Monday, October 29, 2012

Exposing the Obama Administation Benghazi Cover UP...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
-vs- Tyranny

The Benghazi debacle and subsequent cover up requires, in fact DEMANDS answers from the inept administration who is responsible for it. From the Boston Herald.

Last week, in the final presidential debate on foreign policy, Mitt Romney made a deliberate decision not to go after the president on Benghazi. Romney’s task was to present himself as a plausible commander in chief. To do so, he needed to remain above the fray and avoid getting into a spat with the president over the details of the attack on the U.S. consulate in Libya.

Romney was right (politically) to avoid a tit-for-tat with Obama on Benghazi. With the White House changing its story daily, any attempt by Romney to criticize the president on this issue would only have left him with a major case of whip-lash.

But the public and the media must demand answers. What exactly happened this past Sept. 11 in Libya? And why was the Obama administration unable or unwilling to prevent it?

The Benghazi controversy is not one, but four separate scandals — each of which calls into question the president’s leadership.

First, Benghazi raises legitimate questions about Obama’s competence as commander in chief. In last week’s debate, the president said that his No. 1 job is to keep Americans safe. Then why did he not do so in Benghazi?

Was the president unaware of the threat in Libya? Or did he simply fail to treat it with the requisite level of seriousness? The British saw the danger and closed their consulate months earlier. Once the attack was under way, why did the president fail to send assistance?

Second, the president’s reaction to Benghazi reveals his utter lack of integrity. That he allowed Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to fall on her sword rather than man-up and accept responsibility for his administration’s failure was not only despicable, it was cowardly.

Third, Benghazi reveals the president to be dishonest. It is now clear that the administration knew almost immediately that the Benghazi attack was a premeditated act of terrorism. But, in order to protect his own political hide, the president engaged in a misinformation campaign aimed at deceiving the American public.

And the president continues to lie daily in order to hide the cover-up... {Read More}

Via: Memeorandum

Is Obama Just Incompentent or is He a Criminal?... Some of Us Remember Watergate

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
-vs- Tyranny

In regard to the terror attack on the Benghazi Consulate, and the Presidents bungling, Senator McCain's analysis is right on.

The Hill - Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) on Sunday questioned whether the Obama administration was engaged in a Watergate-esque “cover-up” of its handling of the September attack on the U.S. Consulate in Libya.

"This is either a massive cover-up or an incompetence that is not acceptable service to the American people," he said on CBS's "Face the Nation."

McCain said that information that has surfaced since the attacks, which claimed the lives of four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens, indicates the narrative provided by the White House in the days following was "patently false."

"There was no demonstration. So for literally days and days they told the American people something that had no basis in fact whatsoever," he said.

The White House initially claimed that the attacks on the consulate in Benghazi were sparked by spontaneous anger over an anti-Muslim film created in the U.S., but later said the attack had been planned and carried out by armed militants.

The administration has said their public statements on the attack were based on the intelligence that was then available.

President Obama's handling of the situation has become a campaign issue, with Mitt Romney and congressional Republicans accusing him of waiting too long to call the assault a terrorist act and questioning if the administration downgraded security ahead of the violence.

The issue has provided the Romney campaign an opening on foreign policy, an issue that the Obama team saw as a strength thanks to the president’s drawdown of troops from Afghanistan and Iraq and the successful mission to kill al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.

And McCain, in his advice to Romney, indicated foreign policy should become a larger part of the discussion in the waning days of the campaign.

"I think that national security, as I said, foreign policy has entered into this discussion," he said.

Watch video here.

Via: Memeorandum

Sunday, October 28, 2012

Bye Bye Anon, You Have Outlived Your Welcome...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
-vs- Tyranny

This site has been the object of a steady and ongoing attack by one Anon whose sole purpose has been simply to harass. The prior post was worded and published precisely as it was because I knew it would draw out its true and sinister intention, to shut down someone who dared to differ with its controlling, progressive collectivist, and fascistic ideology.

My work with Anon is now complete. It has been banned from this site for as long as Rational Nation USA remains in operation. Which, health permitting will be for a very long time. Hopefully Anon the Cowardly will be the last troll I will ever have to ban from this site. Honest dialogue and opinions are welcome here. Personal attacks on anyone of the type Anon freely engaged in will not get published in the future.

Anon, and other progressives just like it have but one goal in mind, that is to silence opposing views. They demand to dictate the terms and in so doing control the debate. Individuals that value freedom and liberty, indeed cherish it, should be be very concerned with the its that make up the extreme progressive collectivist fringe. Anon, and his disingenuous progressive brethren are the greatest danger to freedom of speech and individual liberty this nation has ever known. When they cannot win their argument in rational discourse they resort to bludgeoning their opponents with belligerence, lies, and the use of defamation and/or character assignation.

Unfortunately there is little difference between the major political parties as I noted in previous posts. As it now stands in 2012 the differences are simply a matter of degree. Either a slow ride to the cliff edge and the eventual fall, or an accelerated and perhaps headlong leap to the same cliff  edge and ending.

There is certainly still time. It will however take Americans who value private property rights, freedom of choice and individual liberties, confined within the laws of a free society respecting the same rights of all to enjoy the benefits of freedom, for this nation to retain the rights and freedoms fought for over two centuries ago.

Go to the polls November 6th, vote your conscience, and never let the likes of one it Anon convince you otherwise.

Goodbye Anon...




Saturday, October 27, 2012

Does the Election Matter? Historical Data Indictes Not....

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
-vs- Tyranny

As America moves closer towards a collectivist society, a movement that has been supported by rEpublican and dEmocrat Presidents and Congresses alike, one should ask themselves the question... Does it really matters who is elected President November 6th? Observing present realities, and looking at the national trend for the past 100 plus years it should be obvious to everyone that socialism has been, and continues to be on the march. Irrespective of which political party holds power, who the President is, or whether the Supreme Court is liberal or conservative, socialism has been steadily woven into the fabric of this once capitalist and individualistic nation.

Whether or not the majority understands why this is occurring, or the dangers it presents to property rights, freedom, and individual liberties is debatable. For freedom and liberty to survive as this nation (rightly) understood the concepts at the time of its founding requires an understanding of the concepts and principles that define rights.

Individual Rights

A “right” is a moral principle defining and sanctioning a man’s freedom of action in a social context. There is only one fundamental right (all the others are its consequences or corollaries): a man’s right to his own life. Life is a process of self-sustaining and self-generated action; the right to life means the right to engage in self-sustaining and self-generated action—which means: the freedom to take all the actions required by the nature of a rational being for the support, the furtherance, the fulfillment and the enjoyment of his own life. (Such is the meaning of the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.)

The concept of a “right” pertains only to action—specifically, to freedom of action. It means freedom from physical compulsion, coercion or interference by other men.

Thus, for every individual, a right is the moral sanction of a positive—of his freedom to act on his own judgment, for his own goals, by his own voluntary, uncoerced choice. As to his neighbors, his rights impose no obligations on them except of a negative kind: to abstain from violating his rights.

The right to life is the source of all rights—and the right to property is their only implementation. Without property rights, no other rights are possible. Since man has to sustain his life by his own effort, the man who has no right to the product of his effort has no means to sustain his life. The man who produces while others dispose of his product, is a slave.

