ORLANDO
If you look back to the beginning of "Roadhouse Blog", you will notice that I have never made mention of my personal theology. This has never been an oversight, rather a purposeful decision. I have always asserted that it is not a prerequisite that you belong to any particular religion to be a conservative. Though conservative philosophy may be rooted in Judaeo-Christian beliefs, you don't need to be a Christian to understand and adopt the principals of conservatism as your own.
For instance, you can be an Atheist and understand free-market economics. You can be a Buddhist and understand the concept of national sovereignty. You can worship dirt and still understand the purpose and importance of a strict immigration process. So I would like to take this opportunity to set the record straight on my personal beliefs and their relevance to this post.
I'm a Christian. To "the left", that means I am an in-tolerant, hate-filled bigot who fears anyone different than myself. To Christians, it means that I am not even allowed to hate others...ANY others. So, when it is said that a Christian's opposition to certain parts of the "gay agenda" is based on hatred, I simply remind myself that I know better than that.
Yes, I will always dis-agree with the concept of "gay marriage" for both theological and practical reasons. Yes, I will always see the "transgendered" as suffering from a dis-associative mental disorder. And yes, I will always see homo-sexuality as a "sin".
That being said, after the terrorist attack at "Pulse", a popular Orlando, Florida night club frequented by the local gay community, I think it's high time we all take a step back and re-examine our priorities...not just as Christians or homosexuals, but as Americans.
My disapproval of some one's personal choices does not prevent me from accepting their value as an American. Besides, how ridiculous would it be for me to assume everyone agrees with some of my proclivities.
So, in the spirit of patriotism, I would like remind everyone of a few things. When a Muslim extremist attacks a gay bar, he's not just attacking "gays", he's attacking infidels. In infidel is anyone who is not willing to submit to Islam. The "gay" thing is really nothing more than a "twofer" for a Muslim terrorist. Similarly, my Christianity makes me a "twofer" as well. In that sense, a Christian and a homosexual have a common, equally brutal enemy who would like to see both of our heads removed. At the very least, it may be time for both of our camps to assert the "the enemy of our enemy is our friend" philosophy.
Furthermore, the Second Amendment protects every one's right to protect themselves...even homosexuals. A bullet does not care who fires it. It will take down a bad guy for a gay person just as well as for the strait. So, before you go sachet'ing on down to protest your local gun shop, maybe you'll want to consider going in and asking them to teach you how to shoot. A bedazzled pink .45 semi-auto is the perfect accessory to match your chartreuse feather boa...and it might just keep you alive too.
To sum up, getting shot at a gay bar is tragic, and so is getting shot at a mall, school, sporting event, concert, or on the street. So, I suggest we move our usual differences to the back burner for now, and focus on the what's really important...life.
Tuesday, June 21, 2016
Tuesday, February 2, 2016
Anti-Social
The term "Orwellian" has never been used as a compliment. There's a reason for that. George Orwell's "1984" depicted the consequences of what happens when society ultimately decides to trade liberty for convenience. The story illustrates the conflict between man's thirst for power and willingness to submit. If you've seen the movie or read the book, you know how terrifying Orwell's vision was.
After watching or reading "1984" you might find it strange and ironic that it's author was in real life a socialist. But when you consider the seductive nature of socialism, it's not exactly a "shocker".
Orwell saw his dystopian vision as a fictional account of socialism that is mearly mis-managed, as opposed to the natural end to a tyrannical means. He suffered from the same delusion as socialists from before his time and present day.
From Trotsky to Chomsky, advocates of socialism have believed that if we would simply allow a particular set of specific circumstances to fall into place, guided by a specific group of particularly chosen rulers, then socialism would blossom into a beautiful Utopian wonderland where all needs are met and all faces are smiling.
Flash forward to 2016 and we see the freight train of socialism barreling down the tracks in the form of Bernie Sanders and/or Hillary Clinton with Barack Obama as the conductor. The momentum and speed of it's approach is impressive and intimidating to say the least. But for all it's hype and popularity, this train will crash because it's tracks end at the solid granite mountain-face of human nature.
This is not a prediction that Sanders or Clinton could not possibly win...they absolutely could. It's simply my understanding that win or lose, their ideology will always lead to the same place...slavery. Not in the form of blacks submitting to the desires of all-powerful plantation owners, but in the form of citizens submitting to the desires of all-powerful government.
