the rest of us for the failure of their ill-conceived and dangerous social programs. They spent 5 trillion dollars on phony social programs since 1950, murdered 20,000,000 babies in the womb and want more and more and more.

So, today we need to look at the left-wing’s maneuvers to circumvent the Constitution and body of laws and use the back room deals and courts to get at the tax base, the central target of all socialists, Communists and related parasites. The Immigration fiasco is over until 2009, but they will still not close the borders or enforce the current laws. They will do nothing and just pout.

The case of Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954) [6] is linked to the Supreme Court ruling in Plessy v. Ferguson. Here the earlier law supported the notion of separate but equal in several cases. Brown I reversed this saying, in effect, that separate was NOT equal and so on and so forth. The details are uninteresting and tiresome to review.

Fine. Now, let us ask: are people really equal? The much bashed Bell Curve[7] merely tabulated test scores that showed, and still do, that many minorities just cannot compete on standardized tests and busing, howling, set-asides, race-norming, quotas, sleaze and more cannot produce an equal outcome. No overblown and flowery oratory from any Eastern Liberal can change the test scores that were covered in the book, and they were abysmal. They still are. What the liberals wanted in affirmative action measure was not equality , but forced outcomes that were achieved at the expense of white males, who were not exactly their constituents, especially if the were Christians and had blue eyes and blond hair.

Now, the question is how to change the laws. A brief reading of the Constitution shows us that the Congress has the sole privilege of making laws and the SCOTUS is not endowed with that power, after the British or Roman system we suppose. But, after Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803) [8], the SCOTUS carved out of nothingness such a right. Not only that, but they also conjured up the right to veto laws and usurp some executive privilege in administering civil actions to correct previous errors in law and to corral the miscreants who defied their own actions. This is anarchy in the making. The proof of this is shown by counting the number of lawyers who roam the land looking for fees while they ‘correct’ the law.

The SCOTUS, the only court that counts, is split on this, for an instance, with Chief Justice Rehnquist opining against Plessy v. Ferguson. He was not alone.

William Rehnquist wrote a memo called "A Random Thought on the Segregation Cases" when he was a law clerk in 1952, during early deliberations that led to the Brown v. Board of Education decision. In his memo, Rehnquist argued that "I realize that it is an unpopular and unhumanitarian position, for which I have been excoriated by 'liberal' colleagues but I think Plessy v. Ferguson was right and should be reaffirmed." He continued, "To the argument... that a majority may not deprive a minority of its constitutional right, the answer must be made that while this is sound in theory, in the long run it is the majority who will determine what the constitutional rights of the minority are." [9]

Not if the liberals can help it! Minority rule, very much favored by the rabid left is known as authoritarianism and they have sacred icons who are heroes of this political sector such as Stalin, Mao and Ho and about 150 examples in Africa. No Marxist dictator has ever been asked to resign by a left liberal and, with no surprise expected, Castro is the Darling of the Progressives. They want to close Guantanamo[10], which will rate rave applause and wet sloppy bravoes from Castro, Hugo Chavez and Daniel Ortega, just to name a few dictators with blood on their hands . Heroes of the left like [Vinegar] John Kerry[11], a known Communist sympathizer, who aided the enemy in time of war and voted against nearly every major weapons program during his sorry tour in the Senate, was selected to run for President and wildly endorsed by the left here in the US, in Mexico and among Marxists around the world. Jimmy Carter[12] is another example of a Marxist Stooge. World wide, he could have secured nearly a billion votes. The entire base structure of the Democrats controlled and wagged by their leftist-most elements would use a Star Chamber to make decisions as they tried to do in the Kennedy offices on Capitol Hill in the Immigration Bill disaster. It matters not to a dedicated liberal or any of their lackeys who use narcotics to ‘feel good’ that they cannot tolerate laws based on majority rule. They have no qualms nor sacrifice the least significant of any scruples when they celebrate as some whiskey-soaked Kazoo-tooter[13] conjures law in the back room along with a pack of Hispanic racists from La Raza[14] and some fingerlings from the White House, the Progressive Caucus[15] or even Code Pink. They have no objection to Rep Jefferson from LA sitting on important committees when he just served with a 16 count indictment for bribery and worse. Then, there is the case of John Murtha of Abscam fame.

Now, none of the mumblings make any sense unless you believe that the courts really can make law from the bench, as some have done. Why try to use Congress, as the ACLU always reminds us, when you can get some crooked judge to rule your way and get another whack at the tax base? The jejune chants in our current ‘law system’ are just that: so much blather by advocates and stooges who try to bend the law.

So, that is where it lies: Can we allow the Marxist-trained cadres and their sycophants to corrupt our system of government?? I say no. We need to defeat these parasites, dumping some Republicans like Trent Lott along the way, and place real Americans on SCOTUS where they can administer the law and vacate most or all of the legal activism since 1950. The next presidential election in 2008 is critical as the next two justices to rot away in their chars are a pair of the most leftist persons ever to be called judges. They must be replaced with people who can interpret what the Constitution means and vacate spurious rulings and dispatch judges who cannot follow the law. George Bush can carry away the errors on his back and see if there is anything left of his ‘legacy.’

These leftist parasites will ruin our country if they can and tax the rest of us out of existence. They will not be satisfied until we are compelled to give up our homes to the ‘poor’ and stand for hours in food lines as they did in Moscow in the late 1980s. California will be the first to go down; Oregon second.

rycK ryckki@gmail. com

On Political Dupes and Our Form of ‘Democracy.’

Politics is the tangled and nefarious process of decisions made by groups. The persons who would take one or more sides in an issue are frequently emotional, direct and forceful in their desires to force a decision toward their persuasion and frequently have no idea what they are talking about. The process of culturing up votes or advocates for some group decision has its toots buried in inane actions commonly attributed to all of us. An example is the ubiquitous array of tempting diets as shown it the news rags at the supermarket near the checkout stand. I cannot recall a single week in my five decades of shopping that I have not seen a ‘miracle diet’ outlined with fanfare and fluff where the believer can lose one hundred pounds or more, look like Jane Mansfield in only three weeks or sooner, not be hungry and the weight stays off. There are always miracle cures for cancer too. One wonders, then, why so many people are over weight or gratuitously obese in America in light of these modern miracles and we can also marvel why the cancer rate has not dropped to zero.

Similar phenomena are noticed for eager witnesses to see magicians and freak shows. It seems that the a priori awareness that the performance is rigged is not a retarding factor in attendance for the simple. People want to see the featured freak show seven fingers or two heads or try to guess how the magical trick is done, since they do not believe in wizardry. Politicians have often sought solutions by attempting to penetrate the dark regions of wizardry, but have failed to get much for their efforts with the possible exceptions of Henry VIII, Nancy Pelosi and H. Ross Perot.

Now, you can mix the two in politics. Consider the John Edwards incident where he channeled the soul of a dead baby or when he offered to talk to anyone about his dead son. This is all some creepy stuff, but buffoonery made Edwards millions off some medical malpractice suit, as an ensemble of ignoramuses paneled briefly as a jury gave out the huge award. He tantalized the jury with this:

Edwards said, "I have to tell you right now — I didn't plan to talk about this — right now I feel her [Jennifer], I feel her presence...[Jennifer's] inside me and she's talking to you." [1]

Edwards was now rich. His wife, a victim of cancer, but not too humble to taunt the voters with sympathy in the Hollywood Manner of Michael J. Fox, recently attacked Ann Coulter for her remarks about the phony Edwards.[2],[3] Cindy Sheehan worked a similar trick with the memories of her dead son who disagreed with her leftist politics. It seems there is now an instant and a major fund-raising campaign going on, since Edwards is losing contributions [I wonder why?] and slipping down the poll ladder and has hoisted up a donation ad called “The Right Wing Attacks” on his website. [see below] Grubbing for money is the ultimate political achievement and poking hot buttons and hyping the voters on emotional issues is a Kennedy-approved apparatus.

The voter is taunted and cajoled from every quarter in an effort to maneuver their ballot box preferences. The process of political puppeteering works very well with the ignorant and imbecilic voters who are not paying much attention. The recent case where the Immigration Bill was squashed in the middle of a traditional maudlin Kennedy Breakdown.

The US voters appear to be similar to cognitively-challenged chickens in a ground coop with thin walls and too much water. They peck and wander around while the owner fixes the feed costs and secures the doors. They cannot seem to react unless the fox appears visibly inside with bloody feathers in his mouth. They are ‘living the good life’ and we must all marvel why our phony form of democracy has produced such prosperity. The good times and wealth are more astonishing in light of the Marxists who infested nearly every political election since 1918. The alcohol-propelled demagogues like Ted Kennedy do have some effect but can be exposed and their antics defeated, as happened today with the phony Immigration Bill.

rycK ryckki@gmail.com

References

______________________________________________-

The Right Wing Attacks!

Tuesday evening Elizabeth Edwards called Ann Coulter live on Hardball to ask for an end to her personal attacks on John and other candidates. Coulter's response? More personal attacks.

It's up to us to raise the dialogue by taking our message straight to voters. Let's show that Ann Coulter style politics will never carry the day. We have 4 days to reach $9 million. Please donate today:

$25 $50 $100 Other

http://www.johnedwards.com/rightwing/

_______________________________________________________________

A comment on Edwards

Pretending to channel the souls of dead babies in court in order to convince stupid jurors to give you money other people earned is about as low and depraved as you can get, but now we find out he politicizes the memory of his dead son by running around telling anyone who is of political benefit to him this gruesome, creepy story. And he's lied to so many people about never telling it that he can't remember who he lied to.

http://therightrant.blogspot.com/search/label/Democrats

___________________________________________________-

Coulter’s actual comments

I was going to have a few comments on the other Democratic presidential candidate, John Edwards, but it turns out that you have to go into rehab if you use the word 'faggot,' so I'm - so, kind of at an impasse, can't really talk about Edwards, so I think I'll just conclude here and take your questions."[99]

"C’mon, it was a joke. I would never insult gays by suggesting that they are like John Edwards. That would be mean."[101]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ann_Coulter#2007_John_Edwards_controversy

___________________________________________________________

Edwards quotes:

Edwards said, "I have to tell you right now — I didn't plan to talk about this — right now I feel her [Jennifer], I feel her presence...[Jennifer's] inside me and she's talking to you."

Edwards won a $6.5 million settlement for his client, but five weeks later, the presiding judge sustained the verdict but overturned the award as being "excessive" and that it appeared "to have been given under the influence of passion and prejudice," adding that in his opinion "the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict." He offered the plaintiffs half of the jury's settlement, but the child's family appealed the case and settled for $4.25 million.[12]

Winning this case established the North Carolina precedent of physician and hospital liability for failing to determine if the patient understood risks of a particular procedure.[13]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_edwards#Legal_career

The Immigration Bill is Being Secretly Crafted by Kennedy and Liberals

I think it was Sir Winston Churchill, perhaps not yet knighted and honored, who said that the making of laws and the making of sausages were to be kept from the public. This hints at the slimy business of the power struggle in Washington.

Senator Cornyn (R-TX) has some comments on this:

``This is a bill that was written behind closed doors by a small group of senators, and now it's being brought to the floor again without an opportunity to offer, freely offer, amendments and to have the kind of debate that I think this topic deserves,'' the senator said.

Cornyn said the congressional debate on what to do with the 12 million immigrants illegally in the U.S. has ``fallen short'' because it has focused only on whether to give them citizenship or deport them.

The current proposal, which would let undocumented immigrants gain legal status after paying a fine, isn't sufficient punishment for people in this country illegally, the senator said. ``It looks like we're selling American citizenship,'' he said.