Bear in mind that the right to property is a right to action, like all the others: it is not the right to an object, but to the action and the consequences of producing or earning that object. It is not a guarantee that a man will earn any property, but only a guarantee that he will own it if he earns it. It is the right to gain, to keep, to use and to dispose of material values.

Man holds these rights, not from the Collective nor for the Collective, but against the Collective—as a barrier which the Collective cannot cross; . . . these rights are man’s protection against all other men. {Excerpts, Ayn Rand Lexicon

These are concepts and principles that have been handily and readily rejected by rEpublican and dEmocrat leaders alike. The reason? Both desire and lust after power and control.

Good luck future generations of Americans. Unless something changes soon the citizens of this nation will be little more to their rulers than property to be used however the state wishes.

Friday, October 26, 2012

Obama Tossed Under the Bus by General Petraeus...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
-vs- Tyranny

As the Obama administration continues the Benghazi spin more relevant information continues to surface. It isn't at all supportive of the administration or recent CIA narrative.

The Weekly Standard - Breaking news on Benghazi: the CIA spokesman, presumably at the direction of CIA director David Petraeus, has put out this statement: "No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate. ”

So who in the government did tell “anybody” not to help those in need? Someone decided not to send in military assets to help those Agency operators. Would the secretary of defense make such a decision on his own? No.

It would have been a presidential decision. There was presumably a rationale for such a decision. What was it? When and why—and based on whose counsel obtained in what meetings or conversations—did President Obama decide against sending in military assets to help the Americans in need?

Can there be any doubt but what the spin from the administration will continue? Perhaps soon the nation will know the complete truth. It can't come soon enough.

Via: Memeorandum

Obama Eyeing Control Of CEO's Compensation By the Government...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
-vs- Tyranny

The President is interested in dictating CEO's compensation. Government control of salary rather than market determination. First the CEO and executives of companies. How long one wonders before this President and his progressive dEmocrat party comes after salaries of the next echelon of managers. And so on. Remember, socialism takes many forms. One is called fascism. Like communism it subjugates the individual and individual initiative and success to the "collective good" of society. Or put another way what an all powerful government by the few decides is good.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama said in an interview released on Thursday that the next important step for making the financial sector safer is to make sure executive pay is less closely tied to risky bets.

In an interview to be published on Friday in Rolling Stone magazine, Obama said that despite passage of Dodd-Frank financial reform legislation, there is more to be done to make financial markets safe after the damage caused by the crisis of 2007-2009.

"The single biggest thing that I would like to see is changing incentives on Wall Street and how people get compensated," Obama said. It's questionable, even after enactment of Dodd-Frank reforms, that those incentives have completely been changed, he added.

The Rolling Stone interview stirred controversy because of the president's use, at one point, of a barnyard epithet that some saw as an attack on Republican Mitt Romney.

The White House did not dispute the remarks but a re-election campaign official stressed that the comments were "part of a casual conversation at the end of the interview." The wide-ranging interview covers Obama's first term, what he views as his biggest accomplishments and his fierce fight with Romney for the White House.

Via: Memeorandum

Thursday, October 25, 2012

Collectivist Obama Discussing Rand...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
-vs- Tyranny

Considering President Obama's leftist progressive philosophy the following comes as no surprise.

The Blaze - In a new interview with journalistic standard-bearer Rolling Stone, President Barack Obama gives a back-handed smack to vice presidential hopeful Paul Ryan and famed author Ayn Rand.

t’s no secret that Paul (and countless others) are fans of Rand’s work. “I grew up reading Ayn Rand, and it taught me quite a bit about who I am and what my value systems are and what my beliefs are. It’s inspired me so much that it’s required reading in my office for all my interns and my staff,” Ryan has said previously. But liberals have slandered Ryan, portraying him as more of a fanatic than a fan. Rob Zerban, the Wisconsin Democrat trying to unseat Ryan in the House of Representatives, claims that the Republican congressman has a “disturbing” obsession.

President Obama is seizing on this running meme and continuing his efforts to paint his Republican challengers as scary right-wing extremists. When Rolling Stone lobbed him a softball about Ryan’s admiration for Rand’s work, Obama responded:

“Ayn Rand is one of those things that a lot of us, when we were 17 or 18 and feeling misunderstood, we’d pick up. Then, as we get older, we realize that a world in which we’re only thinking about ourselves and not thinking about anybody else, in which we’re considering the entire project of developing ourselves as more important than our relationships to other people and making sure that everybody else has opportunity – that that’s a pretty narrow vision. It’s not one that, I think, describes what’s best in America. Unfortunately, it does seem as if sometimes that vision of a ‘you’re on your own’ society has consumed a big chunk of the Republican Party.”

When asked if he himself had ever read Rand, Obama replied, “Sure.”

Ha: I’d love to know which one of his “Marxist professors” had Ayn Rand on their required reading list.

Precisely, a very big Ha indeed.

Via: Memeorandum

Polls, What Are They Good For?...

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

Click to Enlarge

Having read the recent ABC/Washington Post poll I can only conclude the American electorate has yet to make up its mind.

A poll that reflects a majority of likely voters leaning to Romney and trusting him on the economy while at the same reflecting a majority of registered or likely voters expect Obama will win reelection says the outcome is still very uncertain. So, we wait impatiently until Tuesday November 6th after the "fat lady sings" to find what the future might bring. Given the two major candidates the future may very well not be bright.

ABC News - Mitt Romney has seized further advantage on economic issues at the core of the 2012 campaign, taking him to 50 percent support among likely voters vs. 47 percent for Barack Obama – Romney’s highest vote-preference result of the contest to date.

The difference between the two candidates is within the margin of sampling error in the latest ABC News/Washington Post daily tracking poll, and their individual support levels have not significantly changed. But the momentum on underlying issues and attributes is Romney’s.

Romney’s gains are clear especially in results on the economy. This poll, produced for ABC by Langer Research Associates, finds that likely voters now pick Romney over Obama in trust to handle the economy by 52-43 percent – the first time either candidate has held a clear lead over the other on this central issue.

Equally important, Romney has erased Obama’s customary advantage on which candidate better understands the economic problems of average Americans. Today, 48 percent pick Obama, 46 percent Romney – essentially a dead heat. Yesterday and today mark the first time in the campaign that Obama hasn’t had at least a marginally significant lead on economic empathy.

Within-group trends on both these economic measures were covered in yesterday’s analysis; they reflect movement in Romney’s direction almost exclusively among white men, and particularly among less-educated white men.

SIGNALS – There are other signals of Romney’s gains. Expectations are one: Fifty-two percent of likely voters now expect Obama to win the election, down from a peak of 61 percent in late September. Forty percent expect Romney to win – still well fewer than half, but up by 8 percentage points.

Notably, political independents divide by 42-46 percent on whether they expect Obama or Romney to win; that’s shifted dramatically from 61-31 percent in Obama’s favor. Whites, likewise, have moved from a 55-38 percent expectation in Obama’s favor Sept. 29 to 44-48 percent now. {Read More}

Really all this tells us is that over the next 11 days it will continue to be close, that neither candidate is strong, and that America is not happy. But we already knew that didn't we?

Via: Memeorandum

Monday, October 22, 2012

Classic Blowhard, the "Donald" Trump...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
-vs- Tyranny

Mr. Donald (the blowhard) Trump has announced he is going to release a "bombshell" that is "very very big" about President Obama. He has assured FOX News that they will be covering it in "a very big fashion." He anticipates it will be released Wednesday. Presumably (IMNHO) to allow time for spin activity following tonight's debate.