Like the plantation owner who maintained order among his "stock", a socialist government needs to do the same thing. When a slave needs food, water, clothing, shelter, or medical attention, he had better be worth the investment to the plantation owner, otherwise he/she will do without.
This is the same crude "social contract" philosophy used to seduce people to the "dark side" known as socialism. The common thread between slavery and socialism is power. Whoever happens to have it will be in charge until someone with a bigger stick comes along and takes it. Keep in mind that a bigger stick does not equate to intelligence, sophistication, common sense, compassion, fairness, morality, kindness, understanding or mercy.
This is typically where the discussion actually starts. The socialist will make a comparison to "corporations" holding power over the "little guy". A compelling concept...except. A corporation does not have the power to put me in jail or order a troop of armed men to break down my door at three AM. If a "little guy" like me does not like what one corporation is doing, I have options. I can do business with any number of other corporations, or none at all if I wish.
I am not compelled by force of law to comply with anything a corporation might want me to do. If Microsoft orders me to purchase their product, I can tell them to "pound sand", and Bill Gates is powerless to do anything about it. But if Barack Obama orders me to purchase a health care policy...I must submit, comply, give-in, bend over...etc. The fact that I have always paid my doctor's bills on-time means nothing. The fact that I have rights means nothing. The fact that I had better plans for that money means nothing. Such is slavery.
The socialist will tell you that corruption is one of the hallmarks of capitalism. Actually, corruption is a hallmark of human nature. More specifically, corruption is a hallmark of nature in general. The animal kingdom is not usually known for it's democratic principals.
Regardless of anyone's brand of governance, there will always be the risk of corruption. Under capitalism, you might bribe someone for a variance in a land deal. Under socialism, you will have to bribe someone to get anesthetic for you child's dental surgery. Corruption is perfectly comfortable festering in the heart of any type of ruler or society. If you want to end corruption, you're going to have to end life in it's entirety. Option "B" might be to put the "corrupt" in jail, let the animal kingdom do it's thing, and move on with your life.
Some would consider "theft" to be a form of corruption. It's hard to imagine something more corrupt that the theft of one's ambition. When you are dependent on someone, you are at their mercy...and they know that. Over time, that becomes your understanding of life. You have no desire to advance, because you know there is a penalty for straying from the prescribed metric assigned by the ruling class. You justify this existence by accepting the "greater good" guilt trip, and the "our experts know better" mantras you've been fed since birth.
As a result, new advancements are not made, and inspiration is kept "in check" so as to maintain order among the population. After all, if the ruling class wants to stay in power, enjoying all the benefits of their position, they can't have the people getting all "uppity". Logic dictates that anything that might typically "inspire" someone to think outside the box will need to be tightly regulated. This includes music, art, dance, education, magazines, the Internet, blogs, social media, speech and you guessed it...movies and books. The term "Orwellian" is so much more appropriate as a synonym for irony.
The term "Orwellian" has never been used as a compliment. There's a reason for that. George Orwell's "1984" depicted the consequences of what happens when society ultimately decides to trade liberty for convenience. The story illustrates the conflict between man's thirst for power and willingness to submit. If you've seen the movie or read the book, you know how terrifying Orwell's vision was.
After watching or reading "1984" you might find it strange and ironic that it's author was in real life a socialist. But when you consider the seductive nature of socialism, it's not exactly a "shocker".
Orwell saw his dystopian vision as a fictional account of socialism that is mearly mis-managed, as opposed to the natural end to a tyrannical means. He suffered from the same delusion as socialists from before his time and present day.
From Trotsky to Chomsky, advocates of socialism have believed that if we would simply allow a particular set of specific circumstances to fall into place, guided by a specific group of particularly chosen rulers, then socialism would blossom into a beautiful Utopian wonderland where all needs are met and all faces are smiling.
Flash forward to 2016 and we see the freight train of socialism barreling down the tracks in the form of Bernie Sanders and/or Hillary Clinton with Barack Obama as the conductor. The momentum and speed of it's approach is impressive and intimidating to say the least. But for all it's hype and popularity, this train will crash because it's tracks end at the solid granite mountain-face of human nature.
This is not a prediction that Sanders or Clinton could not possibly win...they absolutely could. It's simply my understanding that win or lose, their ideology will always lead to the same place...slavery. Not in the form of blacks submitting to the desires of all-powerful plantation owners, but in the form of citizens submitting to the desires of all-powerful government.
