Sunday, April 29, 2012

Saturday, April 28, 2012

The Republican Party Is the Problem According To Conservative and Moderate Think Tanks... I Say So Are the Democrats...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

I rarely give credit to the stink hole of progressive thought Think Progress because, well, because it is a stink hole of anti concepts in motion, designed for the progressive collectivist sheeples.

However, even the clueless get it right every so often. Think Progress recently reporting on American Enterprise Institute and the centrist Brookings Institution view the Republicans are the problem caught my eye. This because I've been saying for nigh on 15 years they are the problem.

Here is the the text minus the stink hole of progressive thought's comments.

Two leading political scholars — representing the conservative American Enterprise Institute and the centrist Brookings Institution – have published a must-read article, “Let’s just say it: The Republicans are the problem.”


Rep. Allen West, a Florida Republican, was recently captured on video asserting that there are “78 to 81” Democrats in Congress who are members of the Communist Party. Of course, it’s not unusual for some renegade lawmaker from either side of the aisle to say something outrageous. What made West’s comment — right out of the McCarthyite playbook of the 1950s — so striking was the almost complete lack of condemnation from Republican congressional leaders or other major party figures, including the remaining presidential candidates.

It’s noat that the GOP leadership agrees with West; it is that such extreme remarks and views are now taken for granted.

We have been studying Washington politics and Congress for more than 40 years, and never have we seen them this dysfunctional. In our past writings, we have criticized both parties when we believed it was warranted. Today, however, we have no choice but to acknowledge that the core of the problem lies with the Republican Party.

The GOP has become an insurgent outlier in American politics. It is ideologically extreme; scornful of compromise; unmoved by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition.

When one party moves this far from the mainstream, it makes it nearly impossible for the political system to deal constructively with the country’s challenges.

“Both sides do it” or “There is plenty of blame to go around” are the traditional refuges for an American news media intent on proving its lack of bias, while political scientists prefer generality and neutrality when discussing partisan polarization. Many self-styled bipartisan groups, in their search for common ground, propose solutions that move both sides to the center, a strategy that is simply untenable when one side is so far out of reach.


We understand the values of mainstream journalists, including the effort to report both sides of a story. But a balanced treatment of an unbalanced phenomenon distorts reality. If the political dynamics of Washington are unlikely to change anytime soon, at least we should change the way that reality is portrayed to the public.

Our advice to the press: Don’t seek professional safety through the even-handed, unfiltered presentation of opposing views. Which politician is telling the truth? Who is taking hostages, at what risks and to what ends?

Also, stop lending legitimacy to Senate filibusters by treating a 60-vote hurdle as routine. The framers certainly didn’t intend it to be. Report individual senators’ abusive use of holds and identify every time the minority party uses a filibuster to kill a bill or nomination with majority support.


Republicans often dismiss nonpartisan analyses of the nature of problems and the impact of policies when those assessments don’t fit their ideology. In the face of the deepest economic downturn since the Great Depression, the party’s leaders and their outside acolytes insisted on obeisance to a supply-side view of economic growth — thus fulfilling Norquist’s pledge — while ignoring contrary considerations.

The results can border on the absurd: In early 2009, several of the eight Republican co-sponsors of a bipartisan health-care reform plan dropped their support; by early 2010, the others had turned on their own proposal so that there would be zero GOP backing for any bill that came within a mile of Obama’s reform initiative. As one co-sponsor, Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), told The Washington Post’s Ezra Klein: “I liked it because it was bipartisan. I wouldn’t have voted for it.”

And seven Republican co-sponsors of a Senate resolution to create a debt-reduction panel voted in January 2010 against their own resolution, solely to keep it from getting to the 60-vote threshold Republicans demanded and thus denying the president a seeming victory.

This attitude filters down far deeper than the party leadership. Rank-and-file GOP voters endorse the strategy that the party’s elites have adopted, eschewing compromise to solve problems and insisting on principle, even if it leads to gridlock. Democratic voters, by contrast, along with self-identified independents, are more likely to favor deal-making over deadlock.

Democrats are hardly blameless, and they have their own extreme wing and their own predilection for hardball politics. But these tendencies do not routinely veer outside the normal bounds of robust politics. If anything, under the presidencies of Clinton and Obama, the Democrats have become more of a status-quo party. They are centrist protectors of government, reluctantly willing to revamp programs and trim retirement and health benefits to maintain its central commitments in the face of fiscal pressures.


Today, thanks to the GOP, compromise has gone out the window in Washington. In the first two years of the Obama administration, nearly every presidential initiative met with vehement, rancorous and unanimous Republican opposition in the House and the Senate, followed by efforts to delegitimize the results and repeal the policies. The filibuster, once relegated to a handful of major national issues in a given Congress, became a routine weapon of obstruction, applied even to widely supported bills or presidential nominations. And Republicans in the Senate have abused the confirmation process to block any and every nominee to posts such as the head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, solely to keep laws that were legitimately enacted from being implemented.

In the third and now fourth years of the Obama presidency, divided government has produced something closer to complete gridlock than we have ever seen in our time in Washington, with partisan divides even leading last year to America’s first credit downgrade.

On financial stabilization and economic recovery, on deficits and debt, on climate change and health-care reform, Republicans have been the force behind the widening ideological gaps and the strategic use of partisanship. In the presidential campaign and in Congress, GOP leaders have embraced fanciful policies on taxes and spending, kowtowing to their party’s most strident voices.


Mike Lofgren, a veteran Republican congressional staffer, wrote an anguished diatribe last year about why he was ending his career on the Hill after nearly three decades. “The Republican Party is becoming less and less like a traditional political party in a representative democracy and becoming more like an apocalyptic cult, or one of the intensely ideological authoritarian parties of 20th century Europe,” he wrote on the Truthout Web site.

Shortly before Rep. West went off the rails with his accusations of communism in the Democratic Party, political scientists Keith Poole and Howard Rosenthal, who have long tracked historical trends in political polarization, said their studies of congressional votes found that Republicans are now more conservative than they have been in more than a century. Their data show a dramatic uptick in polarization, mostly caused by the sharp rightward move of the GOP.

If our democracy is to regain its health and vitality, the culture and ideological center of the Republican Party must change. In the short run, without a massive (and unlikely) across-the-board rejection of the GOP at the polls, that will not happen. If anything, Washington’s ideological divide will probably grow after the 2012 elections.

In the House, some of the remaining centrist and conservative “Blue Dog” Democrats have been targeted for extinction by redistricting, while even ardent tea party Republicans, such as freshman Rep. Alan Nunnelee (Miss.), have faced primary challenges from the right for being too accommodationist. And Mitt Romney’s rhetoric and positions offer no indication that he would govern differently if his party captures the White House and both chambers of Congress.


In the end, while the press can make certain political choices understandable, it is up to voters to decide. If they can punish ideological extremism at the polls and look skeptically upon candidates who profess to reject all dialogue and bargaining with opponents, then an insurgent outlier party will have some impetus to return to the center. Otherwise, our politics will get worse before it gets better.