Right... Like the pompous blowhard that he is it is really all about the buildup of negative imagery and creating the perception of dastardly and apocalyptic consequences should America reelect President Obama. Perhaps it is so that if Obama is reelected it may very well be a net negative for the country (I believe it is). However, the truth is the country will still be here in another four years. We will undoubtedly have many more opportunities to alter direction and correct bad situations come 2016. Just as we always have. Just as the founders intended.

So, get serious dude. People of intelligence will judge Obama on his performance in office. Ascertaining how his decisions have affected them PERSONALLY as well as how they have affected the country will determine how informed individuals will vote. They really don't need, nor do they  want the likes of your pompous a*s feeding them a line of BS that simply put suits your own personal agenda.

Of course this is just my opinion and many will disagree. However, I'm betting a boatload more will find themselves if not in full agreement at least in partial agreement.

Politico - Donald Trump said on "Fox & Friends" Monday that he'll reveal “very big” news about President Barack Obama by Wednesday, but declined to give any hints about his plan.

“Something very, very big concerning the president of the United States,” he said. “It’s going to be very big. I know one thing — you will cover it in a very big fashion.”

Trump, who said he will announce the news on Twitter “sometime probably Wednesday,” suggested it could “possibly” impact the election. The businessman, who considered a run for the White House but endorsed former Gov. Mitt Romney, has long been a high-profile Obama birther conspiracy theorist.

 Watch the debate tonight. Think critically. Reflect on the last four years and how it has affected you and your family. At the end of the day and the process vote your conscience. I know I will be doing exactly that.

 Via: Memeorandum

Saturday, October 20, 2012

As the Obama Administration and a Compliant Lame Stream Media Continue the Benghazi Spin...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
-vs- Tyranny

From the lame stream media, no doubt fed by the not to be trusted Obama administration, we are hearing more false spin from dutiful left wing wing nuts.

The Washington Post The Romney campaign may have misfired with its suggestion that statements by President Obama and U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice about the Benghazi attack last month weren’t supported by intelligence, according to documents provided by a senior U.S. intelligence official.

“Talking points” prepared by the CIA on Sept. 15, the same day that Rice taped three television appearances, support her description of the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. Consulate as a reaction to Arab anger about an anti-Muslim video prepared in the United States. According to the CIA account, “The currently available information suggests that the demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and evolved into a direct assault against the U.S. Consulate and subsequently its annex. There are indications that extremists participated in the violent demonstrations.”

The CIA document went on: “This assessment may change as additional information is collected and analyzed and as currently available information continues to be evaluated.” This may sound like self-protective boilerplate, but it reflects the analysts’ genuine problem interpreting fragments of intercepted conversation, video surveillance and source reports.

The senior intelligence official said the analysts’ judgment was based in part on monitoring of some of the Benghazi attackers, which showed they had been watching the Cairo protests live on television and talking about them before they assaulted the consulate.

“We believe the timing of the attack was influenced by events in Cairo,” the senior official said, reaffirming the Cairo-Benghazi link. He said that judgment is repeated in a new report prepared this week for the House intelligence committee. {Read More}

More wing nuttery from the progressive lame stream media.

Via: Memeorandum

Friday, October 19, 2012

Enough To Sicken Even the Most Hardy Free Man and Free Woman...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
-vs- Tyranny

What you are about to read will sicken you. That is if you are a liberty minded individual who values freedom, private property rights, opportunity to succeed based on your individual merits, and ethical objective behavior.

If you're American and it doesn't sicken you then may I suggest a relocation to the Middle East or perhaps Venezuela?

The Telegraph Take a close look at this promotional poster. Notice anything? Alongside the symbols of Christianity, Judaism, Jainism and so on is one of the wickedest emblems humanity has conceived: the hammer and sickle.

For three generations, the badge of the Soviet revolution meant poverty, slavery, torture and death. It adorned the caps of the chekas who came in the night. It opened and closed the propaganda films which hid the famines. It advertised the people's courts where victims of purges and show-trials were condemned. It fluttered over the re-education camps and the gulags. For hundreds of millions of Europeans, it was a symbol of foreign occupation. Hungary, Lithuania and Moldova have banned its use, and various former communist countries want it to be treated in the same way as Nazi insignia.

Yet here it sits on a poster in the European Commission, advertising the moral deafness of its author (I hope that's what it is, rather than lingering nostalgia). The Bolshevist sigil celebrates the ideology which, in strict numerical terms, must be reckoned the most murderous ever devised by our species. That it can be passed unremarked day after day in the corridors of Brussels is nauseating.

Indeed, Indeed...

Via: Memeorandum

Rep. Joe Walsh Proves His Relative Ignorance...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
-vs- Tyranny

In continues to amaze. I mean what is it with the social conservative politicians (socons) that they continue to make themselves look foolish to any knowledgeable and thinking person?

Rep. Joe Walsh's statement that because of current medical science there is no longer ever any reason to terminate a pregnancy to save the life of the mother is just plain nonsense. Of course Mr. Walsh (R-IL) is hoping that UN-knowledgeable people will accept his statement without question, thereby moving the socon agenda further down the road.

Make now mistake about it, individuals like Joe Walsh, and the religious right want to control the lives and health of women. All in the name of what they mistakenly view is in the name of a higher moral principle.

Walsh, and organizations that support him and those like him present a very real threat to the rights of all individuals. Hopefully Mr. Walsh will be soundly defeated in his reelection bid this coming November.

THE HILL - Republican Rep. Joe Walsh (Ill.) said Thursday that abortions are "absolutely" never necessary to save the lives of pregnant women.

"With modern technology and science, you can't find one instance," Walsh said. "There is no such exception as life of the mother, and as far as health of the mother, same thing."

The comment was first reported by WGN radio. It came after a debate between Walsh, a House freshman, and his opponent, Democrat Tammy Duckworth, an Iraq War veteran. The race is a likely Democratic pickup, according to ratings by The Hill.

Planned Parenthood Action Fund released a statement blasting Walsh.

“Joe Walsh’s ignorance about women’s health is alarming. It is deeply troubling that he and some politicians have such a fundamental disregard for women and women’s health. As the advocate for Planned Parenthood health centers, we know that ending a pregnancy can often be a very complex, personal decision and that there are absolutely times that a woman’s life depends on it," said Executive Vice President Dawn Laguens.

Abortion and women's health issues have been at the forefront of several races this election cycle, including the contest for the White House.

The Republican Party platform would ban the procedure with no exceptions, and the Democratic Party platform would allow it with no exceptions. Most Republicans, however, do believe in exceptions in the case of rape, incest and life of the mother.

In the interest of educating Rep. Walsh the following article is based on sound science and demonstrates the startling lack of knowledge he possesses. Certainly there are other criteria, but I shall leave it for another discussion. There is sure to be many more opportunities to expose the ignorance of politicians like Rep. Walsh.

Washington University in St. Louis Scientists have identified genetic errors in women with autoimmune diseases that increase the risk of preeclampsia, a potentially life-threatening condition that occurs in 10 percent of all pregnancies.

The researchers also found the same mutations in some women with preeclampsia who don’t have underlying autoimmune diseases. Their findings provide genetic targets for new treatments and suggest that screening tests could one day identify women at risk of the condition, which accounts for 15 percent of all preterm births.