Like the plantation owner who maintained order among his "stock", a socialist government needs to do the same thing. When a slave needs food, water, clothing, shelter, or medical attention, he had better be worth the investment to the plantation owner, otherwise he/she will do without.
This is the same crude "social contract" philosophy used to seduce people to the "dark side" known as socialism. The common thread between slavery and socialism is power. Whoever happens to have it will be in charge until someone with a bigger stick comes along and takes it. Keep in mind that a bigger stick does not equate to intelligence, sophistication, common sense, compassion, fairness, morality, kindness, understanding or mercy.
This is typically where the discussion actually starts. The socialist will make a comparison to "corporations" holding power over the "little guy". A compelling concept...except. A corporation does not have the power to put me in jail or order a troop of armed men to break down my door at three AM. If a "little guy" like me does not like what one corporation is doing, I have options. I can do business with any number of other corporations, or none at all if I wish.
I am not compelled by force of law to comply with anything a corporation might want me to do. If Microsoft orders me to purchase their product, I can tell them to "pound sand", and Bill Gates is powerless to do anything about it. But if Barack Obama orders me to purchase a health care policy...I must submit, comply, give-in, bend over...etc. The fact that I have always paid my doctor's bills on-time means nothing. The fact that I have rights means nothing. The fact that I had better plans for that money means nothing. Such is slavery.
The socialist will tell you that corruption is one of the hallmarks of capitalism. Actually, corruption is a hallmark of human nature. More specifically, corruption is a hallmark of nature in general. The animal kingdom is not usually known for it's democratic principals.
Regardless of anyone's brand of governance, there will always be the risk of corruption. Under capitalism, you might bribe someone for a variance in a land deal. Under socialism, you will have to bribe someone to get anesthetic for you child's dental surgery. Corruption is perfectly comfortable festering in the heart of any type of ruler or society. If you want to end corruption, you're going to have to end life in it's entirety. Option "B" might be to put the "corrupt" in jail, let the animal kingdom do it's thing, and move on with your life.
Some would consider "theft" to be a form of corruption. It's hard to imagine something more corrupt that the theft of one's ambition. When you are dependent on someone, you are at their mercy...and they know that. Over time, that becomes your understanding of life. You have no desire to advance, because you know there is a penalty for straying from the prescribed metric assigned by the ruling class. You justify this existence by accepting the "greater good" guilt trip, and the "our experts know better" mantras you've been fed since birth.
As a result, new advancements are not made, and inspiration is kept "in check" so as to maintain order among the population. After all, if the ruling class wants to stay in power, enjoying all the benefits of their position, they can't have the people getting all "uppity". Logic dictates that anything that might typically "inspire" someone to think outside the box will need to be tightly regulated. This includes music, art, dance, education, magazines, the Internet, blogs, social media, speech and you guessed it...movies and books. The term "Orwellian" is so much more appropriate as a synonym for irony.
Wednesday, November 4, 2015
MARCH OF THE INSANE
As a working man, I can tell you in all honesty that I am not always a fan of reality. For me, "reality" is a mortgage, electric bill, gray hair, and high cholesterol. Like most, my reality includes a list of things that do not always match my personal desires. I may desire to be seven feet tall, but reality has deemed me to be a more common six. I may desire to be Asian, but reality has deemed me to be caucasian.
Complicating my life further is reality's complete lack of sympathy for my "feelings". I may really, really feel like a 350 lb. Sumo wrestler, but then that pesky reality shows up in my bathroom mirror in the form of a 185 lb. truck driver. I may really, really, really feel like a police officer, but I suspect that reality will step-in again the first time I try to arrest someone, or drive off in the Sheriff's squad car.
So, what if I simply refuse to accept this intrusion of reality into my otherwise normal life? Maybe if I simply proclaim that I am the Emperor of our local shopping mall, I can claim a Royal entitlement to unlimited access to the food court. In fact, isn't it my "right" to demand that every other man woman and child in the United States of America accommodate my delusion?
To aid in my quest to popularize dementia, I'm pretty sure I can rely on the media to take up my cause by convincing the masses that I am worthy of their sympathy. They can assist further by recruiting "experts" to teach us that anyone who disagrees with my fantasy-play-fest is guilty of a hate crime. It will only be a matter of time before I am hailed as a hero. What can possibly go wrong?
Now back to REALITY! In the real world, you can pretend to be something you're not as much as you want. It's a free country, and it's your business...that is, until it becomes my business. The problem is, this is not the United States of YOU! The rest of us live here too, and we have rights. Such as the right to not be forced to live a lie on account of someone else's "feelings".