The skips are where I have intentionally left out Think Progress commentary. I have done so precisely because for those on the rational conservative to
libertarian side of the great political divide will likely find themselves in agreement with the arguments without Think Progress propaganda Much as I have.

Of course the stink hole progressive SHEEPLES will refuse to recognize there are actually reasonable thinking conservatives and libertarians that have zero use for the reactionary SoCon driven republican party. These individuals, like myself, are individuals without a home. And, they will be the catalyst for real change in America.

If we are to survive as a free republic that recognizes the rights of the individual as well as their right to individual property the vast middle had better unite and let their voices be heard. I will assure you that neither the republican or democratic vision is where we need to travel. We need a new, independent libertarian objectivist mentality that will provide the foundation to make the tough concrete decision that will reverse our current downhill slide into the abyss of fiscal as well as social instability and insanity.

Beware the stink hole progressive siren song of prosperity and fairness under the auspices of another Obama term. Nothing could be further from the truth. Another four years of Obama is another four years on the road to greater government dependency, further restrictions on individual freedoms, greater reliance on the decisions of the elite pols which will be forced upon us by the government, and greater divisiveness as we have witnessed during the first four years of the Obama Presidency.

Obama has really been no worse than GWB, for in the final analysis Obama has merely continued the excesses of the GWB administration. Reelecting Obama will insure a continuation of those things this country once fought a war to rectify. Thank you GWB and BHO for your national political leadership, no matter how bad it was and continues to be. It is time to elect a man who can provide real change by making the hard choices and pursuing an agenda that can and will right our ship of state.

That is why I am supporting Gov. Gary Johnson who will win the Libertarian nomination to run against BHO in the 12012 general election. I humbly suggest you consider Gary Johnson and vote for him in 2012. If you want a real meaningful change in direction he is your natural choice.

Via: Memeorandum

Was the Osama bin Laden Kill Really a Gutsy One?... Or Was It a CYA Exercise?

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

President Obama politicizing his decision that resulted in the death of bin Laden. Perhaps it was not really a good decision.

Time magazine securing a memo that could indicate the President was covering his on arse should the mission to take out bin Laden have went wrong. Ben Shapiro writing a column on how the President in his opinion, did just that.

Before beginning my analysis of the above let me say I have real issues with many of the President's policy decisions and I certainly have issues with his desire to grow the federal government beyond recognition. Recognition when compared to what our constitutional republic should look like and how it should function.

Now for my take on the most recent brouhaha.

The memo secured by Time and as reported by Mr. Shapiro in - Received phone call from Tom Donilon who stated that the President made a decision with regard to AC1 [Abbottabad Compound 1]. The decision is to proceed with the assault.

The timing, operational decision making and control are in Admiral McRaven’s hands. The approval is provided on the risk profile presented to the President. Any additional risks are to be brought back to the President for his consideration. The direction is to go in and get bin Laden and if he is not there, to get out. Those instructions were conveyed to Admiral McRaven at approximately 10:45 am.

Ben Shapiro's assessment of the memo.

...the memo doesn’t show a gutsy call. It doesn’t show a president willing to take the blame for a mission gone wrong. It shows a CYA maneuver by the White House.

The memo puts all control in the hands of Admiral McRaven – the “timing, operational decision making and control” are all up to McRaven. So the notion that Obama and his team were walking through every stage of the operation is incorrect. The hero here was McRaven, not Obama. And had the mission gone wrong, McRaven surely would have been thrown under the bus.

The memo is crystal clear on that point. It says that the decision has been made based solely on the “risk profile presented to the President.” If any other risks – no matter how minute – arose, they were “to be brought back to the President for his consideration.” This is ludicrous. It is wiggle room. It was Obama’s way of carving out space for himself in case the mission went bad. If it did, he’d say that there were additional risks of which he hadn’t been informed; he’d been kept in the dark by his military leaders.

Finally, the memo is unclear on just what the mission is. Was it to capture Bin Laden or to kill him? The White House itself was unable to decide what the mission was in the hours after the Bin Laden kill, and actually switched its language. The memo shows why: McRaven was instructed to “get” Bin Laden, whatever that meant.

I have read the memo, and Shapiro's analysis a dozen times. Each time I've read them I have had the same reoccurring thoughts. Having been a executive I tried to put myself in that frame of mind and asked myself how I would have handled the situation. Here is what I came up with.

The President, after analyzing the situation from intelligence reports, input from his military commanders, the views of his cabinet members, and perhaps other appropriate staff made a decision based on the overall risk assessment. He gathered as much information and as many educated opinions from those he places his trust in as he could. Precisely what a effective executive does in business.

At the end of the day the President made his decision. Yes, he placed the tactical decisions in the hands of his Admiral, much like the executive places the responsibility to execute business decisions in their managers hands. It's just the way it works.

Ultimately the success or failure of decisions made by the President falls on his shoulders. Perhaps the President was giving himself wiggle room in the event the mission had failed. However consider this, had the Admiral recognizes any additional risk before executing the President's orders wouldn't it have been reasonable to error on the side of caution? Especially if given additional risks could have endangered the lives of the men on the ground? Perhaps that was one of the President's concerns.

The President made the strategic decision recognizing his responsibility. He handed the tactical handling of the mission off to his Admiral and the mission team. Execution was flawless and the mission was a resounding success. Judgement... The President made the right executive decision, his Admiral and team executed the mission objectives perfectly, and desired result was achieved.

As to what exactly what "get bin Laden" meant. I think most all reasonable people understand it meant to take him out. To rid society of a major terrorist who was responsible for the death of over 3,000 of our fellow Americans. End of discussion.

In my view not much else is of any significance. All of Ben Shapiro's talking points may be true. They likely are nothing more than conjecture. Then again does it really matter? bin Laden is dead, we should all be willing to give credit where credit is due. Now, isn't it time to move on to the real issues for which this President should be denied a second term?

Oh, for those interested here are links with more commentary on this issue. Little Green Footballs, Rush Limbaugh.

To me the big issue here is the shameless way Obama is using his decision, and the bin Laden kill to ostensibly enhance his reelection chances.

h/t: Gateway Pundit

Via: Memeorandum

Friday, April 27, 2012

Farewell Sex May Soon Become Legal In Egypt... If Islamic Wacko Lawmakers Have Their Way

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA 
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

What follows is something even the most callous will have difficulty imagining. But considering from whence the idea came perhaps no one shouldn't be all that surprised.

Daily MailEgyptian husbands will soon be legally allowed to have sex with their dead wives - for up to six hours after their death.

The controversial new law is part of a raft of measures being introduced by the Islamist-dominated parliament.

It will also see the minimum age of marriage lowered to 14 and the ridding of women's rights of getting education and employment.

Egypt's National Council for Women is campaigning against the changes, saying that 'marginalizing and undermining the status of women would negatively affect the country's human development'.

Dr Mervat al-Talawi, head of the NCW, wrote to the Egyptian People’s Assembly Speaker Dr Saad al-Katatni addressing her concerns.