Cornyn said the U.S. would be in ``big trouble'' if failure to pass immigration legislation blocked an increase in the number of visas for skilled workers, as sought by technology companies including Google Inc., owner of the most popular Internet search engine, and Microsoft Corp., the world's largest software maker.[1]

These are all excellent points. Why should we think we need unskilled workers of the lowest class in North America to populate our lands?? Can we not outsource tomatoes, lettuce and such to Mexico or Taiwan or The Sudan and have the produce shipped over here? Apparently not, according to Ted Kennedy of Chappaquiddick Fame. Apparently, we must learn how to make laws under the table, where the good Senator frequently resides after his valiant bouts with sobriety and bawling episodes about his brothers and nephews and such who are prison, or should be.

Most societies are pulled down by the low class. The Third World has numerous cases where failure is directed intently by bad government while being wildly supported by the criminal class from places like High-Anus, Massachusetts.

Most of the trendy howling about making citizens out of criminals or letting them vote [Clinton Bill to let felons vote] arises from the need to stuff ballots for liberals. A visit to the La Raza site gives a list of those states that require IDs while stating that only citizens can vote. What is the point if they cannot vote anyway?? The point is votes as Senator Kennedy howled “Help us out!”

We urgently need other things than the fractured structure of this bill, to wit:

[1] We need a national ID system where every person must have one or commit a felony. All citizens would get one free. All others would have to get one upon entering the US or if they are already here and not citizens.  Summary deportation  as a minimum penalty for not applying for a national ID.  The ID would be connected with the Social Security System information.

[2] We need a National Work Permit that permits any person to work in any manner, including self-employment. Free  and automatic only for  citizens who are non felons.  Fees and reviews for non citizens. Summary deportation for not applying for a national ID, heavy fines for employers  for hiring persons without a Work Permit and revoking of employer Work License.

[3] We need a National Work License for anybody to employ any worker for any reason. Citizens would get one free.   Any person with a National Wrok Permit would be eligible to work. Heavy fines for employing anyone without a National ID and a National Work Permit.


All information in the IDs and Permits would be in national database accessable by all goverment agencies, city, county, state and federal and any persons with valid IDs. Heavy fines, jail and deportataion , where appropriate for any person who steals an ID or Permit from another person.

Every person in the US should have an ID, which is linked to Social Security and such, and a Work Permit with work information such as the employer License ID number. Failure to obtain such permits by non citizens, a felony, would be instant grounds for deportation.

Of course, the left will never go for this because it would allow tracking of all citizens to see just who is working for who. The selling of drugs would then carry two felonies: sale of an illicit substance and absence of a permit to sell. The liberals need criminals to supply them with creature comforts like dope, sexual favors and cheap labor, but most importantly: votes for more liberals and tax hikes.

The left-liberals, still groaning and fuming about Ronald Reagan and his crushing of the USSR want to get some wealth by stuffing the ballot box. They are for the most part Anti-anti-Communists, or simply Communist Stooges. They cannot survive on their own ideological means as their preferential forms of government [Mostly Marxist dictatorships and such] are utter failures.

Urge your Senators to vote down this stupid bill and vote, instead, for a National License and Permitting Act that would let us identify and track who lives here.

rycK ryckki@gmail.com

On Suppression of Criticism

Silencing the opposition, by any convenient means, hopefully forever, satisfies a basic political tenet for all players in the game save those who are too chauvinistic to realize their pawn-like position. Masters at the game usually round up the opposition and space them equally against the nearest brick wall and introduce some new variations on the zany Jackson Pollack art work. Stalin was unusually adept at the game as he managed to cut off criticism by a variety of novel methods and coined the word liquidation as a tribute to his personal lexicon. Apparently, the left-liberal wing of the Party of Democrats [nothing Democratic about them anymore] has blown a main circuit fuse over talk radio and its impact on leftist elections. They have lost control of this part of the media.

Control of the media is probably the most important control factor of an impending dictatorship or revolution next to the collapse of the enemy military forces. The first thing many revolutionaries do is seize the local radio and TV stations and start broadcasting that they have won so the time for peace and justice is now at hand. No revolutionary would allow an outlet to go unsupervised. An example is the Aljazeera site[1], which provides superb propaganda and rude political hints and talking points to the liberal Democrats as they attack the ‘right-wing’ on the War on Terrorism, just a bumper sticker [2]as some noisily assert.

Then, there is the problem of Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity and the crew at Fox News, mostly Bill O’Reilly. The obvious way to counter such a series of pundits with millions of viewers is to put up your own shows, with opposing views, of course, and offer a tussle on the issues. Unfortunately, or perhaps the reverse of this fortune, radio talk shows of the leftist persuasion like those envisioned by Mario Cuomo, Al gore, Air America and others have flopped and disgraced their noble hosts with sour ratings and disinterest from the masses. I wonder why?

Now, what is a good radical with extensive Marxist training to do?? Well, Hillary Clinton, a known Saul Alinsky Radical and adherent of far left-wing radical politics and a member of the Sisterhood from California, one Barbara Boxer have started a quiet legislative effort to muzzle Rush and his friends, who are having too much effect [and fun] with the left. Rush has been on now for about 12 years and is on the brown list, near the top or the penultimate position, of media types, pundits, elected officials, judges and such for a long time. He is a major problem despite the reverse psychological ruse of telling the masses that he is a heap of lies and lacks any persuasive power. If that be true, and truth is not exactly the first weapon a leftist knight would select for battle, then he should have been left to fail by poor ratings and little or no advertising. Surprise! Surprise! Rush and Sean Hannity [3]and Monica Crowley[4], the infamous and stunning Ann Coulter[5] and Laura Ingraham[6] [except for Sean we have three knock-down drop-dead gorgeous blonds here, something to contrast with Barbara Boxer and Maxine Waters!?] have been doing a bang up job of banging the rabid left and exposing their tricks and tricksters and johns. Ann Coulter, another blond bombshell, has the distinction of fighting with as gigantic a set of bloody-eyed zombies as her enemies since Joan D’Arc or Cleopatra.

The center of this issue, of course, is suppression of criticism, something the left just cannot stand. So, the notion of the Fairness Doctrine becomes of interest, which was “present such issues in what was deemed an honest, equal and balanced manner[7]” and the particulars look like this:

Two corollary rules of the doctrine, the "personal attack" rule and the "political editorial" rule, remained in practice until 2000. The "personal attack" rule was pertinent whenever a person or small group was subject to a character attack during a broadcast. Stations had to notify such persons or groups within a week of the attack, send them transcripts of what was said and offer the opportunity to respond on the air. The "political editorial" rule applied when a station broadcast editorials endorsing or opposing candidates for public office, and stipulated that the candidates not endorsed be notified and allowed a reasonable opportunity to respond.[8]

Now, just who would want to bring this back?? Well, let us guess: liberals? You guessed right or actually left. Here is a list of those who support this: Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Representatives Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), Maurice Hinchey (D-NY), and Louise Slaughter (D-NY)[9]. Well, how did we guess this??

Recently, Senator Inhof (R-) recalled a conversation he overheard by Senators Clinton and Boxer as :” "I was going over to vote the other day, and I was walking with two very liberal gals that didn’t pay any attention to me being with them," Inhofe told Ziegler. "They said, 'We have got to do something about this, these are nothing but far-right-wing extremists. We’ve got to have a balance, there’s got to be a legislative fix to this.”[10]

The two most liberals Senators deny this. But, then, what is the value of truth in anyting Senator Clinton has ever said? A known liar, crooked lawyer, perjurist and a person who ignored a judge’s subpeona to relase her Rose Law Firm Billing Records, Mrs Bill Clinton has everything to gain from such a supression measure and nothing to lose by lying about it. That is a fact.

Following the Communist Manifesto and other sacred documents frequently studied by the far left, we cans see the obvious need to squelch criticism from the right wing. And, as ALL the players above are far left-wing types, we can safely dump the notion that they are not working on this or something worse. They need to stop Rush and others or he might just cost them another election or two.

All this follows with the leftist ideolog of lies, legislative methods to attack opponents, high taxes and other measures. They will do or say anything to grab power, so what do we believe here?? The left will try to say that this was ‘old news’ or three years old or out of context or other clumsy retort.

Believe U.S. Senator James Inhofe, as the other two are slick liars and propoents of the worst sort of Tax Maggotry.

rycK

The History of Phony Advice from Leftist

We watch, mostly with wonder and surprise, at the dire predictions and frenetic advice bestowed upon us by our elder statesman and certain celebrities who transcend history, economics and foreign policy. We all remember the media circus when Meryl Streep[1],[2] was seated as some kind of witness or ‘expert’ on the contested Alar growth hormone trial, used by the apple industry to enhance picking time, and we were privileged to reel and wheeze under the implied weight of her pharmacological expertise and lofty oratory. She had no reason to be there. We are constantly invited to join in with little dangling bells and loud song as we celebrate some political notion contrived on some notion of morality or justice, as if these terms were clearly defined anywhere. By some process, understandable only to carnie barkers, slick sleeve grifters and North Beach panhandlers, we are given to believe that some mutual benefit shines down from the cosmos if we just accept the notion that those who are out to attack [and bury] us all really have our good intentions in mind. We must heed the warnings. Mesomorphs who have made a few movies or drove by Harvard a time or two seem to have surpassed all political barriers, simplified the problems, experienced Nirvana, recurrently with drugs, and can now predict the future for us. They have the solutions. Escalating taxes is always one of these mandatory options. We should listen to Streep or Michael Moore, we must suppose, given the blather and steam, because they had some face time on the tube and could be recognized outside Nathan’s. They are our self-anointed guardians and will advise us in our conduct and voting habits if the tax revenues are high enough and we legalize abortion and narcotics and allow illegal aliens to vote without showing identification.

We need to scrutinize a few examples of this strange conduct from celebrities and analyze the prediction, advise, content and outcomes.

First Example:

We have been invited to read, colorfully, the poetry of Ho Chi Minh strongly advocated by Jane Fonda[3] that, doubtless, contains jewels of wisdom. Here is my favorite:

AUTUMN NIGHT by H. C. M.

Before the gate, a guard

with a rifle on his shoulder.

In the sky, the moon flees

through clouds.

Swarming bed bugs,

like black army tanks in the night.

Squadrons of mosquitoes,

like waves of attacking planes.

I think of my homeland.

I dream I can fly far away.

I dream I wander trapped

in webs of sorrow.

A year has come to an end here.

What crime did I commit?

In tears I write

another prison poem. [4]

What does this mean Jane? Are bed bugs parts of his imaginary army? What is needed here to set the stage for an intermezzo that will jerk the tears or honk your horn or galvanize you to political action is some fear, a sad story, some fortune teller and a couple of clowns to blow the kazoos and play stupid. Hello Jane, we missed the message.

Another Example:

Jane Fonda granted Chris Matthews an interview opportunity in which she ‘apologized’ for her conduct in praise of North Viet Nam in Hanoi in time of war. She is apparently immune to treason charges. Apparently US soldiers were concerned that she was performing some elementary propaganda duties for the enemy in time of war and lowering morale and commented in the negative against her and Susan Sontag. Jane, basking in the glow of Chris Matthews, burst forth in a stunning and poetic starburst of redaction and Marxist revisionism when she said: "“... Ho Chi Minh "was essentially a nationalist," but "many people, I think rightly have said he was really more like Tito, the Yugoslav president, Marshal Tito," the man generally seen in the 1970s and 1980s as a less doctrinaire communist tyrant. Matthews was eating it up”.[5]:

Quoth the Chris: "I understand exactly. You know your stuff!"[6]

Sure. Play the stooge and wax enchanted for us Chris.