So who do we blame for this absurdity? The left? The media? The schools? The courts? Absolutely, but let's not forget the "enabler" crowd. These are the friends and family of those suffering from "gender confusion". So caught up in a desire to be politically correct on one hand, but supportive on the other, they fall for the socially engineered hype cobbled together in university faculty lounges.
Rather than steer their loved one back onto the road to reality, they exacerbate the problem by playing along. If their son "feels" like a female, they refer to him as "her" and demand that the rest of us follow suite. They fight for his "right" to use the same bathroom as my eleven year old daughter while complimenting his choice of eye shadow. All the while expecting me to play along.
As for me, I refuse to comply. If I recognize your natural gender, that's exactly what I'm going to refer to you as. I'm not being rude, I'm being honest. Which is more than I can say for someone trying to bully me into denying reality.
Beyond simple reality, both truth and basic compassion demand that we grow up and start acting like adults. The Bruce Jenners of the world need help, not appeasement. Is it any wonder that the suicide rate among the "trans-gendered" is so high when the people closest to them are going out of their way to add to their confusion?
It is said that the road to Hell is paved with good intentions, and Jenner's family has paved many-a-mile...with the help of his adoring fans and "supporters".
As a working man, I can tell you in all honesty that I am not always a fan of reality. For me, "reality" is a mortgage, electric bill, gray hair, and high cholesterol. Like most, my reality includes a list of things that do not always match my personal desires. I may desire to be seven feet tall, but reality has deemed me to be a more common six. I may desire to be Asian, but reality has deemed me to be caucasian.
Complicating my life further is reality's complete lack of sympathy for my "feelings". I may really, really feel like a 350 lb. Sumo wrestler, but then that pesky reality shows up in my bathroom mirror in the form of a 185 lb. truck driver. I may really, really, really feel like a police officer, but I suspect that reality will step-in again the first time I try to arrest someone, or drive off in the Sheriff's squad car.
So, what if I simply refuse to accept this intrusion of reality into my otherwise normal life? Maybe if I simply proclaim that I am the Emperor of our local shopping mall, I can claim a Royal entitlement to unlimited access to the food court. In fact, isn't it my "right" to demand that every other man woman and child in the United States of America accommodate my delusion?
To aid in my quest to popularize dementia, I'm pretty sure I can rely on the media to take up my cause by convincing the masses that I am worthy of their sympathy. They can assist further by recruiting "experts" to teach us that anyone who disagrees with my fantasy-play-fest is guilty of a hate crime. It will only be a matter of time before I am hailed as a hero. What can possibly go wrong?
Now back to REALITY! In the real world, you can pretend to be something you're not as much as you want. It's a free country, and it's your business...that is, until it becomes my business. The problem is, this is not the United States of YOU! The rest of us live here too, and we have rights. Such as the right to not be forced to live a lie on account of someone else's "feelings".
So who do we blame for this absurdity? The left? The media? The schools? The courts? Absolutely, but let's not forget the "enabler" crowd. These are the friends and family of those suffering from "gender confusion". So caught up in a desire to be politically correct on one hand, but supportive on the other, they fall for the socially engineered hype cobbled together in university faculty lounges.
Rather than steer their loved one back onto the road to reality, they exacerbate the problem by playing along. If their son "feels" like a female, they refer to him as "her" and demand that the rest of us follow suite. They fight for his "right" to use the same bathroom as my eleven year old daughter while complimenting his choice of eye shadow. All the while expecting me to play along.
As for me, I refuse to comply. If I recognize your natural gender, that's exactly what I'm going to refer to you as. I'm not being rude, I'm being honest. Which is more than I can say for someone trying to bully me into denying reality.
Beyond simple reality, both truth and basic compassion demand that we grow up and start acting like adults. The Bruce Jenners of the world need help, not appeasement. Is it any wonder that the suicide rate among the "trans-gendered" is so high when the people closest to them are going out of their way to add to their confusion?
It is said that the road to Hell is paved with good intentions, and Jenner's family has paved many-a-mile...with the help of his adoring fans and "supporters".
Thursday, December 4, 2014
HEAD GAMES
A telltale sign of a failing culture is an inability to shock people. In a post-9/11 world, so many of us have seen in Hi-def, what previous generations could have never imagined. Our minds are jammed with sounds and images piped-in from any number of electronic devices at nearly every waking moment of our lives. On one hand, society has more opportunities to educate itself than ever before thanks to digital media. On the other, as we become more attached to and dependent on electronic communication, our ability to relate to each other on a human level seems to be questionable at best.