Egyptian journalist Amro Abdul Samea reported in the al-Ahram newspaper that Talawi complained about the legislation's which are being introduced under 'alleged religious interpretations'.

The subject of a husband having sex with his dead wife arose in May 2011 when Moroccan cleric Zamzami Abdul Bari said marriage remains valid even after death.

He also said that women have the right to have sex with her dead husband, reported. {Read More

If this is what the "Egyptian Spring" wrought I'm wondering what the future has in store for the people of Egypt.

More commentary at Atlas Shrugs, Israel Matzav, American Thinker

Via: Memeorandum

Thursday, April 26, 2012

John Derringer, Real American

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

No time to post, needed break.

Wednesday, April 25, 2012

A Republican Mile Marker...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

Is the GOP becoming less anal as a party? For a party that has maintained a predominately reactionary outlook when it comes to gay rights and gay unions perhaps Romney selecting openly gay Richard Grenell as his foreign-policy spokesman is a hopeful sign.

the Atlantic - The recent hiring of Richard Grenell, Mitt Romney's openly gay foreign-policy spokesman, represents a breakthrough in the world of Republican presidential campaigns.

Grenell isn't the first out gay person to serve as a high-level staffer to a GOP nominee, but as far as I can tell, he is the first such press spokesman -- the first to serve as the public face of the all-but-certain Republican nominee -- and on the historically sensitive issue of national security, no less. As an openly gay Republican in presidential politics, Grenell joins a small fraternity of out GOP staffers, instantly becoming the highest-profile of the band. His rise signals a remarkable new openness in a party often castigated for its social conservatism; in addition to being out, Grenell has waged some public battles for gay rights that contradict his new boss's own positions.

While Republican presidential campaigns have had staffers who were known to be gay before, these staffers, like the scores of gay GOPers working on Capitol Hill, have generally sought to avoid public notice, or even worked to stay hush-hush in the face of widespread social speculation about any single man of a certain age who is powerful but neither married nor a ladies' man. Many -- like Ken Mehlman, Bush's 2004 campaign manager and from 2005 to 2007 the chairman of the Republican National Committee -- didn't come out until they were safely out of politics. (Mehlman came out in an interview with The Atlantic's Marc Ambinder in 2010, confirming rumors that had been circulating in the city for years.)

Grenell, a former United Nations mission spokesman in the George W. Bush administration, has taken a different route. He has been publicly, outspokenly gay for years. He waged a public battle with the State Department to add his longtime partner to a diplomatic registry in 2008, only to be told it would violate the Defense of Marriage Act. He's also on the record as a supporter of gay marriage... {Read More}

This should be taken as a very good sign... for those republicans who have decided to stick with their party. Their tent just may have grown a tad bit bigger.

Via: Memeorandum

As the National Media, and Our President Remain Silent...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

Mathew Owens, brutally beaten lies in a Alabama hospital in ICU fighting for his life. He was beaten by a gang of approximately twenty with pipes, paint cans and chairs. The gang left him on his front porch presumably to die.

Tonight, as I read the sketchy reports of this brutal beating by a gang of approximately twenty I can't help but wonder just where the national mainstream media is hiding. I can't help but ask when Our President, who not too long ago weighed in heavily on a circumstance that resulted in the loss of life, might have some remarks on this incident. Along with words of kindness and support for Mathew Owens family. Perhaps Our President, like NBC, ABC, and others are too busy to be concerned.

It has been reported by a witness that as the gang walked away someone said "Now that’s justice for Trayvon.”

The Daily Caller - Hey, that’s what he gets for having a similar skin color to someone we’ve all been instructed to hate.

Well done, Spike Lee. Nice job, NBC. Keep up the good work, ABC. And to everyone else who’s been using a shooting in Florida to foment hate and divide people by the color of their skin, kudos. Don’t let this attack, and similar attacks across America, bother you. If you had a conscience, we never would’ve heard of you in the first place.

As Thomas Sowell points out, Winston Churchill once said, "If the past sits in judgment on the present, the future will be lost." He wasn't talking about racial issues, but what he said applies especially where race is involved.

I am waiting patiently as well to see exactly how left blogistan reacts to this one. Anybody want to bet?

Via: Memeorandum

Tuesday, April 24, 2012

Wisdom... A Gift Freely Given Should Always Be Considered

On Teaching
Kahlil Gibran

No man can reveal to you aught but that which already lies half asleep in the dawning of your knowledge.

The teacher who walks in the shadow of the temple, among his followers, gives not of his wisdom but rather of his faith and his lovingness.

If he is indeed wise he does not bid you enter the house of his wisdom, but rather leads you to the threshold of your own mind.

The astronomer may speak to you of his understanding of space, but he cannot give you his understanding.

The musician may sing to you of the rhythm which is in all space, but he cannot give you the ear which arrests the rhythm nor the voice that echoes it.

And he who is versed in the science of numbers can tell of the regions of weight and measure, but he cannot conduct you thither.

For the vision of one man lends not its wings to another man.

And even as each one of you stands alone in God's knowledge, so must each one of you be alone in his knowledge of God and in his understanding of the earth.

Indeed each of us is an individual, with our own unique individual mind. With this, and because of this, we must question everything, and through the process of questioning, indeed doubting we can come to know the truth.

Sunday, April 22, 2012

Ron Paul... Valiant Advocate and Warrior for Liberty...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

It is quite obvious the end is near for Representative Ron Paul and his valiant run to restore liberty in America by winning the Presidency of the United States. Even though his valiant and patriotic effort will not propel him to the general election his Revolution will continue. Ron Paul has inspired the young as well as the old. Individuals who love liberty and understand the need to return to constitutional governance will carry on the fight!.

Philadelphia (CNN) – Ahead of Tuesday's Pennsylvania primary, presidential hopeful Ron Paul painted his long-shot campaign as a new American revolution at a rain-soaked event outside Independence Hall.

“In our early history, we had a major undertaking overthrowing an empire,” Paul said. “And in some ways that is what we are doing now.”

Paul’s supporters call his campaign the “Ron Paul Revolution,” and they turned out in a steady, hard rain outside the hall where the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were debated and adopted.

They stood with umbrellas drawn and ponchos on, even as the sound of rain smacking on the tents in the park made it difficult for people to hear the candidate.

“It is obvious that we need to change our foreign policy because of the cost,” Paul said. “Our foreign policy is a schizophrenic foreign policy – it is on again off again."

Though the Texas congressman finds himself behind former Gov. Mitt Romney and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, according to the CNN delegate count, he consistently raises large sums of money. In the first quarter of 2012, the Paul campaign said they raised nearly $10.4 million, with nearly $2.6 million coming in March alone.

At the end of the speech, Paul handicapped the presidential race.

“When you run, you run to win. I have won elections 12 times, and that puts a stamp of approval and what we are doing,” Paul said. “We do know that the continuation of the spirit of liberty will persist no matter what, and that is what really counts (emphasis mine).”