The wild applause by Chris was instructive. He acted as if he was attending some kind of history lesson as a neophyte. Ho was a Marxist, chose and implemented Marxism, accepted money and war material from Marxists, chanted Marxist songs and was the darling of the far left in the US. Chris Matthews is essential to such political theater and functions as a leftist political chum-chucker who can recycle the stale, stilted propaganda action items of the New York Times. He lends some form of credibility to screeds against American society and capitalism. We wonder what “[a]..less doctrinaire communist tyrant.” might look like. Can we have a half or quarter Nazi or a 2% Presbyterian? Maybe Osama bin Laden is not a 100% terrorist. Are prison inmates 90% Democrats?

“Matthews pressed her on whether the left actually shortened the war. When Fonda replied that yes, she and "tens of thousands of others" succeeded,…”[7]

Quoth the Raven Once more: "I think you’re right!...if that war was supported by the American people, we might have stayed in there a lot longer and still lost." [8]

We can fight Fascism and lose 400,000 dead, but Marxism is allowed? Marxists murdered 100,000,000 in the last century and we might inquire where the activist left were hiding. Another example is needed to contrast to the piddling fluff and petty sophomoric grind house mumblings of Jane and her pet But-Monkey Chris Matthews. But, ..but but.

Example:

George Kennan warned President Truman and many others of the danger of the Soviets and issued: “American anti-communism and general suspicion of Soviet aspirations was George Kennan's famous Long Telegram of 1946.”[9] He sounded the alarm and predicted much of what the Soviets were up to and offered a containment policy accordingly, finally leading to success. I doubt that FDR would have rebelled against his allies in such a crude fashion, but we cannot test that. We need to look at the threat and see what happened and decide whether we should have followed Kennan’s advice.

Kennan writes:

“Thus the decision [to fight Communism] will really fall in large measure in this country itself. The issue of Soviet-American relations is in essence a test of the overall worth of the United States as a nation among nations. To avoid destruction the United States need only measure up to its own best traditions and prove itself worthy of preservation as a great nation.”[10]

Of course, the left, policies fashionably divided into Trots and Stallies at the time, were furious with Kennan and the Cold War policy he advocated. Stalin was our Uncle Joe. But, Kennan was absolutely right about the virulent disease of Marxism using any assorted flavor as the Soviets might select. The Communist Manifesto text and speeches by Soviet leaders clearly predicted and demanded the end of capitalism by revolution if necessary. Fact. Ronald Reagan took up the challenge for most of his life and became the most targeted anti-Communist in history. Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick continued on with the Kennan pressure and alerted us to the dangers of people like Jimmy Carter and his adoration of Marxism and Islamo-Fascism.[11] Her appearance on TV was enough to cause spontaneous cerebral aneurisms in the rabid left and their lap dogs. It was Jimmy Carter who thought the Ayatollah would be a ‘stabilizing’ force in Iran. Jimmy kissed Brezhnev on the cheek as he groveled in the presence of one of his intellectual heroes and bawled when Daniel Ortega lost the election in Nicaragua. He bawled after his own unsuccessful reelection attempt.

Jim Wright, Jimmy Carter and other Democrats, ennobled by the New York Times for their efforts, formed the Anti-anti-Communists, to attack Ronald Reagan and his allies, who were armed with facts and copies of speeches, by association, and ultimately became the Crypto Communists of the left in America. Anti-anti-Communists are simple preceptors of Marx and Lenin [read pedestrian communists] with some up-to-date slogans and access to the US tax base. Carter was a failure as a person, father, President and in foreign affairs. His emotional embrace of Marist propaganda as wanting ‘peace and stability’ is almost as phony as the wording of his Nobel Prize, given in churlish defiance by the enemies of George Bush in Sweden and Norway. President Reagan crushed the hapless Marxists and the Soviet Union crashed like a rotten melon in a shallow ditch. The People’s Republic has retained certain remnants of Maoism, none of them in the economic category—that costs money from trade. The remaining dedicated Marxists on the planet, mostly in Africa, are still beggars upon the national stage with little to offer but spite, genocidal tendencies and sore memories of decades of failure.

The singular differences among these examples were not dependent upon some lack of the media talent, or the Hollywood experience, but the dedication of the people involved and the message. The premises in the leftist cases were functionally false, the messages stilted with radical political noises and unbridled propaganda, and the economic platforms were unsound. Marxism and its assorted congeners are a farce and defiantly reject success wherever touted. Fonda, Matthews and Streep robotically embraced some stale phony political constructs that somebody might have absently scraped off their shoes while the Anti-Communists were correct in every measure of their enemies. They did form the Evil Empire as President Reagan taught us. George Kennan, Ronald Reagan and Jeane Kirkpatrick worked with the facts and used much of the USSR’s revolutionary rhetoric and open bold threats as a basis for their work to enlist a movement to destroy Communism. That worked.

Today, similar Hollywood puppets and other self-anointed luminaries hop and clap on the fringes of leftist political stage as they accuse the United States of being the aggressor in Iraq, Iran and the Middle East. Islamo-Fascism is a matter-of-fact political reality that is fourteen centuries old and has ruined societies in dozens of states. Millions have died in religious wars and purges in the name of Islam. The future of Islamo-Fascism is contingent on the current and ultimate effects of Tribalism and unfathomable religious divides, which signal continual failure. Either of these social defects could destroy an average society [as anywhere in Africa] but practicing both simultaneously guarantees destruction. Fanatical religious activists issue insane and irrational religious mandates [jihads, fatwas and called “calls Jews "scum of the earth" and "monkeys and pigs" who should be "annihilated."[12][13]] in the hope that some deity will smile upon them and sweep their enemies off the map, as in the case of Israel. That has yet to happen, which brings up other serious questions: How many times do we have to suffer from some inevitable complete destruction before something happens? What happened to the AIDS Pandemic in the US? Are some of us still alive?

We can sort out much of the political struggles today by first looking at the facts and the history of successful and unsuccessful economic systems. When they lose after following their silly Marxism, fanatic religious crusades and other follies, the hackneyed excuse is to blame capitalism and demand money so they can restructure their society and prepare to lose again and again. The US is to blame for most of the world’s troubles and many leftists in the US are willing to testify to this any old day. Many make there living acting out noisy screeds against capitalism.

Global Warming, or Cooling as it may be, is now the premier topic of political activism although the science is hazy and sunspots appear to have more influence over the surface temp than carbon dioxide. [14] Any cracker who got extra brown spots on his skin in the Arizona Desert can offer solemn testimony to our ultimate destruction, to the songs and dance of Al Gore and his puppets.

Here you go again.

rycK

Are We Getting Through to the Slugs in Congress??

We must suspect that the hallowed halls of Congress must sequester some form of brain-destroying mold, or other organism, that robs our elected leaders of most of their cognitive skills save those needed for hygiene, booze and stuffing money into jacket pockets. The air must ring with musty spheroids of pollen or viruses that can extinguish any sense of morality, faith or decency while sanctifying sloth, prevarication and indolence. Eventually all so-called Senators, a vile and cruel insult to the Roman Republic, can be bribed with this or that and vote as if they were born and educated in Mexico, East Timor or Timbuktu.

But, they seem to retain sufficient neurons and other essential cranial matter to sense when the voters are about to throw their greazy carcasses back into the streets. An example springs to mind, this week, as we think about the Immigration Bill now resurrected from the Rotted and Gone. There are some 14 lousy lawlettss in this horrible bill that seeks to reward criminal activity with special tax breaks and amnesty and most Senators have at least heard whispers of voter unrest and need to be wary of their future jobs in government service.

One slimy point, apparently written by La Raza [The Race, the Spanish racist digest] or some inebriated imbecile in the Kennedy camp was going to allow, for obvious reasons, criminals to be eligible for citizenship although they had committed serious felonies like rape, murder and such. Many our elected officials have done as much, although not convicted, and have sympathy and empathy for felons. Most of these crooks are Democrats, who stand to gain many votes from this bill.

The details are in limbo now, but the game might be rigged. Amendments hang in the air like so much marijuana smoke in the Senate.

Here is an analysis:

“This is despite the fact that the conservative leaders of the anti-amnesty movement are refusing to cooperate, and won't give Mitch McConnell a list of amendments that they want considered. My source tells me that the reason for this is that the game has now been rigged. McConnell is essentially promising to bring the amendments up in exchange for cloture votes, but Trent Lott is publicly saying that they will strip any problematic amendments out in committee.

“In other words, if the bill gets through the Senate and the House, the Democrats and the open borders Republicans will work together when the bills have to be reconciled in committee to strip out any amendments that the "grand bargainers" don't like. Therefore, at this point, it doesn't matter what amendments pass, because any tough enforcement provisions that slip through will be rendered toothless when the bills are reconciled”

What a slimy deal.

I think we need for a Senator to step forward and just filibuster the whole gig unless certain amendments are put in the bill that prevent the outrages mentioned above. Trent Lott is acting like a Democrat now with his slim 1 vote majority as minority leader. He should lose that and be given a job he can do.

“I asked my source to speculate on why Lott was pushing so hard, and he said that Lott may be naive enough to think that this bill might help John McCain's presidential campaign. He told me that despite McCain's dip in the polls since the bill hit the news, it was hard to miss the fact that the biggest supporters of this bill in the Senate, Jon Kyl, Trent Lott, and Lindsey Graham, are all solidly behind McCain in 'O8.”

McCain is finished as a Presidential candidate [McCain Feingold Bill] so we should encourage Kyl and Graham to dump his maverick carcass aside and get back to reality. There is no reason to break Social Security, invite 40,000,000 aliens to the welfare rolls with full medical or give the left-liberals a bunch of votes.

Move Lott outta power.

rycK

The noisy banter over health care in Cuba and the old USSR have been served up to the interested, and uninterested, like a plump pig on a platinum platter with supporting apple and pineapple sauce, as a sterling example of what Marxism can do for their people. This is so wonderful. But is it? We now know that the Russian medical system was limited to the ‘masses’ with very limited services and procedures and that when serious or moderate medical care was indicated, the Politburo and its hangers-on flew to Switzerland for help. Proper leftist propaganda efforts demand, at least in theory, that at least some superior social or economic attribute be hailed in Marxist governments so as to legitimize at least some modicum of progressive success. Otherwise, the have nothing to report except failure, and that is all they have every time we look closely. How many times in Africa now? 150??

According to the New York Times we have an opportunity to look at the numbers on healthcare and ask some questions from this startling comment:

How could a poor developing country — where annual health care spending averages just $230 a person compared with $6,096 in the United States — come anywhere near matching the richest country in the world? [1]

The answer follows: According to the CIA with data from 2006, we find that the per capita GDP is $4,000 and the gross GDP is $40 billion and the population is thought to be 11,394,043 (July 2007 est.),which gives $3,511, which is close to $4,000.[2] Fine. A precise accounting for the GDP in terms of medical expenditures depends on the income from Venezuela in the form of oil and the fact that this is paid for by trading health care workers:

Since late 2000, Venezuela has been providing Cuba oil on preferential terms, and it currently supplies about 98,000 barrels per day of petroleum products. Cuba has been paying for the oil, in part, with the services of Cuban personnel, including some 20,000 medical professionals.[3]

The NYT Article [ref 1 below] skirts around the issue by asking some expert who mumbles about lifestyles being simpler with more exercise and abortions, which tend to improve the life expectancy. Apparently, the lack of cars, electricity and other shortages are in some way beneficial to the population because they enhance health. Food rationing and electrical blackouts were not mentioned. Can you really practice medicine in the dark? Reasons [read phony examples] like this are given to support the notion that Castro has a first class education system and marvelous healthcare system.

The ‘authority’ from the article closes this story with the following quote:

“I know Americans tend to be skeptical,” he said, “but health and education are two achievements of the Cuban revolution, and they deserve some credit despite the government’s poor record on human rights.”[4]

The USSR had both of these wonderful attributes, but it seems their ‘education’ system was limited to teaching Russian language, revolutionary history and preaching Marxist economics, something that robbed the Russians of their ability to participate in capitalism after 1989. They were all miseducated. Their currency, savings accounts, health care system and more went crashing down leaving poverty, crime and failure in the wake.