“We’re going to need to confirm these links in a larger study, but if they are validated it may be possible to develop better ways to identify and treat women at risk,” says senior author John P. Atkinson, MD, of Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis.

Preeclampsia typically develops after the 20th week of pregnancy. It causes dangerously high blood pressure, protein in the urine, headaches and swelling of a mother’s hands and face. The only treatment is to induce delivery, which can be fatal to the baby if preeclampsia strikes too early in pregnancy. {Read More}

Via: Memeorandum

Thursday, October 18, 2012

DOMA Struck Down By New York Appeals Court...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
-vs- Tyranny

As a supporter of equal rights the decision by a New York Appeals court striking down DOMA, the second court in the nation to do so, is welcome news. Especially satisfying is that Dennis Jacobs, a conservative judge in New York wrote the following; "Homosexuals are not in a position to adequately protect themselves from the discriminatory wishes of the majoritarian public." Judge Jacobs statement, in a nutshell defines one of the greatest dangers inherent in a true democracy, something progressives advocate regularly. Rule by the majority can, and often does, create a sort of tyranny for the minority. Such is the case with DOMA.

New York (CNN) - A federal appeals court in New York became the nation's second to strike down the Defense of Marriage Act, finding that the Clinton-era law's denial of federal benefits to married same-sex couples is unconstitutional.

The divisive act, which was passed in 1996, bars federal recognition of such marriages and says other states cannot be forced to recognize them.

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals determined Thursday that the federal law violates the Constitution's equal protection clause
, ruling in favor of a widow named Edith Windsor, an 82-year-old lesbian who sued the federal government for charging her more than $363,000 in estate taxes after being denied the benefit of spousal deductions.

"What I'm feeling is elated," said Windsor. "Did I ever think it could come to be, altogether? ... Not a chance in hell."

The case centered on the money Windsor wanted back, but raised the more looming question of whether the federal government can continue to ignore a state's recognition of her marriage and financially penalize her as a result.

"Homosexuals are not in a position to adequately protect themselves from the discriminatory wishes of the majoritarian public," wrote Dennis Jacobs, a conservative judge in New York.

A federal appeals court in Boston made a similar ruling in May, but the moves are considered largely symbolic as the issue is expected to eventually be taken up by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Man tells senators: Defense of Marriage Act cost me my home

"This court has a limited jurisdiction," CNN legal analyst Paul Callan said. "But this is a very favorable decision for those who believe that the Defense of Marriage (Act) unconstitutionally discriminates against same-sex couples."

Those who back striking down the law "believe this decision will give them a very strong position arguing before the U.S. Supreme Court in the future," he said.

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo also weighed in on the three-judge-panel's decision, saying it "provides further momentum for national progress on this important civil rights issue." {Read More}

Seeing the courts uphold the principle of individual civil rights over that of majoritarian rights is indeed a very good thing for for us all.

Via: Memeorandum

Chris Matthews on the Constitutionality of Questioning a Sitting President...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
-vs- Tyranny

Chris Matthews once again proving his grasp of the Constitution is limited. Of course we all know he has become a great one for "winging it" of late. However, this recent commentary (opinion) from Mr. Matthew is over the top vintage progressivism on display.

Washington Examiner - On MSNBC’s “Hardball” Wednesday evening, Chris Matthews discussed the theatrics of the presidential debate with James Lipton, longtime host of “Inside the Actor’s Studio.” Lipton offered some unremarkable observations — he called Mitt Romney “the boss who tells lame jokes and waits for everybody to laugh or else” — but what made the segment remarkable was Matthews’ reaction to a portion of the debate in which Romney in essence silenced President Obama, telling him he would have a chance to speak later.

Matthews played a video clip of the exchange, in which Romney accused Obama of cutting the number of oil and gas permits awarded on federal lands:

ROMNEY: How much did you cut them by?

OBAMA: I’m happy to answer the question.

ROMNEY: All right. And it is — I don’t think anyone really believes that you’re a person who’s going to be pushing for oil and gas and coal. [Gestures.] You’ll get your chance in a moment. I’m still speaking.

OBAMA: Well –

ROMNEY: And the answer is I don’t believe people think that`s the case because –

ROMNEY: — that wasn’t the question.


ROMNEY: That was a statement.

After the clip ended, Matthews seemed appalled. “I don’t think [Romney] understands the Constitution of the United States,” Matthews said. “He’s the president of the United States. You don’t say, ‘You’ll get your chance.’” {Read More}

Yes indeed Chris. I'm quite sure there are many dictatorial leaders who would find themselves in agreement with you.

Via: Memeorandum


Wednesday, October 17, 2012

Bias or Coincidence?...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
-vs - Tyranny

Guess Who the Arrogant One Is...

Tuesday night's debate between the two presidential candidates was, beyond doubt, a better night. Particular for Obama. There was no question but what he at least had hot blood cursing through his arteries and veins.

Whether it is coincidental or not is of course subjective, but the numbers clearly show a tilt in response time favoring the democratic candidate.

National Review - If you want more time to get your message out in debates, it’s good to be a Democrat.

According to the CNN debate clock, President Obama spoke at greater length than Mitt Romney during both debates, as did Vice President Biden during his debate with Paul Ryan. In the first debate, Obama spoke for 3 minutes, 14 seconds more than Romney — which means he got 8 percent more talking time than Romney. In last night’s debate, Obama spoke for 4 minutes and 18 seconds longer than Romney, giving him 11 percent more talking time. Obama talked for 52 percent of the time when either man had the floor, while Romney talked for 47 percent.

During the vice presidential debate, the gap wasn’t as wide: Biden spoke for 1 minute, 22 seconds more than Ryan. Still, that gave Biden 3 percent more speaking time than Ryan.

Combine the above statistical data with the fact that candidate Romney gets interrupted a bunch more than the President one has has to question just why that is. Yes?

Via: Memeorandum

Tuesday, October 16, 2012

Secretary of State Clinton Accepts Respomsibilty of Lax Embassy Secrity

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
  -vs - Tyranny

Like a loyal political soldier Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton steps up and accepts full responsibility for the lax security in Benghazi that cost Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans their lives.

CBS News - Secretary of State Hillary Clinton sought to take responsibility for the attacks on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, on Sept. 11 in a series of interviews on Monday.

"I take responsibility" for what happened on September 11, Clinton told CNN Monday after arriving in Lima, Peru, for a visit. The series of interviews with U.S. television networks were Clinton's most direct comments on the deadly attack, which killed U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans.

Clinton insisted President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden are not involved in security decisions.

"I want to avoid some kind of political gotcha," she told CNN." {Read More}

Credit to the Secretary of State for shouldering the responsibility for the lax security and resultant loss of life. I'm sure the President will now sleep easier at night.

Via: Memeorabdum

Monday, October 15, 2012

Women Voters In Swing States Push Romney Ahead...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
-vs- Tyranny

Could it be possible? Female support for Romney in the all critical Swing States maybe holding the keys to a Romney win? Another strong debate performance could tip the scales further for Romney. As the race goes down the stretch it's now a sure bet the Obama Team is biting their fingernails. Or knuckles...