Via: Memeorandum

Presidential Dog Biscuit and Car Top Carrier Politics...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

Keith Olbermann, the extreme left wing blowhard (think Rush Limbaugh on the right), whom I agree with about .0001% of the time is right about the presidential "dog" politics of last week. As is George Will.

ABC - After a week of dog-eat-dog politicking between President Obama and Mitt Romney’s respective campaigns, Keith Olbermann said today that the “dog-gate” controversies have gotten out of hand.

Politicos, pundits and the presidential-campaign watching public spent the past week pondering which is worse, a presidential candidate who put his dog in a kennel strapped to the roof of his car for a 12-hour drive or a president who ate dog meat as a child living in Indonesia.

“It raises the level of absurdity to something exponential,” Olbermann said on “This Week” about the Romney campaign criticizing Obama for consuming dog meat when he was 6 years old.

“With so many valuable questions going on, we’re wasting most of the time dealing with the dogs,” the former MSNBC and CurrentTV host said.

But ABC’s George Will said neither the candidates nor their campaigns are responsible for the recent dominance of dogs in the presidential race. Instead, he said, the media is to blame.

“The horse race is over, and the sugar rush that the media got from that is gone, and therefore they’re looking for something to keep their mind off, I guess, big questions,” Will said during the “This Week” roundtable. {Read More}

Just wondering which dog biscuit the President most liked at age six. Cause I'm sure every six year old had their favorite. RIGHT?

Via: Memeorandum

Marco Rubio Supporting Jeb Bush For VP...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

Gov. Jeb Bush
Sen. Marco Rubio
Tea Party favorite Marco Rubio, who earlier endorsed Mitt Romney has announced his support for Jeb Bush to be named the Vice Presidential candidate on the Republicans national ticket.

As the moderate Romney continues to strengthen his support among the republican party establishment, and the more conservative wing of the party is beginning to coalesce around  the presumptive nominee it is looking more and more that...  the more things change the more they actually stay the same. The bottom line folks is the choice in November 2012 is almost certain to be between  Obama and Obama Light. The only real difference is Obama Light (Romney)  actually has had real life business experience and real business accomplishments.

As for Rubio, well I guess he just reenforced his hand with the party power structure. He is a big "R" establishment statist republican after all.

(CNN) – Republican Sen. Marco Rubio, who consistently makes the short list of potential GOP vice-presidential candidates, on Sunday offered a ringing endorsement of Jeb Bush for the No.2 spot.

Bush, the former Florida governor, recently said he hoped Rubio would accept a potential offer from presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney to serve on the ticket, and Rubio returned the compliment.

"Well that's very nice of Jeb. I hope he'll say yes if future President Romney asks him," the senator from Florida said of his political mentor in an interview set to air on CNN's "State of the Union." "I think he'd be a fantastic vice president."

Despite continual questions regarding his political future, Rubio vowed to stay out of the "veepstakes" chatter going forward, given that the official process is now in place.

Romney appointed Beth Myers last week to head his search for the individual who will complete the GOP ticket heading into the November general election.

"The last thing he needs are those of us in the peanut gallery to be saying what we would or would not do," Rubio told CNN Chief Political Correspondent Candy Crowley. "I know that Mitt Romney's going to make a great choice for vice president."

The first term senator and tea party favorite on Thursday said he would reject a vice-presidential proposal, adding his focus is on his Senate tenure. He and Romney are scheduled to campaign together on Monday.

Via: Memeorandum

Saturday, April 21, 2012

More Hyperbole From Climate Change Environmentalist(s) Activist...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

The environmental wacko's, in typical fascistic form weigh in on global warming and climate change, calling for "making the skeptics pay" for daring to question questionable science. - “Let’s start keeping track of them…let’s make them pay”

Writing for Forbes Magazine, climate change alarmist Steve Zwick calls for skeptics of man-made global warming to be tracked, hunted down and have their homes burned to the ground, yet another shocking illustration of how eco-fascism is rife within the environmentalist lobby.

Comparing climate change skeptics to residents in Tennessee who refused to pay a $75 fee, resulting in firemen sitting back and watching their houses burn down, Zwick rants that anyone who actively questions global warming propaganda should face the same treatment.

“We know who the active denialists are – not the people who buy the lies, mind you, but the people who create the lies. Let’s start keeping track of them now, and when the famines come, let’s make them pay. Let’s let their houses burn. Let’s swap their safe land for submerged islands. Let’s force them to bear the cost of rising food prices,” writes Zwick, adding, “They broke the climate. Why should the rest of us have to pay for it?”

Just wondering. Could this constitute "hate speech" and warrant a federal investigation?

Via: Memeorandum

GOP Statism To Prevail For the Foreseeable Future...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

Gee, what a surprise. As the old adage says, "the more things change the more they stay the same."

SCOTTSDALE, Ariz. - The Republican Party establishment has withstood the tea-party revolution.


The 2012 meeting of the Republican national command shows just how little has actually changed in the Grand Old Party since the tea-party movement helped Republicans capture the U.S. House majority two years ago and announced that they were a powerful force in American politics.

While tea-party activists have won county chairmanships and seats on state central committees, few (if any) activists have clinched slots on the Republican Party’s 168-member governing committee. That’s not to say that tea-partiers have disappeared or that they won’t get their moment in the sun — but it may take years for them to climb the party ladder the same way as everyone else.

GOP elders sympathize with the movement’s ideas and want to channel whatever energy the decentralized groups offer for November. But when asked about the tea-party’s influence in interviews here, the movement was always spoken of in the third person and as one constituency in the larger Republican coalition, sort of like defense hawks or fiscal conservatives.

Many Republicans here said that tea-party activists now understand that things will run more smoothly if those with experience are in charge rather than those who put a premium on ideology over process.

“The important thing for any group in the party to understand…is that you need experience to govern,” said New Hampshire Republican Chairman Wayne MacDonald. “Everybody has to start somewhere. It’s just important they learn the mechanics of how the party operates…It doesn’t mean new ideas aren’t welcome." {Read Some More :(}

There you have it folks. Statism heavy (dems) or statism light (repubs) for as far as the eye can see. Buckle up and suffer the ride as best possible.

Via: Memeorandum

Alton Hayes, I Beat Up a White Boy Because...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

Alton L. Hayes III

Here we have it folks. A black youth beats the sh*t out of a white youth in Chicago. His reason? Because the dude was white and Alton is pissed off about the Trayvon Martin shooting.

Excerpt from Fox Chicago

Alton L. Hayes III, a west suburban man charged with a hate crime, told police he was so upset about the Trayvon Martin case in Florida that he beat up a white man early Tuesday.

Hayes and a 15-year-old Chicago boy walked up behind the 19-year-old man victim and pinned his arms to his side, police said. Hayes, 18, then picked up a large tree branch, pointed it at the man and said, “Empty your pockets, white boy.”

The two allegedly rifled through the victim’s pockets, then threw him to the ground and punched him “numerous times” in the head and back before running away, police said. Hayes and the boy are black; the victim is white.