We cannot track, precisely, the money devoted to health care, but we can ask if Cuba uses modern medicine, which rests, for most part, on clinical diagnostics. In the US, at least during the Hillary Care Scares, diagnostics cost about 4% of the total bill and pills about 15%, the rest going to admin, surgery, hospital care and such So, we could ask a simple question:

Does Cuba have sufficient blood tests for its citizens?

What is the average cost of a blood test panel in the US??

Here is a website that gives prices with a fixed $15 for draws and a few examples of the cost of specific blood tests:

Ref [5]

And this list goes on and on for 400+ tests. I get a test annually that includes cholesterol, glucose, PSA and some others that runs $300-400. Notice that if you pick three or four clinical tests to perform from this list, the average Cuban HC expense of $230 is dwarfed! Just a few average tests will consume all the money per citizen. So, how do they do this?

How is this possible? For simple stuff like Albumin – Serum, glucose, sodium, potassium and such the cost might be lower, but infectious diseases like Hepatitis A, B, C, D are very expensive. Indeed, even on Hep C with a Viral Load test would run $800 or more. No Hep C tests in Cuba?

Let us give Castro the benefit of the doubt and assume that the US costs are 5-10X higher than Cuba can do and wonder what the costs are. We quickly see that for clinical diagnostics, alone, the cost of comprehensive tests to cover the population swamps the Cuban resources. This, is limited to diagnostics alone. What about treatments?

Now ,what if we ask about MRIs? Here is a place that will offer” Full Price MRI for $380-$560 and Full Price CT Scan for $270-$370; Minimum Full Body CT Scan (chest, abdomen, pelvis) is $575 while Maximum Full Body CT Scan (chest, abdomen, pelvis, head, neck) is $825”[6]

What about pills? What do Cubans pay for Lipator, Alleve or antibiotics? Do they have Tylenol??

We haven’t even wondered about emergency room supplies, tissue culture, incubators, oxygen, needles, blood bags and testing and such. The money is already shot.

The ugly facts are that Cuba cannot offer anything substantial for  their citizens for a crummy $230. We begin to suspect that there is no effective HC in Cuba when we learn, from the NYT, that Cuban surgeons actually botched the recent operation on Fidel and Spanish surgeons had to be flown across the pond to save Fidel. [7] Real neat medical training we expect.

The strutting and crowing about the health system of Castro’s Cuba is a farce, but an essential element of propaganda. Lies must be lied and tall tales must be told to continue on with fables about Marxism. We have seen 100,000,000 people die from Communism since 1917 and we still have dedicated cadres trying to attach some modicum of legitimacy to the Marxist systems in spite of the failures. It satisfies the claim of the NYT and other leftists that if all the Cubans are entitled to visit a single grass shack in an alley in Havana hosted by political activists offering political messages and an aspirin pill for those who moan nosily. And, that is low cost, for sure.

The far left, encouraged and sponsored by the New York Times, must continue to push this preposterous propaganda in our faces to patch up their decaying political systems. They told us lies before and now must keep up the phony baloney.

Castro is a murdering dictator and the liberals stoop to lying about his works it seems. It would have been more poignant if Castro had not survived his operation apparently bungled by his own trained ‘doctors’ instead of waxing frantic and getting help abroad.

Is there some left-liberal out there who can tell us about clinical tests and drugs in Cuba and supply costs and the number of persons who benefit??

I didn’t think so. Propaganda cannot be a talking point and also stand tests for analysis as it is hollow and phony and never based on truth.

rycK

The political world is instituted on things other than truth we begin to suspect as we compare assorted political systems across space and time. It seems we are encouraged to accept various tendered notions of freedom, justice and truth, inter alia, that might guide us down society’s wondrous paths in our quest for a decent society. The Greeks, long on wind, theatre and rhetoric, but short on substance, especially in the military world—not to mention science, and with indecent societies while lugging around the burdensome criticism of Plato, have been generous enough to bequeath much of their most pressing problems in a concentrated snarl of circular logic and confusion. We don’t have a clue what words like freedom, justice and truth might connote given the erratic and nonsensical profusion of their definitions, uses and outcomes. Only a soothsayer, a Massachusetts social worker or a union steward might have a working definition. Some in Fresno might guess the definitions of two in a bloody gang war. We are persuaded that the Greeks had good intentions, the hallmark of dictatorships, swamis, patroons, imbeciles with portfolio and fathers of several pogroms. Attempts to rationalize various flavors of politics by their own self-defined terms produce only imprecise and unwieldy results when reflected from the ugly Mirror of Reason and leave us with unpredictable sensations while understanding these terms. It seems that ‘justice,’ a word devoid of any precise meaning, although it does deliver a severe political impact upon the skulls of the unenlightened, still evades us. It seems that our lexicon is not yet sufficient in breadth to contain words that adequately describe some of our antics, and the list of words along with there precise definitions need to be expanded in light and in celebration of Mike Nifong and his allies. Nifong has expanded certain elements of politics.

Demagoguery seems to remain the strongest extant feature of Greek democracy, whatever that was meant to be, is their strongest legacy and was originally intended to remain a dazzling beacon and warning for all as the strongest admonition that such a process would never be revisited after it was shown to be a social disaster. Demagoguery, the only well-honed tool of Athens, is now seen to transcend the simple notions of government and actually allows us to define words like ‘justice’ and such in the terms necessary to control the masses, get elected or promote some political vector.

In analyzing examples of demagoguery and other perturbations of governance, we find the Strange Case of Mike Nifong to be of interest. Here we hit upon a singular chance to view a detailed spectacle of modern politics from an oblique view, unencumbered by the news or commentary as is not common in our society. Somebody got straight to the truth, the bane and destroyer of carefully-crafted demagoguery. The facts soared beyond the grasp of the political controls in place. It seems the police received complaints about the Duke Lacrosse Team and the elected District Attorney, upon hearing the news, set about on his long journey in the quest of justice. Somewhere along the line, he stumbled, his reelection looming like a great soaring bird in the near future, but his failures and skullduggery with the undisclosed evidence and other matters continued with wild applause that still rings from the stoops and dance halls of Durum, North Carolina. Here was a case of racism to exploit!! A gang of evil whites gang-raped an innocent black girl as she struggled to work her way though college.

In the beginning was the complaint of rape by the Lacrosse Team or several of its members by some young person, a minority and an obvious victim. An investigation was conducted and DNA samples taken for most or all of the team members and from the victim and her intimate attire. This would allow prima facie evidence of rape if the specimens matched. The investigation would proceed according to the hallowed norms of justice. Then, things went awry. Witnesses and testimony from the accuser and her ‘friend’ were found to be contradictory and erratic, attributes that would normally lead to dropping the case, but not here. So, the investigation proceeded. Justice must be served, especially on a black/white encounter on campus.

Now, before the DNA tests could be finished, certain activists, radicals, political agitators and others rose to the heights of demagoguery and found an instant case of obvious and confirmed racism completed and documented. Case closed. The Lacrosse team should be disbanded, students expelled, etc. etc. etc. The guilty must go to jail and Duke must cleanse its campus of racists. Yadda yadda yadda.

From this point, the howls for blood formed into a high crescendo by students, certain faculty and others rose to fever pitch. Visits from the Black Panthers and other radical black political leaders ensued. The brother of the poor, mistreated victim called for justice. Her name was withheld. A black student e-mailed the Lacrosse coach with threats and “…was rewarded by being placed on prestigious campus committees and Brodhead himself championed this "student" as being a "star" at Duke.” All this before the investigation had sorted out the facts.[1] All in the name of curing racism. Let us salute justice in all its forms. Racism is now justice.

As the evidence became powerless to properly sustain the validity of accusations, especially since the DNA of the team was not found upon the person or clothing of the victim, concealment of the exculpatory evidence was necessary to compel the investigation to proceed and Nifong needed to be reelected, of course. Here, we can kill two stones with one bird. The fact that ‘the victim’ was carrying the DNA of four others in her skivvies or elsewhere, none of whom were on the Lacrosse team was suppressed. The truth need not interfere with leftist justice. They must be guilty because they are rich and white.

Fearing that some injustice was in the making, Duke University readmitted the students. This provoked outrage from a ‘professor,’ to wit: “The decision by the university to readmit the students, especially just before a critical judicial decision on the case, is a clear use of corporate power, and a breach, I think, of ethical citizenship,” says Dr. Karla Holloway, the William R. Kenan Jr., Professor of English and Professor of Law at Duke. “I could no longer work in good faith with this breach of common trust.”[2]

Spoken with true political themes and constant attention to leftist politics of the reversed racist sort. The evil corporate power was shielding justice. We wonder if professors of law at Duke can really enlighten us about breach of common trust without some clear racial divides. Does ethical citizenship require the suppression of evidence? Yes, it does, at Duke, in some circles.

This is not a matter of good faith; it is a matter of overt racism, as usual, from the rabid left. What howling leftist professor in academia cares about the facts? The salient point of politics here is that Nifong had acted in strict accordance with his strong leftist training and was compelled to find the innocents guilty in a court of law, because it was the politically correct thing to do, with applause included, and a majority of votes in his vision for his upcoming election. Here, we see the disgusting, but liberally acclaimed, corruption of our system of law in terms of ‘justice’ as the DA bends before his howling left-liberal Democrat constituents. He was not alone, the New York Times and other leftist tomes hailed him as wondrous and progressive as he committed serious felonies in his official conduct by his suppression of exculpatory evidence.

The charges were dropped. The NC Bar came in with an investigation and hearing. Nifong was disbarred and is now subject to both criminal and civil actions.

The interesting point now follows: Nifong did not violate his covenant with the left. His actions as a criminal and sleazebag did not exonerate the Duke Lacrosse team members of their participation in the rape nor did his suppression of evidence and other criminal acts affect the political outcome. The dropped charges still hang like marijuana smoke in the air. The twisted translation of this event is as follow: “Tawana told the truth!”[3] The Duke Lacrosse Team members are blameworthy simply because they are affluent and white. This is a clear case of racism, beloved of the left and celebrated by the New York Times and their Pinch-pampered toadies at the editorial desk who modulate the flow of propaganda and disinformation for the left wing. This stubborn defiance of logic and truth must now be detailed in the precise definition of the new word: Nifongism.[4] Whenever a person works toward any left-liberal politically correct outcome and uses racism, criminality and sleaze in his diligence that person is an advocate or preceptor of Nifongism. Those who populate the chorus and faun and coo and drool over the actions of a Nifongist are now designated as Nifongalongs or purring toadies for the cause. Democrat victories depend on the New Nifongery[5] with the nifongalongs tottering along behind carrying the wash bottles and waving hate banners. Racism, drugs, sodomy, sloth and massive social spending round out the political agenda.

Such is the sorry state of politics. But, something tells me that the Greeks knew all about this and guys like Plato were just prompted to put a little shine on the rotten system they put upon the world.

rycK

The latest news is, from some of those who have dismal approval ratings, given as more promises:

"We're going to show the American people that the promises in this bill will be kept," Bush said in a speech to the Associated Builders and Contractors.”[1] –President Bush.

It is always interesting that promises are offered after a long string of promises have been broken on a given subject. Here, we must recall all the fluff and foam about ‘closing the border’ and ‘building a fence’ with little or no action and no funding for the fence.

The approval rating of Congress, at this time, is now worse than Bush’s dismal and well-earned level.

We are damn sick of this promissory promiscuity that oozes from the nearest cavity of some pandering politico as he/she/it panders and gropes for new ways to offer more earmarks[2] to cronies and hatch new perks to the ‘elected’ representatives of the people.