Source: USA TODAY/Gallup Poll of Swing States taken Oct. 5-11 in Colo., Fla., Iowa, Mich., Nev., N.H., N.M., N.C., Ohio, Pa., Va. and Wis. Margins of error: +/- 4 to 6 percentage points. Nationwide head-to-head matchup based on Gallup daily tracking poll of registered voters Oct. 10-11. Margin of error: +/- 4 points.Kevin A. Kepple and Susan Page, USA TODAY

USA Today — Mitt Romney leads President Obama by five percentage points among likely voters in the nation's top battlegrounds, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds, and he has growing enthusiasm among women to thank.

As the presidential campaign heads into its final weeks, the survey of voters in 12 crucial swing states finds female voters much more engaged in the election and increasingly concerned about the deficit and debt issues that favor Romney. The Republican nominee now ties the president among women who are likely voters, 48%-48%, while he leads by 12 points among men.

The battle for women, which was apparent in the speakers spotlighted at both political conventions this summer, is likely to help define messages the candidates deliver at the presidential debate Tuesday night and in the TV ads they air during the final 21 days of the campaign. As a group, women tend to start paying attention to election contests later and remain more open to persuasion by the candidates and their ads.

That makes women, especially blue-collar "waitress moms" whose families have been hard-hit by the nation's economic woes, the quintessential swing voters in 2012's close race.

"In every poll, we've seen a major surge among women in favorability for Romney" since his strong performance in the first debate, veteran Democratic pollster Celinda Lake says. "Women went into the debate actively disliking Romney, and they came out thinking he might understand their lives and might be able to get something done for them."

While Lake believes Obama retains an edge among women voters, the changed views of Romney could be "a precursor to movement" to the Republican candidate, she says. "It opens them up to take a second look, and that's the danger for Obama."

Female voters are a critical part of the president's coalition. Four years ago, he led Republican rival John McCain by a single point among men, according to surveys of voters as they left polling places. The decisive Democratic margin of victory came from women, who supported Obama by 13 points.

Now, the USA TODAY/Gallup Poll shows Romney leading Obama 51%-46% among likely voters in the swing states. Men who are likely voters back him 54%-42%. The states are Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin.

Romney pollster Neil Newhouse says the poll shows "encouraging movement" in the wake of the first debate in Denver. Obama pollster Joel Benenson calls the method used to identify likely voters flawed.

"In the last election, Gallup's registered voter model — not its likely voter model — was a much more accurate predictor, with their likely model missing the mark in 2010 by 9 points right before the election," Benenson says. "That explains why Gallup's results are way out of line with a dozen recent swing state polls that show the president with a double-digit lead among women."

Among all registered voters in the survey, Obama leads by nine points among women and by two points overall, 49%-47%.

The poll of 1,023 registered voters, including 869 likely voters, was taken Oct. 5-11 — just after the first presidential debate and before the second one in Hempstead, N.Y. It is the 10th in USA TODAY's series of surveys in the swing states that, in the Electoral College system, are likely to determine the outcome. For the first time, with Election Day looming, the poll includes a screen to identify likely voters.

Romney's improved standing among female voters is "likely to cause major consternation among Obama supporters," says Richard Eichenberg, a Tufts University political scientist who is studying gender differences in state-level polling with Elizabeth Robinson. "If Mr. Romney has tied President Obama among women in swing states, then he has likely taken a step toward winning the election.

"But a word of caution is necessary," Eichenberg adds. "Although swing states share many similarities, President Obama's support among women is holding up well in some of them and less well in others. For example, his support among women is largely unchanged since the first debate in Ohio and Wisconsin, but it is definitely down in Colorado, Virginia and Florida." {Read More}

As it gets closer it gets more interesting.

Via: Memeorandum

Saturday, October 13, 2012

A Break From Politics...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
-vs- Tyranny

Journey Into A Dream
Last Sail

Today is a day I have chosen to take a break from political blogging. Politics can be ugly. Too much time spent in the the battle over political ethics, philosophy, and the general sad state of our nation can, and all to often does color ones view of life and the things that add deeper meaning and beauty to our daily existence.

The pictures displayed above have special meaning for me. They are just two examples of the artistry and talent of someone I am very proud of. The young women who drew the pictures has been developing her talent and ability for some time. Watching her grow in scope and depth over the past few years has been, to say the least very rewarding.

There isn't a lot I can do for this aspiring young artistic talent, except to give her just a little more exposure by posting examples of her work here on the pages of Rational Nation USA. For those who find beauty in the two works posted here please visit Art by Lindsay Carpenter where there are many examples of her artistry. For those who may wish to purchase any of her work you can obtain further information off of her website.

Introducing My Beautiful and Talented Daughter... Lindsay Carpenter

Lindsay Carpenter

Not only can the women draw, paint, and do fantastic photography, she can write extremely well also. I've been trying to get her to write columns for Rational Nation for a couple of years. Guess she is just too busy with her art. That and being smart enough not to get drawn into the game of politics. Sometimes the kids are smarter and wiser than their parents.

Love ya Squirt... I am very proud of the women you have become.

Romney's Recent Gains in Polls Showing "Staying Power"...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
-vs- Tyranny

Nate Silver, the guy who has a rather remarkable record of accuracy in predicting outcomes is now saying Romney's gain in the polls following the first debate is showing signs of staying power. Good news for the Romney campaign and his supporters and reason to cause alarm in the Obama campaign and among his progressives supporters.

The New York Times - Mitt Romney continues to surge in the FiveThirtyEight forecast, and Friday may have featured his best set of polls all year.

The best way to track a change in the polls is to look for instances in which the same firm has surveyed the same state (or the national race) multiple times. The FiveThirtyEight forecast model relies on a procedure very much like this to calculate the overall trend in the race.

Fifteen polls were released on Friday that provided a comparison with another survey conducted between the Democratic convention and last week’s debate in Denver. Mr. Romney gained an average of 4.6 percentage points in these surveys.

That is actually a bit larger than we were showing earlier in the week, when the same exercise put Mr. Romney’s postdebate bounce more in the range of three or four percentage points.

It is not clear whether Mr. Romney is still gaining ground — or whether he benefited from a couple of outlying results. The median change in the polls, which will be less sensitive to potential outliers, was a three-point gain for Mr. Romney, more like earlier in the week.

But unlike earlier, Mr. Romney is now seeing some of his best results in swing state polls. Six of the seven polls published on Friday from such states had him ahead.

Thus, just as the hypothesis of a fading Romney bounce was damaged on Friday, so was the idea (which we critiqued in an earlier post) that his gains would be more modest in the swing states. {Continue Reading For More Analysis}

In his article on October 11th Nate Silver pointed out the President's "swing state firewall" is showing signs of thinning, or becoming "brittle."

At this point in time the momentum is shifting and headed in Romney's direction. It is going to be critical for Romney to repeat his successful first debate performance against the President (two more times) for him to have a shot at winning the election.

Accomplishing the task of defeating Obama in both of the remaining debates won't be easy...

Via: Memeorandum

Friday, October 12, 2012

Socialism Through the Eyes of One Who Saw the Results First Hand...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
-vs- Tyranny

A very big h/t to the Left Coast Rebel. An excellent find!

Thomas Peterffy's personal story via. Youtube...

Thomas Peterffy grew up in socialist Hungary. Despite the fact that he could not speak English when he immigrated to the United States in 1956, Thomas fulfilled the American dream. With hard work and dedication, he started a business that today employs thousands of people. In the 1970s, Thomas bought a seat on the American Stock Exchange. He played a key role in developing the electronic trading of securities and is the founder of Interactive Brokers, an online discount brokerage firm with offices all over the world.