After being arrested, Hayes told police he was upset by the Trayvon Martin case and beat the man up because he was white, Cook County State’s Attorney’s office spokeswoman Tandra Simonton said, citing court records. {The Rest}

I acknowledge, being the rational conservative/libertarian that I strive to be the full story on this is likely yet to be told. I caution the right to be reserved in its response to what appears to be a racially motivated hate crime. We must allow the wheels of justice to function as they should and trust the scales of justice remain in balance.

That aside, I can not help but wonder if; 1) The left who immediately tried and convicted Zimmerman will be as quick in response to what appears to be a racially motivated hate crime? 2) Will the Reverend's Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton be found criticizing this racially motivated hate crime against a white youth? 3)Will the President speak out on national television condemning this act of racial intolerance and hate? 4) Will the rabid left acknowledge their rank hypocrisy if they don't? Just a few what seems to be obvious questions.

I recognize the severity of each of these alleged crimes is vastly different and the impact of one is not even comparable to the other. However, the fact that racism was invoked in the Martin case certainly justifies the question if the hate crime by Alton Hayes was indeed racially inspired and motivated.

I eagerly await a response from the left.

Via: Memeorandum

Mitch Daniels Has Some Advice for Mittens...

by:Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

"You have to campaign to govern, not just to win." - Mitch Daniels, Indiana Governor

Mitch Daniels offered the above advice to Mitt Romney, the presumptive republican presidential nominee.

In this age of political platitudes, sophistry, hyperbole, and driving negativism more appropriate words would be hard to find. Coming from any politician.

A few key excerpts from a CNN Politics article.

The governor, who's often cited as a potential Republican running mate for Romney, reportedly told the newspaper that "political victories that follow 'slash-and-burn' campaigns seldom lead to great accomplishments," referring to the already-bitter war underway between Romney and the president's re-election campaign.

"Spend the precious time and dollars explaining what's at stake and a constructive program to make life better," Daniels said. "And as I say, look at everything through the lens of folks who have yet to achieve."

"You don't change one thing about the policies you advocate or your principles,' he said, noting instead that candidates should simply make clear how their policies would lift up those who are struggling." {The Rest}

Sometimes it seems America in large measure is suffering from ADD, Attention Deficit Disorder. Many have lost the discipline and patience to focus on, and remain focused on salient and critical information about the health of our nation. Er,I mean lack of health.

When large segments of the population fail to educate themselves on the key important issues of the day the nation we live in becomes fertile soil for, well, I guess the best example is what we are witnessing today.

When appearance becomes more important than substance, when doing the expedient becomes more important than principle, when integrity no longer trumps winning, and when these things cease to have any real clear defined meaning a nation always finds itself in deep sh*t.

The presidential candidates will spend millions (Obama may hit the billion mark) just to get elected. They will say anything, true or not so long as their handlers advise them it will secure the election.

As we've grown accustomed to seeing, the more negative and personal the campaign literature and ads the more effective they seem to be. This is something a truly reasoned mentality has difficulty grasping. Yet it seem Americans are all to receptive to the madness.

Maybe it's the media that is at greatest fault. Or possibly the millions of partisan blogs that populate political blogistan. Perhaps it is the monied interests that control the levers of power. Possibly it is the politicians (political class) themselves. Most likely it is all the above.

Daniels is so right in saying, "Spend the precious time and dollars explaining what's at stake and a constructive program to make life better... look at everything through the lens of folks who have yet to achieve."

An effective and principled political leader begins with a vision. They develops the plan and strategy necessary to achieving their vision, their road map if you will. During the campaign to sell their vision to the electorate the effective and principled leader 1) defines the vision 2) tells the truth, both the good and the painful 3) stays on message 4) stays positive while being truthful 5) never makes it personal and refrains from character attacks on opponents 6) asks for support but never compromises their principles and ethics, 7) maintains consistency and in doing so integrity 8) Maintains a strong forceful presence while maintaining an air of humility.

It doesn't appear, at least to this observer that Romney will take Governor Daniels advice. I don't believe the other guy, the President is paying any attention either.

Via: Memeorandum

Wednesday, April 18, 2012

Sometimes It Just Makes Sense To Begin At the End...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

Sometimes it seems right to begin at the end. Let me explain.

I was browsing through some politically focused sights, the usual mix of liberal, conservative, and libertarian. One really caught my interest, mostly because the article was filled with common sense and lacked what has become so common today; a sense of pure partisanship.

After completing the article I found myself reflecting on the simple wisdom contained in a article that will never, although it should, hit the main stream media.

And so, I begin the article at the end.

Sandy Salt - Who are these flash-mob voters you ask, well I like to call them the Angry Joes & Janes of the middle that are not right or left wingers. These are fiscal conservatives that hate the idea of the government wasting their hard earned dollars. They are compassionate and willing to lend a had, but don't want to feel like their charity is at the end of the billy club. They are more liberal on social issues, but only to a point and they definitely don't like being told where the point is by either side. They go by many names, but they are all Americans through and through. They believe in the American Dream and hard work. They don't like the idea that people are taking advantage of them, from either end of the financial spectrum. They are the angry middle that wants a better life for their children and would like to see them damn kids move out on their own finally and for good.

There is a mob mentality to them and sometime you wonder where they have run off to, but don't ever think that they don't exist or they won't come back. They just get busy living life and don't have time for the constant banter of talking heads or every lie from a politician. They will appear when needed and sometimes when the politicians least want them because they upset their criminal endeavors. They are out there working and watching. They will appear when the hour is darkest and the need is greatest. The are the Angry Joes & Janes of America protectors of Freedom, Liberty, and the American Dream. God Bless Them Every One! {From the Beginning}

Good Job Sandy Salt! Keep em coming. There is a huge well spring of hard working American patriots out in the heartland of this great nation, and we've got each others back.

Be sure to check out more at Sandy Salt, you'll not be disappointed.

Hey, They're Only Numbers... Right?

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

Just some numbers. You be the judge of either how significant OR inconsequential they may be.

( In the 39 months since Barack Obama took the oath of office as president of the United States, the federal government’s debt has increased by $5,027,761,476,484.56.

Although he has served less than a term, Obama is now the first American president to see the federal government's debt increase by more than $5 trillion during his time in office.

During the full eight years that George W. Bush served as president, the federal government's debt increased by $4,899,100,310,608.44. (Rising from $5,727,776,738,304.64 to $10,626,877,048,913.08.)

The $5,027,761,476,484.56 that the debt has increased during Obama's presidency equals $16,043.39 for every one of the 313,385,295 people the Census Bureau now estimates live in the United States. {Read More}

Banana's seem ever closer to home...

Via: Memeorandum

Will a Iron Curtain Descend In the West? USA Congress on the Brink...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

The Iron Curtain Memorial in Budapest

The Iron Curtain that spread across eastern Europe following the end of WW II eventually fell. When the west (the Allies) effectively won the Cold War the curtain, a most glaring construct of totalitarian tyranny saw its last days.