Obey says staff aides and lawmakers simply haven't had enough time to sift through more than 32,000 earmark requests and decide which ones make sense. Now, some bills will be delayed as his colleagues and aides work double time to "scrub" earmark requests.[3]

It is difficult to distinguish these people from cockroaches.

Let us remember these charnel house-grade parasites in the next primary round and general elections. There is little reason to reelect any of these losers.

rycK

Liberal Enforced Political Education

Nobody is against education, with the possible exceptions of the Marxists, certain Bostonians and others in the intellectual backwaters of society are concerned, since the process of education is a special problem with concomitant dangers only for those in authoritarian governments, but the question naturally arises: whose education shall we teach?? How about the three Rs? No? The mere notion of education brings visions sugar plums to the horizon of those who live by government auspices or parents who have been led to believe that education is essential to prosperity. All this is doubtless true in their respective categories. The converse is also true.

So, what do we teach?? How do we test? Do we grade? A survey of persons who own houses, have good jobs and are free from sloth, crime, drug addiction[although not counted as a crime by some], and so on and so forth, reveals that a good, or higher, education is of some benefit to the individual and society at large. Inspecting this notion from the reverse perspective, those who drop out of high school, engage in crimes and drugs and such are found to be in the lower half of our society’s earnings and asset ownership percentiles and frequently in prison. Education has some effect on outcome. How many college grads graduated from Sing Sing?

Then, keeping on some fairly narrow mental analytical track here, we might just assume that ‘everybody’ would be in favor of a ‘good’ education that teaches skills and demeanor sufficient to become prosperous citizens in America. Grades would indicate who could advance in their education. But, they would have high taxes it seems. This is the exact point where the troubles begin.

Firstly, it is somehow considered ‘unfair’ that blue-eyed blond male Americans with lily-white ancestral pedigrees seem to get the best jobs and control most of the wealth. Few would quibble with this assessment. After them, still perusing the economic ladder, fellow brown haired persons of equally white lineage are next in line for the benefits of earned wealth. Lately, white females seem to join this group. This ‘unfairness’ results, some assert, from a critical inspection of financial and power level outcomes: it seems that those white males that partake and excel in the proffered education do well in society. What a notion! By algebraic subtraction, it is apparent that those of not exactly white origin, exempting, for the moment, Asians who present a set of stunning talking points to destroy several educational views, do not do so well in school or jobs although those white males who fail in the education area also are not participating in the American dream, unless they are proficient in crime or become lawyers. One is struck by the logic here and wonder how a test group such as ‘whites’ might be sorted out using annual incomes and asset attributes and then sorted according to education proficiency to effectively reestablish the educational and prosperity performance data that indicates a good education is essential. Whites with varying eye color who do poorly in school have lower incomes and less wealth? Yes. Is this also unfair? Going a bit further, if we include minorities in this array and rank them with respect to education and non participation in crime and drugs, we also get something that resembles the white case except a bit truncated. Most minorities or other persons, neglecting the eye color, do well also when they get a good education. Isn’t that strange? There are fewer non-Asian minorities who are prosperous. Asians are still an anomaly to be dealt with as an aside according to some. They seem to excel despite the lack of white skin and blue eyes and confound several racially-based societal theories. We wonder why.

So, what is unfair here??

According to Rethinking Schools Online, the following conservation in the classroom by children prompted some measures to ensure ‘equal outcomes’ or at least teach that notion:

Children’s dialogue:

Scene: children at play assembling Legotown[1]

Children were allowed to select their own Lego pieces for personal construction projects.

"I'm making an airport and landing strip for my guy's house. He has his own airplane," said Oliver.

"That's not fair!" said Carl. "That takes too many cool pieces and leaves not enough for me."

"Well, I can let other people use the landing strip, if they have airplanes," said Oliver. "Then it's fair for me to use more cool pieces, because it's for public use."

[A child said this??]

Discussions like the one above led to children collaborating on a massive series of Lego structures we named Legotown. Children dug through hefty-sized bins of Legos, sought "cool pieces," and bartered and exchanged until they established a collection of homes, shops, public facilities, and community meeting places. We carefully protected Legotown from errant balls and jump ropes, and watched it grow day by day.

After nearly two months of observing the children's Legotown construction, we decided to ban the Legos.

Now, here is that ‘educational analysis’ of the lengthy study of Legoland:

They were unable or unwilling to see that the rules of the game — which mirrored the rules of our capitalist meritocracy — were a setup for winning and losing. Playing by the rules led to a few folks winning big and most folks falling further and further behind. The game created a classic case of cognitive disequilibrium: Either the system is skewed and unfair, or the winners played unfairly. To resolve this by deciding that the system is unfair would call everything into question; young children are committed to rules and rule-making as a way to organize a community and it is wildly unsettling to acknowledge that rules can have built-in inequities. So most of the children resolved their disequilibrium by clinging to the belief that the winners were ruthless — despite clear evidence of Liam and Kyla's compassionate generosity.[2]

Here, we see the latent Marxist training of lower-level cadres blossom forth in the permitted language of ‘fairness’ and equality by simply watching how children act and, with a little filtering and prompting, showed that the standard capitalist outcomes will always, apparently, lead to inequality.

Apparently, the ‘teachers’ seem to not recognize that our world is not exactly ‘equal opportunity for all’ and that therein lurks competition is part of all societies, even the ones these ‘teachers’ wallow in. Using the crude sophistry of there being ‘only two sides to the question,’ they outlined the only two choices:

…: Either the system is skewed and unfair, or the winners played unfairly.

Translation: we need to change the system and dump capitalism.

Sure. This is a rare example of pure propaganda mixed with simian-level sophistry. Written in retrograde and couched as some ‘study,’ the ‘teachers’ find some ground-level problem with the capitalism system, as usual. When did Marxist sycophants every find anything different? We might just assume, at this point, that capitalism is unfair to Marxism, which obviously follows. Then, personal property must also be an unfair attraction for thieves. It must be unfair to dope addicts that prosperous types reject drugs.

We then can wonder how their ‘educational system,’ all syrupy and sticky with goodness and fairness might choose persons for various jobs in our society such as: police, brain surgeons, engineers, scientists, ditch diggers and prison wardens. We can already guess how their system would work to select druggies, the lazy and criminal specialists. We saw how the Marxists chose their people for certain jobs: Political favoritism and party membership. That was limited to a ‘fair’ 4% or so of the population.

Of, course; this is the crudest form of propaganda. It barrows heavily from the Soviet Indoctrination System [read ‘education’] of some 74 years of tedious agony, before the Berlin Wall went down, and suggests that the government must control education so the proper political outcomes will be observed. This is theoretically for the good of the party. This worked well in Cambodia with the Khmer Rouge in charge as the population actually did turn out well trained and ‘educated’ in the proper manner intended by the government, at least for those who survived. Only about two thirds of them were murdered, an advance on certain Russian and Chinese and certain Mozambique experiments. Those with glasses, who could probably read [how could they tell?] and had soft hands, were smothered with plastic bags and their skulls set up on a bamboo hut to dry and bear witness to ‘education’ and ‘fairness.’ Those who survived were more ‘equal’ than before.

What a phony performance! Are the liberals Grunting and Grabbing for more wealth again??

One way to cure this disease is to force all teachers to take national standardized exams for competency in reading, math and such along with an ongoing drug testing program that looks to see if their educational prowess is actually guided by hard drugs. Fire those who fail the screens and exams. Force teachers to teach students to excel at what they do best! The Marxist part of some candidate’s training need not even me measured [or mentioned] and reported as a metric since it is so silly as to be rejected out of hand. Nobody should fear a Marxist education except a victim. They rest of us will just have a few good belly laughs. The only things a Marxist ever introduced were more failure or cruelty. Cuba proves the point. Education and a fine ‘Medical system’ produce abject poverty. Great! Food rationing is good! Letting buildings fill up with mold and collapse are great for a progressive society.

This Legoland Learning deserves careful attention for praiseworthy Marxist political action and perhaps an award like the California Dumbing Down Award. Such fine work will generate a society of drooling automata who are arbitrarily assigned to their jobs by a result of precise role-playing and political favoritism with a fervent attempt to recreate something like another Moscow Central Planning, a government bureaucracy worthy of mention since it was the biggest economic failure in the history of mankind. The good citizens in the gulags in Russia, the grain fields of North Korea, the cane swamps of Cuba and many parts of Africa turned out to be all about ‘equal’ when their ‘education’ was finished and they were allowed to enjoy the society created for them by their political masters.

Any way to reinvent Marxism or one of its slimy political congeners is considered progressive by the left.

Parents: Don’t let your kids even talk to these political parasites. Much of the world already taught Marxism and it stinks.

THINK

rycK

Achieving Prosperity In Spite of the Left

[or as Surviving the 60s as posted in David Horowitz’s http://frontpagemag.org/]

by rycK

Being a practicing advocate of individualism is like living the life of a paladin. I have long suspected that the left wing has dedicated a lot of time and money to prevent such folks from becoming successful in this world by placing serious obstacles in our pathways. I am now convinced of this vast left-wing plot. It appears that anybody who dares to accumulate some wealth either is scorned for having inherited it from his crooked ancestors or pilloried for having obtained it by unfair or illegal means. Some of us have struggled to circumvent most of the impediments placed in our paths and many somehow have clawed their way to the reaches of the upper middle class despite the loud objections and churlish admonitions. My battles with the left began at an early age and continue to the present. An account of this follows.

I was raised in the San Joaquin Valley due east of a desolate little town called Orosi, which could be used to broaden the definition of the word sanjac. This hamlet lies in Tulare County in the towering political shadow of John Steinbeck and could have been the sole inspiration for his novel, The Grapes of Wrath , where thousands of Dustbowl Okies settled comfortably into the welfare system after the Great Depression. They are still there. Tulare County, in the ‘50s, topped the national list of places with excessively high county welfare expenditures. I was amused to read that it was still numero uno in about 1995. This dusty town of a few hundred was comprised of a mixture of Chicanos, Okies, Japanese Americans, Armenians, Chinese and a few other politically undesignated folks like me. My Japanese friends, comprising 50% of my ten person high school clique, were all born in internment camps like Manzanar or Gila Bend in the middle of the Second World War. We were all rather poor, but in my household we had plenty of kindness, love and food. The kids in my neighborhood didn’t wear shoes in the summer. I was orphaned at 15 by the death of my mother and lived with my aged grandparents after being abandoned by my step father. I quickly learned to be self-sufficient and plan my own affairs. In this modest rural setting, I was (unexpectedly, in hindsight) exposed to a solid and extensive education with an unusual dose of fortuitous political training. Our little high school was the kind of place (poverty disaster area) where the government would willingly forgive a teacher’s college loan if he or she managed to teach there for two years. Tenure required three. Somehow, in this social purgatory, we attracted some excellent teachers. I was taught critical analysis and learned the value of keeping up to date with current events. Our library had a set of Great Books and I read some classics, but was more impressed by works that stressed observation and analysis like The True Believer by Eric Hoffer. The teachings of Hoffer would act as a beacon and alarm system as I made further progress in my quest for education and prosperity.