The journey towards socialism can be a slow one. A journey on which our country has been drifting (or sliding) for many years, albeit more in the fascist variant than Marxism. This immigrant from Hungary, a socialist state under the iron fist of the USSR knows first hand what evils can, and often do accompany any of the variants of socialism. A condition of existence in which the individual, and individual initiative is subordinate to the state.

Sound eerily familiar? Just a slight bit? If so do your part to spread the word. If not perhaps you might want to study up some.

Take a trip to CNN for commentary and comments. Indications are this nation is well on its way to the bottom of the slope.

Mr. Wonk -vs- Mr. Smirk...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
-vs- Tyranny

Associated Press/Pool

After last night's Vice Presidential debate, if one can really call it a debate, we have little more information on Romney/Ryan specific policy positions than we had before the debate.

We learned that Smirking Laughing Distracting Gaffe Man Biden can be an effective disruptor. Whether this will play well with independents and those preferring a more serious tone remains to be seen.

At the end of the day the reasonable bet is that the debate won't change the dynamics of the race at all. So, on to the next two Presidential debates where hopefully the rubber finally meets the road. I won't be holding my breath.

WSJ - So now we know what Team Obama's comeback plan was following last week's defeat in the Presidential debate. Unleash Joe Biden to interrupt, filibuster, snarl, smirk and otherwise show contempt for Paul Ryan. The carnival act contributed to the least illuminating presidential or vice presidential debate of our lifetimes.

From the opening bell, Mr. Biden seemed to take to heart the interpretation that President Obama offered this week of his debate performance—that he had been "too polite." That was not a problem for the Veep, whose marching orders were clearly to steamroll the overmatched moderator Martha Raddatz and dismiss everything Mr. Ryan said with a condescending sneer.

By unofficial media counts, Mr. Biden interrupted the Republican some 80 to 100 times. Mr. Ryan let the bully get away with too much for our tastes, at least until he finally pushed back on the interruptions or until Mr. Biden lost steam in the last half hour. But as anyone who's been in a tavern past midnight understands, it's hard to win a fight with a guy who is shouting from the corner bar stool.

No doubt the performance cheered Democrats who needed cheering after last week, but we wonder how well it played with independents or undecided voters who tuned in to learn something.

To the extent that substance mattered, and it didn't count for much, Mr. Biden had his strongest notes on foreign policy. He too glibly rolled past the murders of four Americans at the Benghazi consulate a month ago, attributing the Administration's false early explanations to "the intelligence community." We doubt that's what the investigation will ultimately show. But on Afghanistan, Syria and to a lesser extent Iran, Mr. Biden was more sure-footed than Mr. Ryan. On Syria in particular, Mr. Ryan never said what a Romney Administration would do differently.

Mr. Ryan was stronger on domestic issues, calmly laying out the facts of Mitt Romney's proposals on taxes, Medicare and job creation. Even here, though, the debate devolved into an exchange between Mr. Ryan's policy details and Mr. Biden's free-association appeals to emotion and class solidarity—"Who do you trust on this?" {Read More}

Via: Memeorandum

Thursday, October 11, 2012

Romney Finding the Center...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
-vs- Tyranny

Source: Getty Images

Mitt Romney had a very effective debate night in round #1 versus President Obama, although some of his statements were, to say the least stretches. But I guess that's normal for politicians because Obama had a few stretches as well.

That aside, does anyone really know which side of the fence Romney really stands on? I mean he has actually said he "is seriously conservative" while recently scrambling to the political center.

Now don't get me wrong, the middle ground is perhaps where an elected official ought to be. I mean after all is said and done, once elected aren't elected aren't officials supposed to represent ALL the people of their district, state, and nation, depending on their specific office?

Okay then... Isn't Romney's shift from "seriously conservative" to the center is indicative of  precisely what Romney did as Governor of Massachusetts, a state that is 87% democratic and one of the most liberal states in the nation. If the issue is finding ways to "get the job done" then is can be argued that it is precisely what Romney did in Massachusetts. Something Obama has failed to do as President.

Yeah, Romney is a bit wishy washy for my taste, however, given the alternative he IS the preferable lesser of two evils, at least in my never humble opinion. Certainly at the very least Romney would slow done the growth of government and the headlong rush to the cliff's edge.

For a more left leaning take, just to be fair and balanced, I encourage you to read the following.

The Washington Post - The final weeks of the presidential campaign are bringing Mitt Romney full circle, back to a question that has tugged at him for nearly two decades: What does he really believe?

Although he declared himself “severely conservative” during the ­Republican primaries, the former Massachusetts governor has been sounding more moderate in recent days.

There may be room for argument as to whether Romney’s positions are changing. But the emphasis and tone with which he describes them unquestionably are — on issues that include immigration, taxes, education and health care.

On Tuesday, the candidate, who has repeatedly vowed that he would be “a pro-life president,” told the Des Moines Register editorial board that “there’s no legislation with regards to abortion that I’m familiar with that would become part of my agenda.”

In an interview with ABC News on Wednesday, President Obama said the comment was “another example of Governor Romney hiding positions he’s been campaigning on for a year and a half.”

What remains to be seen is which Romney will be judged as the real one by voters. Will they consider his flexibility disturbing evidence that he lacks principles or a reassuring signal that he would not govern as an ideologue?

At a rally in Las Vegas, former president Bill Clinton mocked Romney’s shifts, saying they were evident in last week’s presidential debate, which was almost universally regarded as a win for the Republican.

“I had a different reaction to that first debate than a lot of people did,” he said, laying it on with his buttery Arkansas drawl. “I thought: ‘Wow, here’s old moderate Mitt. Where ya been, boy? I miss you all these last two years.’ ” {Read More}... Click here for the video.

Thanks so much Bubba for reminding America that back in the day you did the "center shift" from the left to center as well to govern effectively. For this America is grateful.

For those like me who view issues in a more philosophical and ethical light there remains the more ethical alternative.

Via: Memeorandum

Wednesday, October 10, 2012

Security Lax In Benghazi as Foreign Fighters Flow Into Libya From Egypt and On To Benghazi...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
-vs- Tyranny


ABC News - ABC News has learned that Eric Nordstrom, the former Regional Security Officer at the U.S. Embassy in Libya, has told congressional investigators that security at the U.S. diplomatic post in Benghazi, Libya, was “inappropriately low” – and believed that State Department officials stood in the way of his attempts to change that.

Nordstrom and the commander of a 16-member Security Support Team, Lieutenant Colonel Andrew Wood, heard that foreign fighters were flowing across the Egyptian border and were making their way across the border to the Libyan city of Derna – which is to the east of Benghazi — and from there were making their way to Benghazi. But State Department officials seemed oblivious to their Benghazi post’s vulnerability.

Nordstrom was worried -he did not know how much the Americans could rely on members of a local Libyan militia in Benghazi that provided security — the “17th of February Martyrs Brigade.” Mostly merchants and shopkeepers before the war, they seemed eager, but they hadn’t much experience and other than a daily $30 stipend for food from the U.S. Embassy, they hadn’t been paid in months.

Nordstrom had “no idea if they would respond to an attack,” he told investigators.

The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, led by Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., will hold hearings on what went wrong today at noon ET. Nordstrom will testify at that hearing.