Now in 21st century America, a bastion of freedom and liberty, legislation is moving through the Congress that at it's core has the potential of creating an "Iron Curtain" for USA citizens. And without the due process of law.

Investors Business Daily -The Republican House of Representatives may soon follow the Democratic Senate and give the IRS the power to confiscate your passport on mere suspicion (emphasis mine) of owing taxes. There's no place like home, comrade.

'America, Love It Or Leave It" might be an obsolete slogan if the "bipartisan transportation bill" that just passed the Senate is approved by the House and becomes law. Contained within the suspiciously titled "Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act," or "MAP 21," is a provision that gives the Internal Revenue Service the power to keep U.S. citizens from leaving the country if it finds that they owe $50,000 or more in unpaid taxes — no court ruling necessary (emphasis mine).

It is hard to imagine any law more reminiscent of the Soviet Union that America toppled, or its Eastern Bloc slave satellites.

In his 1967 CBS "Town Meeting of the World" debate with Bobby Kennedy, Ronald Reagan declared, "we don't want the Berlin Wall knocked down so that it's easier to get at the throats of the East Germans. We just think that a wall that is put up to confine people, and keep them within their own country instead of allowing them the freedom of world travel, has to be somehow wrong."

Throughout the many decades of the 20th century's Cold War, the freedom of movement Americans enjoyed as a cherished right was one of our secret weapons. As the Communists in Moscow promised the world utopia out of the barrel of a gun, people around the globe noticed that the Soviets needed walls and barbed wire fences to keep their people in, while in the U.S. walls were as pointless as a fish's bicycle. {Read More}

If there ever was any doubt left but what BOTH political parties are in reality advocating and supporting increased statism and tyranny over the people all doubt should have just evaporated.

This legislation is just another step in the continuing march to greater state control over the lives of all individuals in this country. Those who advance statism and the tyranny of the state have found in Barrack Obama {and many Republicans as well as Democrats} a committed and useful tool to tighten the noose of tyranny. Some will say this is a paranoid and empty argument. To which one can respond, rightly and correctly so... Look at, and to history.

More can be found here.

Via: Memeorandum

Tuesday, April 17, 2012

Powerful Words of Resistance Against Tyranny...

from the desk of:
Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

Perhaps the most insightful and powerful words I've read in quite some time.

Utopianism substitutes glorious predictions and unachievable promises for knowledge, science, and reason, while laying claim to them all. Yet there is nothing new in deception disguised as hope and nothing original in abstraction framed as progress. A heavenly society is said to be within reach if only the individual surrenders more of his liberty and for the general good, meaning the good as prescribed by the state. If he refuses, he will be tormented and ultimately coerced into compliance, for conforming is essential. Indeed, nothing good can come of self interest, which is condemned as morally indefensible and empty. Through persuasion, deceit, and coercion, the individual must be stripped of his identity and subordinated to the state. He must abandon his own ambitions for the ambitions of the state. His first duty must be to the state-not family, community, and faith, all of which challenges the authority of the state. Once dispirited, the individual can be molded by the state with endless social experiments and lifestyle calibrations.

Especially threatening, therefore, are the industrious, independent, and successful, for they demonstrate what is actually possible under current societal conditions- achievement, happiness, and fulfillment-thereby contradicting and endangering the utopian campaign against what was or is. They must be either co-opted and turned into useful contributors to or advocates for the state, or neutralized through sabotage or other means. Indeed, the individual's contribution tok society must be downplayed, dismissed, or denounced, unless the contribution isdirected by the state andinvolves self-sacrifice for the utopian cause. (Ameritopia - Chapter 1, page 5)

A highly recommended read for all individuals who cherish freedom and love liberty. Something statists like Obama and Romney, et all wish to deny future generations. In the entitlement driven society of the 21st century there can be no independent thinkers and doers.

I Wholeheartedly and Vehemently Support the Second Amendment, but...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

This sight fully and wholeheartedly supports the second amendment rights of all verifiability sane and mentally stable Americans to bear arms. Indeed, just as the founding fathers so correctly understood it is crucial to a free society that it's citizens are insured the right to bear arms. It is the only way in which the individual citizen has to protect themselves against the threat of a tyrannical government.

However, especially in light of the FACT that President Obama has not threatened to take away this right, rocker Ted Nugent's remarks are just a bit over the top and really constitutes nothing more than extreme right wing hyperbole and propaganda.

Here is what the rocker had to say. Ted at the 56 second mark of the video. CNN certainly did it's best to tip toe around Ted's remarks while giving great extended play to Debbie (Wacko) Wassermann Schultz's OPINION.

CNN - "If Barack Obama becomes the president in November again, I will either be dead or in jail by this time next year," Nugent said, according to a video posted on YouTube by the NRA. "If you can't go home and get everybody in your lives to clean house in this vile, evil America hated administration, I don't even know what you're made out of."

He accused the government of "wiping its ass with the Constitution you're living under a rock some place" and labeled members of the Obama administration, including the vice president, attorney general and secretary of state "criminals."

"We need to ride into that battlefield and chop their heads off in November. Am I, any questions?" Nugent said.

Cool it Ted! You're NOT helping the cause. In fact you are turning rational thinking conservatives/libertarians off with this over heated and dangerous rhetoric. Sorry if the truth hurts.

Via: Memeorandum

Obama Economic Logic Akin to Madness...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

Since 1980 total Federal Tax increases have totaled 3.3% of GDP. If President Obama is reelected the possibility of a huge 3.5% Federal Tax increase in quite likely. Impact on the business sector, our economy, and the middle class in particular will be staggering.

AEI - All the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts.


It would have been the Mother of All Tax Hikes, a $3 trillion tax increase during shaky economic times. It would have broken a campaign promise not to raise taxes on middle-income Americans.

President Obama was shockingly close to embracing such a plan back in 2009. And if he’s reelected in 2012, Obama may well reconsider the idea and let all the Bush tax cuts expire as they are scheduled to do in 2013.

At least, that’s the story—and prediction—told by journalist Noam Scheiber in his new book, The Escape Artists: How Obama’s Team Fumbled the Recovery.

Short version: In the fall of 2009, Obama’s chief congressional lobbyist Phil Schiliro cooked up a plan to extend the middle-class Bush tax cuts for two years while letting the upper-income tax cuts expire on schedule. If Congress couldn’t devise a way to pay for the $2.3 trillion extension of the middle-class cuts, they would expire in 2015. Schiliro easily sold White House budget director Peter Orszag on the idea. “[Orszag] believed the only practical way to balance the budget was to repeal all the Bush tax cuts, not just the upper-income variety.”

Orszag then presented the plan to Obama: {Read More}

We are indeed likely to see the biggest single tax grab by the Feds in the last 43 years if our Hope and Change Guru of Collectivist Statist Thought, President Obama is reelected to the Oval Office. He will oversee the implementation of a massive attack on our liberties, and a suffocating attack on our business sector and the economy.

Unfortunately the alternative to Obama, Obama Light Mittens Romney may turn out to be not much different if elected, and only sightly better. Flip - Flop.