I received some political training at home probably by osmosis. My

Grandfather administered the California State Brocero Program for several counties which included the stretch from Modesto to Delano, so, I received some first-hand perspective about the politics of farm labor. On occasion, visitors came to the house where they discussed the politics of the farm labor problem. This applied political education began to mature when I started working in the cotton fields in 1954 (11 years old), quite by accident, by haplessly falling into line with some Okie kids, whose migrant parents did stoop labor for a living in the blistering heat. I could make forty cents after a mere three hours of difficult work in the dust and heat and I thought I was rich. The mechanism for obtaining prosperity was clearly at hand: work for it. I labored summers and weekends doing agricultural work throughout most of the late fifties and far into the sixties. I had to work for money for a car and other necessities or do without. My political training was punctuated a few years later by watching Caesar Chavez and his loyal followers bash the heads of reluctant field laborers during the organizing efforts of the United Farm Workers. They even came for me once until they recognized their error. By day they ‘organized’ workers by visiting the fields in their white station wagons, intimidating peasants with threats and beatings, and by night ferried hookers though the Mexican towns, like Cutler, in the same vehicles. They covered the interior lights with blue cellophane and kept their head lights turned off for effect. My observations on this sort of conduct in the real world were in stark contrast to my prior notions, since I was reared in a community with warmth and kindness and taught the virtues of hard work, honesty and the value of truth. Nobody in my extended family, or members of the town, ever lied to me, stole my meager belongings, or tried to sleaze me. I soon learned that these attributes, which I still hold to be essential, were, and still are, virtually worthless when dealing with the left. I was surprised then, but not now, that Chavez was hailed as one of the darlings of the left. He was a cheap thug and I am a witness to his crimes.

My education continued after high school and was strangely mirrored by the antics of the (then future) characters in the movie American Graffiti as I commuted daily to the local junior college (College of the Sequoias) where the tuition and fees were 24 dollars per semester. I studied engineering for two years there during the Cuban Missile Crisis. I won my only college scholarship there ($80) for the highest number of grade points, not because of some scintillating 4.0 GPA (it was significantly less) , but because I took 25 credit hours. Science and engineering were suited to my particular cognitive skill set. In contrast, political science was mystical and defied any rational analysis, so a detailed study of that arena was deferred. I was accepted by UCLA School of Engineering, headed off to Westwood, CA and joined a fraternity. In my view, President Kennedy was the only person who could save Americans from the impending social and economic stagnation. He was promptly shot leaving the country with a major leadership deficiency supplied by LBJ. The draft heated up , which collided with my imperative to work thirty hours per week to pay for school. After an exchange of nasty grams with my draft board, I had to run for a Naval Reserve Unit. I was sent to Treasure Island in San Francisco for forty weeks of electronics training beginning in May, 1965. I brought about three years worth of engineering training with me, a penchant for political analysis, and a singular proficiency in duplicate bridge that I had acquired in L.A. My net worth tallied up to perhaps forty dollars in cash. My car had died of old age.

The Bay Area was jumping. There were abundant political rallies, speeches, underground newspapers and sidewalk pamphleteering everywhere. I made it into town three weekends a month and tried to thread my way through the dope, incense, massage parlors, hookers, and gays cruising for errant sailors and other party goers. North Beach was an experience. I frequented a place known as Coffee And Confusion on Columbus where political debates were always heated, interesting and informative. I was addicted to bridge and had several free memberships in Bay Area bridge clubs where we (my partner was one of my electronics instructors and a Navy Seal) played duplicate bridge for master points. I even accepted invitations to various parties, political discussion groups, rallies, and other throngs with vague names and slogans that were calculated to disguise the designs of far-left oriented political activist groups. I sought these out mainly of curiosity with the intent of satiating my ever-present quest for political knowledge and also for the more practical reason that I was earning only 86 dollars per month as a sailor. There was never any charge. I met all kinds of intellectuals who were frequently dedicated cadres or members of clandestine far-left political groups or others that were recruiting members of the military for interesting political assignments like sabotage, desertion and spying (from a phony Take A Sailor Home for Thanksgiving program at Treasure Island, which was invaded by Berkeley leftists on Thanksgiving Day in 1965 somewher near 7th Street in Berkeley, CA). I was able to avoid any lasting connections with these hard-core groups, who were apparently well-funded by unknown (to me) sponsors and deftly steered by grad students at UC Berkeley. Their political skills and interpersonal relations training were polished, extensive, and they knew how to influence people. I joined numerous debates on contemporary political issues and voraciously analyzed the contents of their pamphlets and manuals for the information and political theories that they contained. My intrinsic sympathy for their causes first was softened, then actually abated, after learning more about their real agenda. They were out to change the world, by force if necessary, and were doomed to failure. They had little to offer that was constructive in terms of social or economic plans. I learned that dedication to the cause was the most important attribute of cell members of the underground movements. My analysis of their theories and practice were sufficient for me to dismiss their causes as worthless, or worse. Leary and Ginsburg had nothing to offer but sorrow and the prospect of continuous drug rehap. I was offered numerous opportunities to join failed causes--even a chance to desert and flee to British Columbia after a brief stay at some farm in Eastern Oregon. I left San Francisco for other adventures in the spring of 1966 and headed for the Viet Nam war theatre.

I was flown to Saigon, then Clark Air Base in the Philippine Islands and joined the crew of a small destroyer ( a rust bucket one year my junior) whose mission for the next two years was to support shore bombardment of the jungle along the coast of South Viet Nam. The mission was H&I: harassment and interdiction. We could cover the entire coast and even navigate (several clicks) up the Mekong River. There in the muddy waters we interdicted junks and shelled caravans near the shore that were bringing ordnance down from Laos to the war zone. During periods of rest and recreation (R&R), I saw Hong Kong, Japan , Taiwan and a few spots in South Viet Nam. The major lesson learned here in Lyndon’s war was that the body count (McNamara’s prime metric) was the chief measure of success. The actual count was unknown, but high estimates were more than acceptable to Washington--so, they pumped the numbers. This was a political notion of the sort that loses battles, and had little to do with military strategy Any centurion in Caesar’s Tenth Legion could have shown us the way to victory or retreat. Hundreds of dedicated, but ignorant, peasants died in a hopeless war at the hands of the guns on my boat. I worked day and night on the electronics gear, helped the gun gangs pass ammo to the deck, and monitored the growth of the Great Society. I was concerned about my future, since we were taking some sniper fire, so on one occasion I calculated my net worth after I was forced to borrow some money for my upcoming adventures at the next port. According to slush fund regulations, I was obligated to pay back six dollars for each five borrowed. My life’s financial progress was calculated after this transaction and my net worth turned out to be about -50 dollars, which included the absence of a car and the salient fact that I had no civilian shoes. I was not getting ahead by participating in this war exercise, my education was behind schedule, and folks were trying to kill me. We barely missed being sunk by some 225 mm coastal guns in the Gulf of Tonkin in some follies known as Sea Dragon Operations, but I did get to see Swedish ships steaming in and out of Haiphong harbor. I wonder what they were loaded with? In summary, I spent two tours in some steamy fantasy land where we kinetically rearranged the landscape of the Viet Nam coastline and then were rewarded upon our return to San Diego with a nasty welcome from howling hippies, drug-crazed loonies and flower children. In addition, I received a gift of a big gob of spit deftly directed to my sleeve by a deranged female hippie, long on drugs and short of compassion. The world I knew had changed --and not for the better. This was the world I wanted to come back to?

I ignored as much of this as possible and purchased an old car with my recent poker winnings (which cost 300 dollars and reduced my total net worth to 800), much of which was skillfully earned in the seedy card parlors of San Diego, and headed to Sunnyvale where I worked on the FB111A bomber simulator as I was now an expert in most phases of radar technology. I was sent to Binghamton, NY for ‘two weeks at best’ and met a person who would be my lover, friend, confidant, comrade, co-conspirator and spouse for the next 38 years. I never went back. The bomber contract was scaled back (the wings were falling off the planes) and I was terminated the next year. I promptly switched my attention back to college and the study of chemistry at the State University of New York (now Harpur college of Binghamton University), earned my A.C.S (American Chemical Society) accredited chemistry degree in only two years, and have been a chemist ever since.

Harpur College was a hotbed of New York City radical activists whose second-tier grades prevented them from getting into Columbia, Hunter, Brooklyn Poly, or one of the better schools in the City. The anti-war fever was high and punctuated by the riots at Attica. Professional SDS rabble-rousers and other political agitators were on campus weekly to foment political passions. The Black Panthers were recruiting and passing wicker baskets around for donations and deliberately interrupting several of my classes. I attended all the rallies and listened intently to the speeches. Nearly everything they said was a pack of lies designed to sway opinion over to the far left position. The mental pathologies of these frustrated activists, clearly described by Eric Hoffer, were apparent in the ranks of the students and activists. I had fairly long hair and nobody suspected that I concurrently trained with the local National Guard and Naval Reserve units for student riot control. Binghamton being the most probable hot spot in our area, I wondered if any of these radicals were soon to be my targets. Kent State had set a precedent. The student politicos told me that the revolution would soon start and asked if I would be there in the streets for the action. I promised that I would, indeed, be there. I published two research papers at S.U.N.Y as an undergraduate. Hot stuff!

Later, I spent the next four years at Yale University School of Medicine, Department of Pharmacology as an engineer on the research staff specializing in separation science. My son was born at Yale and has since been the central focus of our lives. Living very close to the financial abyss in New Haven, I was treated to a diluted rehash of the usual leftist political rhetoric, devoid of logic, but still harbored ample disgust for the right wing while civilian support for the Viet Nam war effort simply rotted away. I adapted to the university culture, thoroughly enjoyed its elitist social life, and honed my scientific skills. I was presented with several chances to get into political activism, but declined. My sympathy for the leftist causes dwindled and my taxes started to rise. I published four research papers at Yale.

Finally, I left the university atmosphere that had been my eternal turf and intellectual stimulation and went into industry as a scientist. I was accused of ‘selling out’ to business before I left. In industry, I worked in biotechnology and separation science for E. I. DuPont for more than 23 years. I have now published 25 research papers, acquired some 400 citations+ in the scientific literature, and have begun to cope with ever higher taxes. I have developed a dozen commercial products with more than $ 45,000,000 in sales and have been granted six patents with more pending. After Yale, I only partially escaped the noisy banter of the radical left mentality, since many of my corporate colleagues, had spent seven or eight years at the best universities in the land, were still infected with liberal ideology and assorted illusions. I now rely on eternal literary works with strong predictive qualities like Destructive Generation by Collier and Horowitz, Intellectuals by Paul Johnson, the works of the highly esteemed judge Robert H. Bork: Slouching Towards Gomorrah and The Tempting of America, The Bell Curve by Herrnstein and Murray , The End of Racism by Dinesh D’Souza, and other intellectual resources to form a platform for my ongoing political analysis. I listen to Rush and Sean Hannity and watch Ann Coulter on Fox News. The mortgage is paid.

This interim report must be concluded with some reflections and conclusions based on my experience and the resultant analysis. I was offered many politically inspired opportunities to be an accomplished (and celebrated) loser and was only able to navigate around the left’s well-placed craters and traps with luck, intuition and industry. Just what did Tom Hayden, Jerry Garcia, Bob Dylan , Susan Sontag and Allen Ginsberg really offer? Sloth, sodomy and sedition? Chronologically, I live on the leading edge of the giant boomer movement whose members are now muddled in debates over global warming, how to hastily stuff 401(k) s to the limit, expansion of social programs, and other follies. Hopefully, we can reduce the size of government and evade some of the social leprosy that is intended for us. Prosperity, despite the scorn and disgust of the liberals, is certainly within my grasp, baring some cataclysmic tax event. I am confident that a genuine success story like this, one that was obtained in spite of the perceived horrors of individualism, aided by a general contempt for most things left-leaning, will inflame the liberal establishment and is thusly touted and reported with relish.

rycK ryckki@gmail.com

We are all victims, in one way or the other, of the acts of politicians. One form of victimization involves the use of criminals as surrogates to swing from the coattails of some person seeking office. Here, they can influence the outcome of politician contests by providing some form of assistance. The notoriety of criminals stimulates and encourages certain parts of our society to political action. Hillary knew this at Yale with the Bobby Seale circus, the founder of the Black Panther Party. Another form arises from the constant assertions that some party advocates the Rule of Law and wants to insert a system devoid of corruption. Sure. The third form is excessive taxes, too disgusting to discuss in this limited format.