Is it any wonder that today, when a "death cult" posts their latest beheading of another human being onto the web, the masses react with about as much anger and disdain as when their team doesn't make the playoffs? Now that we have a self-imposed blurring of the lines between real life, and "reality TV", we enjoy a comfortable buffer from things that should shock and horrify us to action.
For a writer, such "action" could be to remind people of the horrors of which I speak. Beheading has been around for about as long as recorded history can tell us. It is the preferred method of execution of "infidels" by Muslims as prescribed by their "faith". Although, explosives, stoning, fire, acid, wood chippers, and pavement rollers are also acceptable ways for Muslims to demonstrate how secure they are in their "faith"as well. But, today we're going to focus strictly on beheading.
If there is anything left of it after years of video games and hip-hop music, I will need you to use your imagination...briefly. Imagine being held captive, while knowing that your fate is to have your head removed by a man wielding a large steel sword. Fast-forwarding past the time that you have to contemplate how this situation came to be, and the time you have to realize that you will never see your family again, we'll just get right to it.
For the sake of time, let's assume that your executioner's implement is razor sharp and he has the skills needed to do the job with one swift blow. Keeping also in mind though that neither of these are a priority. "Misses" are common, and occasionally intentional. Sawing and gauging motions are also a typical technique.
Regardless of your executioner's personal beheading style, the real horror comes after the physical trauma you experience as your head separates from your body. I have read that the human head can live for as much as six minutes after being detached from the body.
Six minutes stuck in an elevator. Six minutes waiting for a Quarter Pounder. Six minutes stuck at a construction zone. A six minute lecture from your spouse. All are unpleasant. But imagine spending six minutes - your last six minutes - watching your body thrash and twitch reflexively as the blood gushes from the hole where your head once was.
Try to imagine the thoughts that might race through your mind as you try to scream, but can't...because your lungs are no longer there to push air across your now-severed vocal cords. Your brain tries desperately to signal your arms, legs, or anything to react with some sort of defensive motion...but there's nothing. The connection is gone. For all it's pluses and minuses, what was once your body, is now being violently beaten with sticks and rocks as you can do nothing but watch...and think. For six minutes.
But don't worry my fellow infidel, this is probably not your fate...probably. Hey, what's on TV tonight?
A telltale sign of a failing culture is an inability to shock people. In a post-9/11 world, so many of us have seen in Hi-def, what previous generations could have never imagined. Our minds are jammed with sounds and images piped-in from any number of electronic devices at nearly every waking moment of our lives. On one hand, society has more opportunities to educate itself than ever before thanks to digital media. On the other, as we become more attached to and dependent on electronic communication, our ability to relate to each other on a human level seems to be questionable at best.
Is it any wonder that today, when a "death cult" posts their latest beheading of another human being onto the web, the masses react with about as much anger and disdain as when their team doesn't make the playoffs? Now that we have a self-imposed blurring of the lines between real life, and "reality TV", we enjoy a comfortable buffer from things that should shock and horrify us to action.
For a writer, such "action" could be to remind people of the horrors of which I speak. Beheading has been around for about as long as recorded history can tell us. It is the preferred method of execution of "infidels" by Muslims as prescribed by their "faith". Although, explosives, stoning, fire, acid, wood chippers, and pavement rollers are also acceptable ways for Muslims to demonstrate how secure they are in their "faith"as well. But, today we're going to focus strictly on beheading.
If there is anything left of it after years of video games and hip-hop music, I will need you to use your imagination...briefly. Imagine being held captive, while knowing that your fate is to have your head removed by a man wielding a large steel sword. Fast-forwarding past the time that you have to contemplate how this situation came to be, and the time you have to realize that you will never see your family again, we'll just get right to it.
For the sake of time, let's assume that your executioner's implement is razor sharp and he has the skills needed to do the job with one swift blow. Keeping also in mind though that neither of these are a priority. "Misses" are common, and occasionally intentional. Sawing and gauging motions are also a typical technique.
Regardless of your executioner's personal beheading style, the real horror comes after the physical trauma you experience as your head separates from your body. I have read that the human head can live for as much as six minutes after being detached from the body.