Update: For more on Federal Taxes discussed from a different perspective visit The Humble Libertarian.

Via: Memorandum

Monday, April 16, 2012

Peggy Noonan Channeling Ron Paul?

Cross-posted at the Left Coast Rebel

"Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force...Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action."
-George Washington

Due to a busy schedule I didn't catch Peggy Noonan op-ed in Saturday's WSJ on the Republican party's trigger-happy war policy.

Plus, Noonan -- Ronald Reagan's speechwriter -- draws up an interesting anti-war John Wayne analogy to what passes as "strong on defense" in the Republican party today...

Finally, in foreign affairs the Republican candidates staked out dangerous ground. They want to show they’re strong on defense. Fine, we should have a strong defense, the best in the world. But that is different from having an aggressive foreign policy stance, and every one of the GOP candidates, with the exceptions of Ron Paul and Jon Huntsman, was aggressive. This is how their debates sounded: We should bomb Iran Thursday. No, stupid, we should bomb Iran on Wednesday. How could you be so foolish? You know we do all our bombings on Monday. You’re wrong, we send in the destroyers and arm the insurgents on Monday.

There was no room for discretion, prudence, nuance, to use unjustly maligned terms. There was no room for an expressed bias toward not-fighting. But grown-ups really do have a bias toward not-fighting.

They are allowing the GOP to be painted as the war party. They are ceding all non-war ground to the president, who can come forward as the sober, constrained, non-bellicose contender. Do they want that? Are they under the impression America is hungry for another war? Really? After the past 11 years?

The GOP used to be derided by Democrats as the John Wayne party: It loved shoot-’em-ups. Actually, John Wayne didn’t ride into town itching for a fight, and he didn’t ride in shooting off his mouth, either. He was laconic, observant. He rode in hoping for peace, but if something broke out he was ready. He had a gun, it was loaded, and he knew how to use it if he had to.
But he didn’t want to have to. Which was part of his character’s power. The GOP should go back to being John Wayne.
The Duke, Anti-War by today's twisted GOP standard: Wikipedia
I wonder how long it will be before the majority of conservatives in this nation wake up to the Republican party's "Bomb here, Invade Now" foreign policy credo Noonan warns of?

I did. I was once a "pro-defense" conservative. I was unaware of the downside of modern "pro-defense" foreign policy. But then I woke up (read a piece I wrote last year at American Thinker for more on this).

Simply put, the Republican party (due in great part to the military industrial-complex's incredible influence over our government and their shortsighted lack of a consistent philosophy) is far too ready, willing and eager to go to war. Blood (lost lives, broken families) and Treasure (devalued currency then loaned to the Chinese to pay for war) aren't even considered in passing as they scream, War! WAR! Bomb 'Em Now! NOW!

Unnecessary, prolonged war not based on self defense is the ultimate big-government infringement upon our liberty and pocketbook. Like every action of today's of Federal Leviathan, the Founders would be ashamed of America's foreign policy.

Please consider the message and authorship of the following anti-war quotes:

 "If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy." -James Madison

"No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare. "
-James Madison

"Of all the enemies of public liberty, war is perhaps the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other."
 -James Madison

"The executive has no right, in any case, to decide the question, whether there is or is not cause for declaring war."
-James Madison

  "It is a universal truth that the loss of liberty at home is to be charged to the provisions against danger, real or pretended, from abroad."
-James Madison

"Having seen the people of all other nations bowed down to the earth under the wars and prodigalities of their rulers, I have cherished their opposites, peace, economy, and riddance of public debt, believing that these were the high road to public as well as private prosperity and happiness." -Thomas Jefferson

"The most successful war seldom pays for its losses."
-Thomas Jefferson

"The spirit of this country is totally adverse to a large military force."
-Thomas Jefferson

"Wars are not paid for in wartime, the bill comes later."
-Benjamin Franklin

"A highwayman is as much a robber when he plunders in a gang as when single; and a nation that makes an unjust war is only a great gang."
-Benjamin Franklin

"I hope....that mankind will at length, as they call themselves responsible creatures, have the reason and sense enough to settle their differences without cutting throats..."
-Benjamin Franklin

"When will mankind be convinced and agree to settle their difficulties by arbitration?"
-Benjamin Franklin

"All wars are follies, very expensive and very mischievous ones."
-Benjamin Franklin

"How far can you go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without?" -Dwight D. Eisenhower

"We seek peace, knowing that peace is the climate of freedom."
-Dwight D. Eisenhower

"We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security."
-Dwight D. Eisenhower

"Preventive war was an invention of Hitler. Frankly, I would not even listen to anyone seriously that came and talked about such a thing."
-Dwight D. Eisenhower

"You can't have this kind of war. There just aren't enough bulldozers to scrape the bodies off the streets."
-Dwight D. Eisenhower

"War settles nothing."
-Dwight D. Eisenhower

"There is no glory in battle worth the blood it costs."
-Dwight D. Eisenhower

"Statism needs war; a free country does not. Statism survives by looting; a free country survives by producing."
-Ayn Rand

"Do not ever say that the desire to 'do good' by force is a good motive. Neither power-lust nor stupidity are good motives."
-Ayn Rand

"No protracted war can fail to endanger the freedom of a democratic country."
-Alexis de Tocqueville

"All those who seek to destroy the liberties of a democratic nation ought to know that war is the surest and shortest means to accomplish it."
-Alexis de Tocqueville

"If we don’t stop extending our troops all around the world in nation-building missions, we’re going to have a serious problem coming down the road."
-George W. Bush

"Free nations are peaceful nations. Free nations don't attack each other. Free nations don't develop weapons of mass destruction."
-George W. Bush 

For more anti-war quotes visit The Humble Libertarian.

Profound Words... Of a Common Man

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

“Entrepreneur’s Credo

I do not choose to be a common man,
It is my right to be uncommon … if I can,
I seek opportunity … not security.
I do not wish to be a kept citizen.
Humbled and dulled by having the
State look after me.
I want to take the calculated risk;
To dream and to build.
To fail and to succeed.
I refuse to barter incentive for a dole;
I prefer the challenges of life
To the guaranteed existence;
The thrill of fulfillment
To the stale calm of Utopia.
I will not trade freedom for beneficence
Nor my dignity for a handout
I will never cower before any master
Nor bend to any threat.
It is my heritage to stand erect.
Proud and unafraid;
To think and act for myself,
To enjoy the benefit of my creations
And to face the world boldly and say:
This, with God’s help, I have done
All this is what it means
To be an Entrepreneur.”
― Thomas Paine, Common Sense 

As I listened to the President and his almost unintelligible words the other day as he described the safety net as a mechanism for encouraging risk the above words raced through my mind.

Our statist President who is obviously in love with the idea of the state providing a sense of security for all it's citizens, at the expense of their liberty of course, would do well to become a common man.

Saudi Arabian Islamic Morality Police... Enforces Ban On “Tomboys” and Gays From Government Schools…

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

Given the American liberal establishments approval and acceptance of all things Muslim it is not at all surprising to find them silent on the following.