After the harangues about crooks and corruption in the Bush Administration from the Democrats in 2000 and 2004, we now learn that Hillary Clinton has added a crook as co-chair to her reelection committee:

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton has appointed two national co-chairs for her presidential campaign -- including a former U.S. District Court judge who was impeached.[1]

U.S. Reps. Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Alcee Hastings, both Florida Democrats, will be two of several co-chairs who will help direct Clinton's effort to win the White House in 2008.[2]

"We need a leader with a clear vision and sound judgment, who can work with a Democratic Congress to renew the promise of America. Hillary is that leader," Wasserman Schultz said in a statement.[3]

Hastings said a second Clinton in the White House would make the country "a much better place for the African-American community, Floridians and all Americans."[4]

With the aid of persons like Hastings we note. Recall that no Democrat called for action against Representative Jefferson from LA, who was recently indicted on 16 counts. Nancy Pelosi resisted a lot of pressure to remove Jefferson from key committee assignments but allowed this person to remain. Jefferson is a senior member of the Ways and Means Committee, its subcommittee on Trade, a member of the House Committee on the Budget. He is Co-Chair of the Africa Trade and Investment Caucus and Congressional Caucuses on Brazil and Nigeria. Jefferson is also the current Chairperson of the Board of Directors for the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation.[5]

As to the crimes by Hastings:

The evidence against Hastings is circumstantial, but it's too much to explain away: a suspicious pattern of telephone calls between Hastings and Borders at key moments in the case; Borders's apparent insider knowledge of developments in the criminal case; Hastings's appearance at a Miami hotel, as promised by Borders as a signal that the judge had agreed to the payoff; a cryptic telephone conversation between the two men that appears to be a coded discussion of the bribe arrangement.[6]

There was far less in the case against Karl Rove and Dick Cheney, but Pelosi and her Marxist lackeys chose to threaten impeachment, investigations and such with Henry Waxman as their pit bull. The found no problem with Hastings or Jefferson.

This is archetypal politics of the left; crooks are just fine as both Hillary and Bill are known felons, not yet convicted, but mentioned as unindicted co-conspirators in more than one investigation. Hillary is in serious trouble with the black community after Barack Obama surged into the race with the black support and snatched up the anti-war supporters. Edwards is not exactly silent on this topic. As such, Hastings is just a piece of red meat to toss into the snarling fangs of dissident blacks whose votes she needs dearly, particularly in Florida. She would not have to pander such in California. This was an unsophisticated gesture, doubtless born of frustration and anxiety, and she could probably have made more progress by using O. J. Simpson or Minister Farrakhan in this critical role.

We expect the Clintons to be eternally corrupt and not tarnish a 20 year streak. They will do what is necessary to try to win and, so, lies and criminals can help in a few cases. Jefferson, Hastings, Bill and Hillary Clinton are all crooks. Period.

rycK

The Simultaneous Meltdowns of Paris Hilton and Ted Kennedy

It is interesting that Paris Hilton and Ted Kennedy had a meltdown on the same day. Normally, coincidences are just that simple and any apparent or designed connections tossed away with little concert. In this case, we should delve a little deeper into the parallel situations and do some wondering.

Firstly, the noisy incidents took place in some government location where disjointed mumblings about the law could be heard even out in the street. Next, legal experts pouted or praised the ending of each drama. Both episodes, we learn, were precipitated by some new or proposed twists in the uncomforting mess we call the body of law and its uneven application, or the lack thereof, depending on where one is standing to review these cases.

We could first search for some genetic association as those with super riches habitually find the same set of warm sheets and promiscuity from either the Hilton or Kennedy branches of this plausible genetic tree is now exactly unknown or even clandestine. We have insufficient science to determine how the Hungarian Invasion of the Hilton gene pool might have affected the behavior of Paris as marriage records, vows and spaced-off living quarters and such have little to do with the spontaneous creation of the rich and famous. As for the Kennedy clan, a strict scientific investigation using the most refined methods of DNA analysis could provide the only clues as who is related to who in that clan and whether a Hilton or two figgered in. Recall Marylyn Monroe and her two flings with two other brothers of Teddy?

Paris Hilton broke down into a sobbing mess after hearing of a nasty reversal in her contrived legal scenario, similar to Teddy’s, and shouted "It's not right! Mom!" Others commented that we "We cannot tolerate a two-tiered jail system where the rich and powerful receive special treatment."^[1] Really? The Kennedy clan has always managed that. That outburst brings in more evidence:

Teddy waxed ugly and sour and howled about jungles as the newly minted Immigration Bill crashed^[2] and dashed his hopes of stuffing the Democrat voters list with illegal aliens. He is prone to emotional outbursts and uses them to effect to cajole out the maximum sympathy from the New York Times and other single-focus organizations. Kennedy is mostly famous for his wild accusations and contrived character assignations of judges. ^[3] “Senator Orrin Hatch recalled Kennedy’s tirade against Bork as “a polemical screed, appalling in tone, in the number of gross misstatements, and in its reliance on indefensible distortions.” And yet it worked.^[4]

More interesting similarities include both the facial appearance of the pair with Ted’s face looking more lumpy and swollen that usual, something that a life-long regimen of alcohol and very limited flirts with sobriety have not yet fixed as it surely did for other problems in his life, like his wife and near relatives. Drugs must enter in the matters here as both Paris and her eastern counterpart in crime have sought glory and self-worth thru illicit drugs although Senator Kennedy ameliorated some of the ill effects with steroids and ice cream.

It seems that both subjects here had sympathetic sheriffs who tried to influence the sentencing and outcomes of similar crimes, both heavily involved with cars and alcohol. Bernie Flynn, the corresponding cop in Ted’s case, originally thought that Kennedy had lied about his killing of Mary Jo Kopechne.[5] Dirty money from Old Joe Kennedy and smuggling and organized crime profits with Sam Giancanna seems to have placated the Kopechne family, an undisclosed amount. Now, Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca is in a similar situation where the Hilton millions just might outshine the Kennedy crime stash. Who knows?? Money talks very loudly in Boston for the Kennedys and perhaps a bit louder in Hollywood when a rich star is involved. Remember the O. J. Simpson trial??

The other coincidence is that both of these characters are spoiled brats who family money has taught them to ignore public decency and to prefer drugs and booze over the truth and commit crimes with impunity. Both should remain behind bars for eternity.

The DDT Fraud and Other Follies like Global Warming

Rachel Carson wrote what seemed to be a scholarly book on the effect of pesticides on the animal kingdom. Her book [1] was written in a freak show format reminiscent of comic opera and cartoon themes. Using fear and lies to spread around her politics, she had ‘concluded,’ without scientific evidence, that DDT and other synthetic chemicals were harming birds and had contaminated the earth. One of her chapters reads like a Lillian Hellman play and was entitled: “A Fable for Tomorrow” that outlined how “life had been silenced” by the pesticide DDT. The strange movie Threads about nuclear war was almost as amusing.

Amidst criticism of her work, devoid of any scientific methods, research or competent literature searches , President Kennedy set up a whitewash forum to ‘vindicate’ her phony work and validate the hysteria she caused because it became a neat political effort to grunt and grab some more votes. Her work was a fable.

Psycho-Loony frauds are common in quack science, but they can be isolated from reality by a review of sound scientific research and any conflicts noted. They are, however, necessary fodder for the left to incite the public in a vain attempt to attract votes.

Here are but a very few examples of research that refutes what she wrote

Many experiments on caged-birds demonstrate that DDT and its metabolites (DDD and DDE) do not cause serious egg shell thinning, even at levels many hundreds of times greater than wild birds would ever accumulate.

It is interesting that there is NO scientific research that demonstrates that DDT is harmful, yet the hysterical rants, sobbings and maudlin posturing of Rachel Carson was ‘accepted’ by the liberal left [read EcoNazis here] and vindicated by Democrats.

Some pertinent scientific findings:

“Laboratory egg shell thinning required massive doses of DDE far in excess of anything expected in nature, and massive laboratory doses produce much less thinning than is seen in many of the thin-shelled eggs collected in the wild.”-- [Hazeltine, WE. 1974. Statement and affidavit, EPA Hearings on Tussock Moth Control, Portland Oregon, p. 9 (January 14, 1974)]

“Years of carefully controlled feeding experiments involving levels of DDT as high as present in most wild birds resulted in no tremors, mortality, thinning of egg shells nor reproductive interference.”-- [Scott, ML et al. 1975. Poultry Science 54: 350-368 (Egg production, hatch ability and shell quality depend on calcium, and are not effected by DDT and its metabolites)]

“Egg shell thinning is not correlated with pesticide residues.”-- [Krantz WC. 1970 (No correlation between shell-thinning and pesticide residues in eggs) Pesticide Monitoring J 4(3): 136-141; Postupalsky, S. 1971. Canadian Wildlife Service manuscript, April 8, 1971 (No correlation between shell-thinning and DDE in eggs of bald eagles and cormorants); Anon. 1970. Oregon State University Health Sciences Conference, Annual report, p. 94. (Lowest DDT residues associated with thinnest shells in Cooper's hawk, sharp-shinned hawk and goshawk); Claus G and K Bolander. 1977. Ecological Sanity, David McKay Co., N.Y., p. 461. (Feeding thyreprotein causes hens to lay lighter eggs, with heavier, thicker shells)]

“Among brown pelican egg shells examined there was no correlation between DDT residue and shell thickness.”-- [Switzer, B. 1972. Consolidated EPA hearings, Transcript pp. 8212-8336; and Hazeltine, WE. 1972. Why pelican eggshells are thin. Nature 239: 410-412]

“Egg shells of red-tailed hawks were reported to be six percent thicker during years of heavy DDT usage than just before DDT use began. Golden eagle egg shells were 5 percent thicker than those produced before DDT use”. --
[Hickey, JJ and DW Anderson. 1968. Science 162: 271-273]
”
Is there no refutation of these findings?? What do they have except a baleful glubberances and some whining politicos?

NOTHING.

But, the phony work of Carson did cause some major damage in pest control around the world.

A review of her book:

"I noticed many statements that I realized were false." Attracted by Carson's message, Edwards tried to overlook the misstatements or to rationalize them away, but increasingly he could not. "As I neared the middle of the book," he adds, "the feeling grew in my mind that Rachel Carson was really playing loose with the facts."[2]

Sounds like a standard leftist buncombe effort. When do we get some solid evidence on crap like this? Is this what the phony Global Warming is based on?? Note Al Gore wrote a foreword to Silent Spring on reprint and he is the current carnie barker to honk the dangers of GW.

What sour fluff!

rycK

Pinch, the New [Reincarnated] Goebbels of the New York Times?

Our local discussion group met, as usual last week, to customarily exchange thoughts and promote intellectual stimulation such that the IQ levels in our part of the universe might rise despite the frantic and dedicated devotion to the tenets of ignorance fostered by politicians and pharmaceutical companies.

Our august group began our weekly essay with an opening by Titus:

Titus: What topic presents itself this fine evening?

Servius: What topic needs our urgent attention and manifold services?

Lucian: How about something beyond the fringes of our usual bland purview? I suggest the topic of reincarnation, as novel, implausible and interesting in the sense that it is considered seriously in Hollywood and parts of Boston.

Titus: Indeed!?

Myron: The notion of reincarnation has not been widely accepted by the masses except in the limited and obscure cases of a few Hollywood actresses, inebriates from central Oakland or some marginal students attending school at Columbia while embracing narcotics addiction, their chosen profession. No reasonable person could countenance the biology or metaphysics of such a preposterous process, which opens this up as a cause célèbre for those who embrace imbecility. The quest for proven examples of such a remarkable notion has been the subject of frantic searches by witches, swamis, the snake charmers, those who passed the Ignoramui Exams, certain frustrated Illuminoids who need to check out a few details with their antecedent grand masters and perhaps Shirley McClain. ‘Just not possible’ is the solemn conclusion.