Nordstrom twice wrote to the State Department – in March and July 2012 — to beef up the presence of American security officers in Benghazi, but neither time was there a response. At no point from December 2011 through July 2012, when he left Libya, were more than three Diplomatic Security Service agents permanently and simultaneously stationed at the Benghazi post. {Read More}

If we are going to have American Ambassadors and staff in known unfriendly and dangerous area's of the globe wouldn't it seem prudent to significantly elevate the level of security? Apparently such isn't the case with the Obama State Department.

It will be very interesting watching how the investigation by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, led by Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif will proceed. Given the State Department and Obama White House spin...

Rice and White House officials now say those initial accounts were based on early intelligence, since corrected. State Department officials now call the attack unprecedented given the number of gunman, weapons and lethal force used.

it is most certain Obama and his State Department will accept no responsibility.

Via: Memeorandum

Tuesday, October 9, 2012

Even the Progressive Spin Machine Couldn't Help Him...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
-vs- Tyranny

Oops, Guess They're Catching On To Me

There are those who see little real difference between the statist proclivities of Obama and the like proclivities of Romney. For liberty advocates the real disappoint of course is that Gary Johnson, his record, and his vision were pretty much kept under wraps because of the powerful duopolistic system and Gary not being able to compete with the rEpublican and dEmocrat money machines. But as they say it is what it is so we deal with what we end up with. I'll be voting principle and conscience but a small part of me I suppose is smiling because the "lesser of two evils" has moved ahead.

THE HILL - Mitt Romney has overtaken President Obama in a Public Policy Polling survey released on Tuesday.

Romney won 49 percent support from likely voters in the poll, compared to 47 percent for Obama.

It’s the first time all year Romney has led in the poll, which was conducted on behalf of the liberal Daily Kos website and the Service Employees International Union. Obama led 49-45 percent in the group’s previous poll, conducted before last week’s debate.

Romney was boosted in the poll by gains among female voters. Obama still leads 51 to 45 over Romney among women, but he had a 15-percentage-point lead in the previous poll.

It’s the second poll in a row to show Romney swinging to a lead following his historic trouncing of Obama at last week’s debate.

A poll released Monday by the Pew Research Center showed Romney with a 4-point lead nationally. In the Pew poll, Romney enjoyed an 18-point swing among female voters.

Romney also stretched his lead among independents in the PPP poll to 48 percent to 42. In the previous poll he led 44-41 among independent voters.

The first debate between Obama and Romney has significantly shifted momentum in the race. {Read More}

Anyone betting on a threepeat?

Via: Memeorandum

Monday, October 8, 2012

Venezuelan "Strongman" Wins Reelection, Obama Administration Congratulates Venezuela

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
-vs- Tyranny

Philosophic and Political Camaraderie?
A ruler who has proven himself to be anti USA at almost every turn has handily won reelection to the Presidency in Venezuela. Reports are voter turn out was 90%.

The Weekly Standard - Yesterday, Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chavez "won" reelection. Today, the White House is congratulating Venezuela on that outcome.

From the pool report, which details a gaggle held by White House spokesman Jay Carney:

-Carney said US congratulates Venezuelan people on its election, while noting the US has its differences with Chavez. {Read More}

Via: Memeorandum

Sunday, October 7, 2012

A Proper Ethical and Moral Code, Has America Lost its Bearings?...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
-vs- Tyranny

As the election draws ever closer it is becoming quite evident We the People are destined to get another screwing no matter which candidate prevails. I find myself just shaking my head and acknowledging the battle for liberties lost and ever again realizing the full natural rights of man is now but a fading and ever more distant dream of what once was.

We have slowly and willingly allowed the forces that propelled us to achieve greatness as a people and nation to be turned into a force that will ultimately destroy us. Witnessing the forces at work that have torn, and continue to tear at the philosophical principles this nation was founded on I no longer have the stamina or desire to describe that which should be clear to all. So I will allow another to say it. And say it with clarity, accuracy, and boldness...

Man's Rights - If one wishes to advocate a free society-that is, capitalism-one must realize that its indispensable foundation is the principle of individual rights. If one wishes to uphold individual rights, one must realize that capitalism is the only system that can uphold and protect them. And if one wishes to gauge the relationship of freedom to the goals of today's intellectuals, one must gauge it by the fact that the concept of individual rights is evaded, distorted, perverted, and seldom discussed, most conspicuously by the so-called "conservatives."

"Rights" are a moral concept- the concept that provides a logical transition from the principles guiding an individuals actions to the principles guiding his relationship with others- the concept that preserves and protects individual morality in a social-context-the link between the moral code of a man and the legal code of of a society, between ethics and poliics. Individual rights arev the means of subordinating society to moral law.

Every political system is based on some code of ethics. The dominate ethics of mankind's history were variants of the altruist-collectivist doctrine which subordinated the individual to some higher authority, either mystical or social. Consequently, most political systems were variants of the same statist tyranny, differing only in degree, not in basic principle, limited only by the accident of tradition, of chaos, of bloody strife and periodic collapse. Under all such systems, morality was a code applicable to the individual, but not to society. Society was placed outside the moral law, as its embodiment or source or exclusive interpreter-and the inculcation of self-sacrificial devotions to social duty was regarded as the main purpose of ethics in man's earthly existence.

Since there is no such entity as "society," since society is only a number of individual men, this meant, in practice, that the rulers of society were exempt from moral law; subject only to the traditional rituals, they held total power and extracted blind obedience-on the implicit principal of: "The good is that which is good for society (or for the tribe, the race, the nation), and the ruler's edicts are its voice on earth."

This was true of of all statist systems, under all variants of the altruist-collectivist ethics, mystical or social. "The Divine Rights of Kings" summarizes the political theory of the first- "Vox populi, vox dei", of the second. As witness: the theocracy of Egypt, with the Pharaohs as an embodied God-the unlimited majority rule or democracy of Athens- the welfare state run by the Emperors of Rome- the Inquisition of the late Middle Ages-the absolute monarchy of France-the welfare state of Bismarck's Prussia-the gas chambers of of Nazi Germany- the slaughterhouses of the Soviet Union.

All these political systems were expressions of the altruist-collectivist ethics-and their common characteristic is the fact that society stood above the moral law, as an omnipotent, sovereign whim worshiper. Thus, politically, all these systems were variants of an amoral society.

The most profoundly revolutionary achievement of the United States of America was the subordination of society to moral law. {Emphasis mine}

Profound truths. However, until such time as the educational system, the business community, our corrupt politicians, and the general electorate understands these moral and ethical principles, and begins to respect and practice them this nation will continue it's reactionary slide back to the tyrannical past from which it initially rebelled.

Sadly, neither major political party and by extension neither candidate has a clue. At this point in the game I wonder how many Americans really have a clue any longer as well.

For more information on the above quoted work please visit here.

Thursday, October 4, 2012

A Night of Truths, Half Truths, and REAL Stretches

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
-vs- Tyranny

Debate night one is in the history book. Spinning by both sides has progressed nicely and of course as expected. However, few who actually watched the debate in its entirety would dispute who the stronger, most assertive, and presidential candidate was, thus "winning" the debate. Romney was unquestionably that winner on last night.

Presidential debates are, or at least should be more about the issues facing Americans and the nation they inhabit than the theatrical. But as we all know perception is reality to most people and thus Romney won hands down on perception.

Romney was confident, upbeat, strong and convincing in his delivery. He had a good grasp of the issues and really took the debate to the President. He in short was having fun as well as debating.