Saudi Arabia has decided to bar gays and tom boys from its government schools and universities within a crackdown against the spread of this phenomenon in the conservative Moslem Gulf Kingdom, a newspaper said on Monday.

The Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice, the most feared law enforcement authority in the oil-rich country, has been asked to enforce the new orders, Sharq Arabic language daily said.

“Instructions have been issued to all public schools and universities to ban the entry of gays and tom boys and to intensify their efforts to fight this phenomenon, which has been promoted by some websites,” it said.

The paper did not make clear who issued those instructions but said gay and tom boy students can go back to schools and universities if they prove they have been corrected and have stopped such practices.

It said high-level orders have been issued to the Commission to immediately enforce the new rules and to step up efforts to combat this phenomenon and other “unacceptable behavior” in public places.

As a American conservative/libertarian I freely criticize the backward, reactionary, and unjust policy of what is apparently a nation of Neanderthals.

At the same time I acknowledge it is really nobodies business what the hell these throwbacks believe in or practice. In so long as they recognize they have no right to criticize Americas for its beliefs and practices.

At least I am consistent. Which is a damn sight more than can be said of many liberals.

Via: Memeorandum

Sunday, April 15, 2012

I Ask You, the Reader... Does the Following Constitute a Double Standard?

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

Trayvon Martin
Finally... George Zimmerman the 28 year old man responsible for the death of Trayvon Martin the 17 year old Florida teenager has been charged with 2'nd degree murder. It is as it should be. Now perhaps the media, the politicians, Sharpton, Jackson, and the pundits on the left and right will give space and allow the justice system to work.

The death of Trayvon, a young man just beginning life is indeed a tragedy that affects us all in one way or another. At the very least it requires us to look at society and how it values life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Or at the very least it should.

There are those who say this incident was racially motivated because Trayvon a black was killed by a white/Hispanic. I am not so sure based on the limited knowledge we now have. Certainly more will surface as the case goes to trial. This is as it should be.

One can not help but wonder what the call for a bounty on George Zimmerman's head by the New Black Panthers amounts to. Is this possibly racially motivated as well? Just asking. Being the inquisitive guy that I am.

At any rate we should all be satisfied that Trayvon Martin's death will be properly placed before a duly appointed jury and that justice will be served. It is as it should be.

The protests over Trayvon Martin's death may have been partly responsible for Zimmerman being charged. But then again there is no certainty he wouldn't have been charged had there been no protests. We just don't know. With any certainty.

It is fairly reasonable however to believe the protests were engineered because Trayvon was black and somehow because of this justice would be slow in coming, if at all. Again racial overtones that certainly should be confronted. By all Americans.

I for one am satisfied, at this juncture anyway that the justice system is working as it should. Ultimately justice will be served and George Zimmerman, the man who took the life of an unarmed 17 year old teenager in Florida will face the judgement of society.

With the racially charged rhetoric, especially coming from the left over the Trayvon Martin case I begin thinking about racial incidents and how they are treated both in the media and by those in power. It seems to me maybe this is a double standard. Let me explain.

Channon Christian 21, Christopher Newsom 23
Channon Christian and her date Christian Newsom were brutally and heinously murdered in 2007. Their crime? Being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Perhaps just as Trayvon Martin was.

Authorities say both were raped, tortured, and murdered after being kidnapped on the morning of January 7, 2007. Four people were convicted and sentenced for their involvement in this crime. Letalvis Cobbins was found guilty of first degree murder and rape in August 2009 and was sentenced to life in prison without parole. Lemaricus Davidson was found guilty of first degree murder and rape in October 2009. Davidson is on death row awaiting his death sentence by lethal injection to be carried out. George Thomas, after having been found guilty of first degree murder and rape in December 2009 was sentenced to life in prison without parole.

In May 2010 Vanessa Coleman was found not guilty of first degree murder but was found guilty of being a facilitator in the rape and death of Channon Christian. Coleman was sentence to 53 years in prison.

According to published reports, Newsom and Christian went out for dinner on the evening of Saturday, January 6, 2007. Police say their car was hijacked and the couple was tied up and taken to the apartment of one of the suspects.

There Christian was reportedly raped in Newsom's presence then Newsom was shot and his body burned. Police have not confirmed that his penis was cut off and we have not found any credible source for that information. Police later found a fingerprint on an envelope in Christian's abandoned car, which led them to the apartment where they found Christian's body in a trash can in the kitchen. She had been dismembered.

Again, police have not confirmed the mutilation of her breast. Investigators say they later determined that she had been held for at least two days during which she was tortured, raped, and murdered. Newsom's body was found by a railroad worker near some railroad tracks in East Knoxville.

The perpetrators of this crime?
So, tell me, was this crime racially motivated. Was it a hate crime? Was it more or less heinous than the Trayvon Martin case?

What is as interesting as it is tragic is the fact this case did not receive the level of media attention and national exposure the Trayvon Martin case has received. The question is why? Does this constitute a double standard both by the media and the authorities? Why was there no FBI investigation? Why didn't the President (Bush) speak out on this horrible crime?

Equally as important as the foregoing questions is the reality that justice was ultimately served. As it will be in the case of Trayvon Martin.

The broader, and more pressing question is when will people recognize we are all part of the same race? The HUMAN race. As such all are entitled to the basic respect and dignity everyone is rightfully deserving just by the simple fact they are human. At least until such time they prove they aren't.

Link to the above: Wikipedia,

Tuesday, April 10, 2012

Ashley Judd Speaks Out...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

Rarely do I visit the Daily Beast. When I do, more often than not I find the material less than interesting or substantive. Today was just a bit different.

The Conversation about women’s bodies exists largely outside of us, while it is also directed at (and marketed to) us, and used to define and control us. The Conversation about women happens everywhere, publicly and privately. We are described and detailed, our faces and bodies analyzed and picked apart, our worth ascertained and ascribed based on the reduction of personhood to simple physical objectification. Our voices, our personhood, our potential, and our accomplishments are regularly minimized and muted.

As an actor and woman who, at times, avails herself of the media, I am painfully aware of the conversation about women’s bodies, and it frequently migrates to my own body. I know this, even though my personal practice is to ignore what is written about me. I do not, for example, read interviews I do with news outlets. I hold that it is none of my business what people think of me. I arrived at this belief after first, when I began working as an actor 18 years ago, reading everything. I evolved into selecting only the “good” pieces to read. Over time, I matured into the understanding that good and bad are equally fanciful interpretations. I do not want to give my power, my self-esteem, or my autonomy, to any person, place, or thing outside myself. I thus abstain from all media about myself. The only thing that matters is how I feel about myself, my personal integrity, and my relationship with my Creator. Of course, it’s wonderful to be held in esteem and fond regard by family, friends, and community, but a central part of my spiritual practice is letting go of otheration. And casting one’s lot with the public is dangerous and self-destructive, and I value myself too much to do that {emphasis mine}. {Read More}

I am quite certain Ayn Rand would be smiling in agreement where see here today.

Via: Memeorandum