Gaius: Then, let us simply demonstrate that it is not possible and table the matter. That would close if off to further discussion.

Servius: Besides being impossible, reasonable scientific proofs of such happenings are not available due to the lack of DNA samples and dental records, among other things, from many of the most famous persons who could have managed the return to life. Nobody cares if the obscure make it back except in India. How could we prove Jack the Ripper came back from the grave if we don’t know who he was or what he looked like? His butchery skills were pedestrian according to the observers who cleaned the walls of his victims thus offering no serious clues. Lacking the obvious requisites, we assume we remain safe from those who claw their way from the grave and revisit upon us their favorite horrors if only for lack of proof.

Titus: Struck by these cold facts and forced to jump difficult hoops to continue this discussion, we might ponder a middle case: Suppose a contemporary person acted, wrote, spoke and passed other profile tests of someone long dead and gone. Invoking the Law of Negative Evidence, which guides the Flat Earth Society and most conspiracy theorists, such persons have not been eliminated from reappearance by chance or miracle. You cannot prove they are not among us.

Lucian: What do we do with this essay? Either, we summon up the notions of fraud or imbecility and heap them upon the bearers of such preposterous notions or, in a gesture of moderation and curiosity, merely look at the evidence and reserve judgment on the prospects and then have a good horse laugh as we cast the notion away. I agree with Gaius on this salient point.

Titus: Challenged by this tempting prospect and intrigued by the silly notion that most common folk would refrain from such personality duplication unless they were insane or lacking acceptable cognitive skills to conform with accepted societal norms, we can simply, pick at random, some famous character whose writings, thoughts, actions and such are well documented. In the absence of DNA or strong evidence, we are left only the personalities and parallel attributes and must use those alone to proceed.

Gaius: Ok, let us give it the old Harvard Try and start out with a difficult one. Let us choose to see if, say, Joseph Goebbels was reincarnated and runs amok among us: To do this we need to find some person with identical histories:

Myron: Agreed. That is the swiftest way to close the discussion. We would have to find corresponding persons with the following attributes: [1] A political Zealot with University Training. [2] Work history as a journalist. [3] Twisted with hate. [4] A racist with strong views on skin color. [5] Strong propaganda skills [6] A compulsion to control outlets of information and the media. [7] Univesity education in literature and/or political science [8] A penchant for failure and promoting incompetents in subordinate positions. [9] A global political activist. [10] A petty criminal. This personage Joseph Goebbels is so rare that no present-day counterpart could be identified at least in the Western Hemisphere. Besides, his politics are buried with him.

Lucian: Let us have a go at it! We can sweep this away and have some fun in the process.

Myron: As a point of logic, we are firstly barren of contemporary candidates given the fact that the number of extant Nazis in the galaxy is now fewer than the number of competent acupuncture professionals in Philadelphia. There is no such character having sufficient visibility operating today in the world given his very narrow political views.

Titus: Well, given the political vectors that created these monsters, we might wonder if the talents remain intact after the reincarnation, but current political forces in play merely altered some minor political and mental directions of the candidate. He could still have brought along the same seasoned skills as Goebbels and be practicing his art in a slightly different political vein.

Gaius: You mean a diametrical swing in political vector from far right to far left?

Titus: Not so far. Is there much difference between National Socialism, Socialism, Marxism, Stalinism, Castroism and so on? They are all basically leftist authoritarian political systems and Hitler and Stalin, we recall, were good friends for years and worked closely on the Rape of Poland and the plunder.

Myron: Not much difference as you say! True. The Fascists were created in response to the excesses of Bolshevism in 1919 on the basis of nationalism—not a rejection of socialism. Mussolini was a socialist and detested capitalists. The ideological differences among these nasty leftist groups were slight and more a struggle among friends and ideological bed fellows rather than being on opposite sides of any political scale.[1] Actually, they were both anti-capitalists and close friends. As such, any differences could be negotiated as long as racism, socialism in some form and anti-capitalism were key components of any agreement. The crass lust for land and power dissolved the cozy marriage between Hitler and Stalin.

Gaius: So, we can look for some far-left wing nut instead of a far-right type here?

Myron: That follows given the histories of the Marxist and Fascist parties. They are both far left on the political scale, countering the public notions, which ignore the pertinent histories and are purely a result of political indoctrination. .

Lucian: Well, then just who in the far left has parallel attributes according to the list given by Myron above. We need to demonstrate the fit, in principle, no matter what particular flavor of anti-capitalism is in force today.

Titus: What about the ACLU, the CPUSA or the Socialist Workers Party leaders?

Gaius: They all fit most of the political requirements but have no grand leader with high visibility and superior propaganda talents. The ACLU leaders are too minutiae oriented and the CPUSA are mere cretins. The proto-Communist talent is sequestered in the anti-anti Communist leagues after Ronald Reagan finished off the USSR. They have no followings in the streets, one attribute Myron failed to alert us to.

Titus: Okay, okay. Well, there are the anti-WTO [World Trade Organization] riots in Seattle and today in parts of Germany. Where is the Ultimate Pinnacle of anti-capitalism power in the US today??

Lucian: That would be the New York Times. Those at The Nation or Baltimore Sun are too inept and dormant and have lost their effervescence since H. L. Mencken stopped writing for them. The Boston Globe is a mere tool owned and dominated by the NYT. That might be a starting place.

Servius: So, who at NYT?? I think we are making progress.

Myron: The publisher of the NYT is one Arthur [“Pinch”] Ochs Sulzberger Jr, the third Sulzberger to occupy that post. He earned Bachelor of Arts degree in political science from Tufts University and has experience as a reporter. He was a radical Viet Nam war protestor and twice arrensted. [2] He also favored the Marxists in choosing who might get shot in battles between the North Vietamense, their Viet Cong allies and Amrican soldiers. Their death was of no significance to Pinch.[3] His politics are quite extreme.

Titus: That seems to fit the Goebbels Profile, but what about the rabid anti-Semitism?? We cannot accuse Pinch of that, or can we?

Myron: No, not directly. Given the political Theory of Trivial Trade-Offs, we can allow slight realignments in key political vectors and merely substitute the hatred for Jews with the hatred of white males in power, corporate CEOs or Southern Baptists. That satisfies the objections noted by Titus. There is the case raised by Harry Stein in his book How I Accidentally Joined the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy (and Found Inner Peace) where he quotes Pinch as saying: “Sulzberger once remarked that if older white males were alienated by the changes he was making to the Times, that would only prove "we're doing something right." [4] That could be the prelude to the Final Solution of the 30s.

Lucian: That follows, suggests an authentic Goebbels-like theme in theory and now in practice, and the Jewish-hate tradeoff can be explained by his Aryan-like antics. Old white people are easily substituted for certain minorities. An example would be where his minions elevated the non-white novice Jayson Blair to some high levels in the NYT although he had no talent, made huge errors in reporting details and was merely a tool of some internal Affirmative Action program inspired by Pinch. His far-left political prejudices, transcribed and inserted in his reporting made his position dear to Pinch. Later the executive editor Howell Raines and managing editor Gerald M. Boyd were canned apparently because: "He[Jayson] was given a regular tenured reporting job despite the misgivings of his immediate boss," the report said of Blair. "He was put on high-profile national assignments with his new supervising editors receiving no notice of the serious problems that had marked periods in his previous four years at the newspaper."[5] Pinch survived.

Myron: We should not reject plagiarism as a valid political tool, since that was not exactly prohibited by the Goebbels Rules on propaganda. Indeed, the NYT has cooperated in a world-wide propaganda effort with nefarious deals and buyouts with the likes of France's Le Monde, the Washington Post and International Herald Tribune. The NYT routinely releases critical military information in support of America’s enemies as proof of their intentions. No Islamo Terrorist has even been criticized in the Times nor has Fidel Castro failed to get flattering reviews from time to time. No communist of the stature of Noam Chomsky as ever been denigrated by the NYT editorial page.

Gaius: True and if history offers any guidance here, we must note that the NYT has always been radical, anti-American, pro Marxist and given to nurturing phony news items that fill some political void. The series of outright lies about the Ukrainian Holocaust, a famine equated with genocide, earned Walter Duranty and the NYT the Pulitzer Prize from his reporting on the ‘Ukrainian famine’ in 1933[6] The NYT still proudly displays the Duranty Prize for all to see even though it was shown to be a standard propaganda effort by the NYT, the USSR and other interested leftist parties. Calls to return the prize have gone unheeded by several Sulzbergers. To defend their propaganda record “The New York Times hired a professor of Russian history to review Duranty's work. That professor, Mark Von Hagen of Columbia University, concluded Mr. Duranty's reports to be unbalanced and uncritical, and they far too often gave voice to Stalinist propaganda.”[7] Propaganda is the New York paper’s finest attribute and critical resource.

Myron: The ‘famine’ is actually referred to is Holodomor [8]in the native language. The UN made a ‘statement’ on this issue that was reduced to the curt “We do not want to settle scores with the past, it could not be changed, but we are convinced that exposing violations of human rights, preserving historical records and restoring the dignity of victims through acknowledgement of their suffering, will guide future societies and help to avoid similar catastrophes in the future.”[9] Pinch insists that Druanty continue to be honored. The far-left UN has supressed the incident as unworthy of a revisit and investigation. We are also aware that there was no Russian War Crimes Tribunal conducted after World War II to investigate these allegations, a fact that matches the politics of both the NYT and the USSR.

Titus: That fits in well with Paul Joseph Goebbels self-styled post of Minister for Public Enlightenment and Propaganda during the National Socialist era. Lies and a cover-up of genocide fits current the format at the Times only as long as they demand that Nazism had nothing to do with leftist ideology and political interests. They must maintain an Iron Curtain so as to clear their ownership and compliance with Hitler and his people.

The anti-white male bias of the NYT is obvious from one of Pinch’s statements recorded by Harry Stein: "Sulzberger once remarked that if older white males were alienated by the changes he was making to the Times, that would only prove 'we're doing something right.' Clearly, by Pinch's standards, the Times has lately been doing very well indeed." Indeed. Old white males with assets seem to be a proper substitution for Jews in the tangled leftist parlance. Perhaps this is where the hate indoctrinations and similar college chants against DWEEMS [10] [Dead White Evil European Males] came from.

Servius: It appears that the race-based hate of the NYT publisher fits in well with the evening premise. It also begins to look like Pinch’s attributes are mirrored in every item in Myron’s list above. This is now interesting.

Titus: Well, the cases are all too similar to flatly reject the notion that Pinch is actually the reincarnated Goebbels. What remains, of course, is a biometric test where we might confirm the common identity of this pair. If this fails, we have only circumstantial evidence as to a prime example of an exposed case of reincarnation.

Myron: Not possible it seems. Goebbels was burned in 1945 and his remains were disinterred from his resting place and cremated. In1970 the ashes thrown in the Elbe.[11]

Lucian: So, we arrive at an impasse on this subject with limited pure facts to proceed. It seems that the confirmed and validated historical paths of these two persons are remarkably similar and that the similitude soars beyond coincidence. We cannot ascribe, as yet, the notion that Pinch’s Putsch is in full operation with the reincarnated Goebbels as Fuhrer giving orders to the NYT editorial staff. But, the outcome seems to be the same. Somebody at the NYT has barrowed heavily from Goebbels theories or something that closely resembles them.

Gaius: So, it seems.

Titus: Nevertheless, if Goebbels had never existed the NYT would have to invent him, or his caricature, and is now conducting their own modern Putsch or some Nazi/Communist/Socialist leftist variant of one.

Servius: And so it goes with the rabid left. That ends the discussion until next time.

Good Night and Good Luck

rycK