Six minutes stuck in an elevator. Six minutes waiting for a Quarter Pounder. Six minutes stuck at a construction zone. A six minute lecture from your spouse. All are unpleasant. But imagine spending six minutes - your last six minutes - watching your body thrash and twitch reflexively as the blood gushes from the hole where your head once was.
Try to imagine the thoughts that might race through your mind as you try to scream, but can't...because your lungs are no longer there to push air across your now-severed vocal cords. Your brain tries desperately to signal your arms, legs, or anything to react with some sort of defensive motion...but there's nothing. The connection is gone. For all it's pluses and minuses, what was once your body, is now being violently beaten with sticks and rocks as you can do nothing but watch...and think. For six minutes.
But don't worry my fellow infidel, this is probably not your fate...probably. Hey, what's on TV tonight?
Friday, April 4, 2014
FORT HOOD II
There comes a time when reasonable adults step back from a given situation and assess their options. As Americans, that time is now. It's high time we step back and ask some tough questions. The first being; Is it time to disband the military? Before you assume that my prolonged absence from the blog-o-sphere has resulted in some sort of de-programming by the left, I ask that you hear me out.
One of the hallmarks of a true conservative is a sense of pragmatism. This goes along with our use of logic, reason, and common sense when approaching an issue. This is also what sets us apart from the left. That, and pants that actually fit.
After the most recent Fort Hood shooting, I find myself questioning the logic of having a military force at all. Think about it. We take a fellow citizen who was gracious enough to volunteer his/her very life for the sake of others, and our government doesn't even have the decency to develop a proper way to use them.
We spend countless amounts of tax payer dollars to teach them how to destroy an enemy, and then we send them into a war zone with a sea-bag full of rules and regulations that prevent them from even insulting an enemy. Of coarse the enemy sees this and exploits it to their advantage, resulting in more flag-draped coffins landing at Dover AFB.
We elect people to positions of power who probably can't even pronounce the word victory, and go on to the further extreme of helping our enemies build their dream nation. So our troops get to see the Muslim Brotherhood gain an entire hemisphere on one side, while watching their brothers and sisters die on the other...both sanctioned and facilitated by their own President.
We train them (at great expense) in the proficient use of firearms, award them pins and medals for it, and then deny them the right to carry those firearms on the same soil that they are willing to die for to protect. This way, they can't defend themselves from "active shooters" while coming out of the PX with a quart of milk and loaf of bread.
We lower the bar for the training process in order to be more "inclusive" and to accommodate some misguided diversity experiment, and then act surprised when some of the test subjects crack under the pressure of war. In the old days, the weak were weeded-out in order to maintain the integrity of the whole force. Today they are welcomed with open arms, as if the U.S. military is supposed to be some sort of halfway house for emotional pansies.
We throw them into the meat grinder of combat and then berate them when the war doesn't poll well.
We subject them to this insanity, and when they finally do go insane, we throw psychotropic drugs at them and tell them to get in touch with their feelings. By the time our government-issued therapists realize that the drugs aren't working...the bullets are already coming out of the barrel.
It seems to me that it would almost be more humane to simply dissolve the military and let the chips fall where they may. After all, if we're not willing to build, maintain, and use the military for it's logical intended purpose, then what's the point of having it at all? Why put these men and women through the indignity of such vague, nebulous, and convoluted service to a nation where 50% of it's citizens have no understanding of liberty anyway?
It's time we turn our military bases into homeless shelters and marijuana farms. Then we can paint the Army tanks yellow and use them as school buses for Democrat-run inner cities. Finally, we can hire the former service members to teach the civilian population how to stand in line, take orders, and eat rationed food. We'll need to know how to do those things when Putin shows up.
There comes a time when reasonable adults step back from a given situation and assess their options. As Americans, that time is now. It's high time we step back and ask some tough questions. The first being; Is it time to disband the military? Before you assume that my prolonged absence from the blog-o-sphere has resulted in some sort of de-programming by the left, I ask that you hear me out.
One of the hallmarks of a true conservative is a sense of pragmatism. This goes along with our use of logic, reason, and common sense when approaching an issue. This is also what sets us apart from the left. That, and pants that actually fit.
After the most recent Fort Hood shooting, I find myself questioning the logic of having a military force at all. Think about it. We take a fellow citizen who was gracious enough to volunteer his/her very life for the sake of others, and our government doesn't even have the decency to develop a proper way to use them.