Obama on the other hand seemed distracted, halting, at times unsure. He reminded us more of a professor (which he is) than an effective leader. At times it appeared as though he just didn't want to be there. He actually looked tired and defeated at times.

Sorting through the statements made by the candidates as well as deciphering the pundits commentary in the attempt to separate truth from partial truth or outright falsehoods can be a daunting task. With the busy lives most people lead, many of them busy trying to find a good paying job, it is difficult to keep on top of all the facts. When knowing the facts is the basis on which individuals ought to be making their decision on who to vote for.

Unfortunately some qualified candidates for the job of president do not get a place at the debate. Complements of the great American political system know as the American duopoly. But I digress.

Here are some snippets to help sort things out a bit, or perhaps generate more questions.

CNN - Last night's debate was full of numbers and bold statements. Check out a slate of fact checks from the team at CNN: Fact Check: Job creation versus unemployment {More}

New York Daily News - Obama and Republican rival Mitt Romney spun one-sided stories in their first presidential debate, not necessarily bogus, but not the whole truth. {More}

THE WEEK - Mitt Romney stretched the truth in the Denver debate. So did President Obama. A look at how various nonpartisan fact-checkers scored the debate {More}

THE BLAZE - Here Are Some of the Biggest Economic Fibs & Untruths From Wednesday’s Debate -

Editor’s Note: The following “fact check” was composed by The Associated Press. Below, find the inconsistencies the AP claims to have found during last night’s U.S. presidential debate. {More}

After all was said and done I am now more sure than ever I won't be changing my vote.

Via: Memeorandum

Wednesday, October 3, 2012

Debate Night Comment Thread...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
-vs- Tyranny

Debate #1 is now history. We have heard what the news networks and pundits have said. What is important is what you the people have to say.

So... what say you?

Tuesday, October 2, 2012

On Obama and "Rev." Jeremiah Wright...

by: Les Carpenter
National Nation USA
-vs- Tyranny

h/t The Daily Caller

Hmm? Follow the link for the full story.

Via: Memeorandum

If It Walks Like a Coverup and It Talks Like a Coverup It Is Most Likely a Coverup...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
-vs- Tyranny

As more information continues to surface we can be sure the Obama administration will find new and ingenious ways to keep its spin in high gear. Staying in power, even when undeserved, is the top priority. No mater what it takes.

Daily Beast - Jihadists twice set off explosives at the consulate prior to the incident that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens, and announced threats on Facebook about escalating attacks on Western targets in the run-up to the 9/11 anniversary, according to whistleblowers reaching out to House Republicans.


Until Sept. 19, eight days after the consulate attack, senior administration officials had said it resulted spontaneously from riots at the U.S. embassy in Cairo against an Internet video denigrating the Muslim prophet. Spokesmen for the State Department and the National Security Council did not return emails late Monday evening.

Rep. Chaffetz told The Daily Beast Monday that the allegations detailed in the letter were based on whistleblowers he described as “people who have firsthand knowledge of the incidents themselves.” Chaffetz declined to provide more details about the whistleblowers other than to say they were U.S. government employees...{Read More}

Indeed. One has to wonder where the MSM will eventually land on this one. Given the MSM's demonstrably pro Obama bias it is likely the "hush" will be ignored or glossed over by the MSM. A great disservice to our republic for sure.

For more news and insightful commentary; Power Line, The Daily Caller, The Washington Examiner, and THE OTHER McCAIN.

Via: Memeorandum

Monday, October 1, 2012

CNN Poll Showing Tight Race Going Into Debates...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
-vs- Tyranny

While Obama is leading in a CNN poll two days before the presidential debates there remains opportunity for Romney to close the gap. Obama's lead is within the margin of error.

Understanding polls are at best statistical indicators of public sentiment, and they can be manipulated through the process of weighting, I do not place an abundance of faith in polls. I decided to post these results mostly as a realistic reminder to the euphoria the left seems to be enjoying at the present moment.

Polls by ABC News/Washington Post, Politico/George Washington University, and American Research Group indicate a tight race as well. CNN has averaged the results of all four polls as well as a Fox News poll of last week and the results show Obama at 49% and Romney at 46%, again within the margin of error.

It is clear Romney still has a window of opportunity if, 1) he handle himself well in the presidential debates and provides positive and definitive answers as to his vision and plans for how to get the American economy on track and reduce our national debt and balance the budget , and 2) he remains gaffe free.

Given Obama's vulnerability on recent events in Benghazi and his administration's early attempt to cover up the truth, combined with his vulnerability on the economy and stubborn unemployment stats, really offers Romney a very real window of opportunity. It remains to be seen if he is up to the task of turning public opinion to his favor.

Washinton CNN - Two days before the first presidential debate, a new national survey indicates a very close contest between President Barack Obama and Republican nominee Mitt Romney in the race for the White House.

And according to a CNN/ORC International poll, neither candidate appears to have an edge on the economy, which remains the top issue on the minds of Americans and which may dominate Wednesday night's debate on domestic issues in Denver.

Fifty-percent of likely voters questioned in the CNN survey, which was released Monday, say that if the election were held today, they would vote for the president, with 47% saying they would support Romney, the former Massachusetts governor. The president's three point margin is within the poll's sampling error.

Three other national polls of likely voters released in the past 24 hours also indicate a tight race. The other surveys are from ABC News/Washington Post, Politico/George Washington University, and American Research Group. A CNN Poll of Polls which averages all four surveys plus a Fox News poll released late last week puts Obama at 49% and Romney at 46% among likely voters.

In the CNN/ORC poll, the national horse race stands pretty much where it was just before the two back-to-back party conventions in late August and early September.

"That's a strong suggestion that whatever bounce President Obama received from his convention has, as expected, faded away," says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. "That's why they call them 'bounces'."

When it comes to issues, the survey indicates that Obama and Romney are effectively tied when likely voters are asked which candidate would best handle the economy. Romney, however, appears to have an edge on the top two economic issues: unemployment and the budget deficit. Obama, by contrast, has the advantage on a variety of non-economic domestic issues such as education, Medicare and health care, and also polls strongly on taxes, traditionally a GOP issue. All of these issues will most likely be debated by the candidates Wednesday night.

The president has a 52%-45% advantage over Romney on foreign policy, which will be the focus of the third and final showdown between the two candidates on October 22.

But debates are not just about issues; voters judge the candidates' personal qualities as well. Among likely voters, Obama's personal favorability rating is 52%, with 48% saying they view the president in an unfavorable way. The president's numbers are basically unchanged since mid August, before the conventions.

The public is divided on Romney, with 49% holding a favorable impression of him and 50% seeing him in a negative light. Romney's favorable rating was at 50% and his unfavorable at 46% in mid-August.

When the dust settles after the debates, it will all come down to turnout and getting out the vote, and the poll suggests when it comes enthusiasm, neither campaign seems to have the upper hand. {Read More}

Indeed the race remains tight. Either candidate can win the race. But for Romney the task is decidedly a bit tougher. For him to pull it off will require stellar performance in all three debates, he must remain gaffe free, he must give America reasons to vote FOR him rather than against Obama, and then hope his efforts will excite enough of the electorate to get out and vote for him.

Editor's Note
: I'll be voting for the alternative, Gary Johnson. So should all liberty minded people who want to see real POSITIVE change in America.

Via: Memeorandum