We spend countless amounts of tax payer dollars to teach them how to destroy an enemy, and then we send them into a war zone with a sea-bag full of rules and regulations that prevent them from even insulting an enemy. Of coarse the enemy sees this and exploits it to their advantage, resulting in more flag-draped coffins landing at Dover AFB.
We elect people to positions of power who probably can't even pronounce the word victory, and go on to the further extreme of helping our enemies build their dream nation. So our troops get to see the Muslim Brotherhood gain an entire hemisphere on one side, while watching their brothers and sisters die on the other...both sanctioned and facilitated by their own President.
We train them (at great expense) in the proficient use of firearms, award them pins and medals for it, and then deny them the right to carry those firearms on the same soil that they are willing to die for to protect. This way, they can't defend themselves from "active shooters" while coming out of the PX with a quart of milk and loaf of bread.
We lower the bar for the training process in order to be more "inclusive" and to accommodate some misguided diversity experiment, and then act surprised when some of the test subjects crack under the pressure of war. In the old days, the weak were weeded-out in order to maintain the integrity of the whole force. Today they are welcomed with open arms, as if the U.S. military is supposed to be some sort of halfway house for emotional pansies.
We throw them into the meat grinder of combat and then berate them when the war doesn't poll well.
We subject them to this insanity, and when they finally do go insane, we throw psychotropic drugs at them and tell them to get in touch with their feelings. By the time our government-issued therapists realize that the drugs aren't working...the bullets are already coming out of the barrel.
It seems to me that it would almost be more humane to simply dissolve the military and let the chips fall where they may. After all, if we're not willing to build, maintain, and use the military for it's logical intended purpose, then what's the point of having it at all? Why put these men and women through the indignity of such vague, nebulous, and convoluted service to a nation where 50% of it's citizens have no understanding of liberty anyway?
It's time we turn our military bases into homeless shelters and marijuana farms. Then we can paint the Army tanks yellow and use them as school buses for Democrat-run inner cities. Finally, we can hire the former service members to teach the civilian population how to stand in line, take orders, and eat rationed food. We'll need to know how to do those things when Putin shows up.
Tuesday, April 23, 2013
GALT'S GULCH OR BUST
Being a man of few ambitions, my "bucket list" is really not that long. Worse yet, it's not that exciting either. While some have managed to cross sky diving or swimming with sharks off their bucket list, I recently managed to cross reading "Atlas Shrugged" off mine. I know it's not exactly alligator wrestling, but at 1069 pages, it's a personal achievement none-the-less.
Let's be honest, it's length and less-than-satisfying ending make this book a challenge to read, and a risk to recommend to just any reader. That is not to say that Ayn Rand didn't hit the nail on the head in her attempt to illustrate how the real world works. She did.
As I started to read the book, it didn't take me long to notice the spooky parallels between things happening in Rand's fictional story line, and things actually happening in real life today. But it's not the similarities between the clash of human nature vs. public policy in the book, and pretty much everything I see in the news right now that gives me "the willies", it's the fact that this book was written in 1957!
Did Ayn Rand have a crystal ball, a sixth sense, or just a wicked talent for deduction? Who knows?
The premise of the book is to simply ask what would happen if the people who "make the wheels go-round" simply decided to quit working and drop out of society. After years of excessive regulation, excessive taxation, intrusive government interference, and the media slandering and misrepresenting them and their purpose to the public day after day, the industrialists, inventors, and producers of the nation decide that they've taken enough abuse. They pull their resources and go "on strike".
The book walks you through step by step the importance of industry to modern man and what happens when the ruling class tries to control the natural instincts of man as applied to the free market. Rand brilliantly illustrates the linkage between one industry to another and the "domino effect" that happens when "intellectuals" use their power to institute some convoluted brand of "social justice".
The title refers to the mythological god "Atlas" who's only purpose was to hold the Earth on his shoulders. So, the metaphor is to ask what happens if Atlas were to simply shrug his shoulders, drop the Earth, and walk away?
When I hear people rush to blame the "rich" for the ills of the world, I have visions of the people of Earth throwing rocks at Atlas every time something doesn't go their way. Rather than saying "Hey, Mr. Atlas! Thank's for holding the Earth in place!", he get's to hear "Hey, Mr. Atlas! You're rich, and I'm not, so that makes you a jerk!" Just how long should he have to put up with that? How long would you?
In the book, "Galt's Gulch" refers to the remote, hidden community built by the producers and industrialist of America to live during their "strike". Complete with their own power company and monetary system, they live a simple, yet comfortable life based on conservative principals and free market values...totally isolated from the outside world. As the outside world falls into ruin, the government tries to "fix" each new crisis with a new policy which inevitably spawns multiple new crises. Like some hellish game of "Wack-a-Mole", each government intervention costs more jobs, money, and lives until society falls into anarchy and chaos.
It's not likely that there will be a real-life "Galt's Gulch", but if there is, I'll be the guy standing in my front yard with my family yelling "Take us with you! I'm a worker! Not a moocher!"
Being a man of few ambitions, my "bucket list" is really not that long. Worse yet, it's not that exciting either. While some have managed to cross sky diving or swimming with sharks off their bucket list, I recently managed to cross reading "Atlas Shrugged" off mine. I know it's not exactly alligator wrestling, but at 1069 pages, it's a personal achievement none-the-less.
Let's be honest, it's length and less-than-satisfying ending make this book a challenge to read, and a risk to recommend to just any reader. That is not to say that Ayn Rand didn't hit the nail on the head in her attempt to illustrate how the real world works. She did.
As I started to read the book, it didn't take me long to notice the spooky parallels between things happening in Rand's fictional story line, and things actually happening in real life today. But it's not the similarities between the clash of human nature vs. public policy in the book, and pretty much everything I see in the news right now that gives me "the willies", it's the fact that this book was written in 1957!
Did Ayn Rand have a crystal ball, a sixth sense, or just a wicked talent for deduction? Who knows?
The premise of the book is to simply ask what would happen if the people who "make the wheels go-round" simply decided to quit working and drop out of society. After years of excessive regulation, excessive taxation, intrusive government interference, and the media slandering and misrepresenting them and their purpose to the public day after day, the industrialists, inventors, and producers of the nation decide that they've taken enough abuse. They pull their resources and go "on strike".
The book walks you through step by step the importance of industry to modern man and what happens when the ruling class tries to control the natural instincts of man as applied to the free market. Rand brilliantly illustrates the linkage between one industry to another and the "domino effect" that happens when "intellectuals" use their power to institute some convoluted brand of "social justice".
The title refers to the mythological god "Atlas" who's only purpose was to hold the Earth on his shoulders. So, the metaphor is to ask what happens if Atlas were to simply shrug his shoulders, drop the Earth, and walk away?
When I hear people rush to blame the "rich" for the ills of the world, I have visions of the people of Earth throwing rocks at Atlas every time something doesn't go their way. Rather than saying "Hey, Mr. Atlas! Thank's for holding the Earth in place!", he get's to hear "Hey, Mr. Atlas! You're rich, and I'm not, so that makes you a jerk!" Just how long should he have to put up with that? How long would you?
In the book, "Galt's Gulch" refers to the remote, hidden community built by the producers and industrialist of America to live during their "strike". Complete with their own power company and monetary system, they live a simple, yet comfortable life based on conservative principals and free market values...totally isolated from the outside world. As the outside world falls into ruin, the government tries to "fix" each new crisis with a new policy which inevitably spawns multiple new crises. Like some hellish game of "Wack-a-Mole", each government intervention costs more jobs, money, and lives until society falls into anarchy and chaos.
It's not likely that there will be a real-life "Galt's Gulch", but if there is, I'll be the guy standing in my front yard with my family yelling "Take us with you! I'm a worker! Not a moocher!"
Tuesday, February 26, 2013
TWO CAN PLAY THAT GAME
A common tactic used by up and coming tyrants and power hungry narcissists is to be surrounded by children during public appearances and use the power of cuteness to sway the masses toward any number of self-destructive policies. When children are not personally available for use as props or set decor, it's also typical to pull out a letter allegedly written by some dis-advantaged elementary school kid, who was so concerned about the issue-at-hand, that they decided to sit down and write their president a letter about it. As we all know, the one thing eight year olds love to do is write letters. I'm also pretty sure that there is no chance that the parents of these children had anything to do with their children's sudden interest in public policy. And it would surely be crazy talk to even suggest that someone desperate enough to exploit children for political purposes might go as far as to fake a "Dear President" letter...so I won't go there.
In keeping with the idea that what's good for the goose is good for the gander, I decided to adopt this tried and true liberal tactic myself. So here is a letter to President Obama that may or may not have been written by my daughter.
Dear Mr. President,
My name is _ _ _ _ _ _ and I am eight years old. My Daddy says you are trying to destroy our country so you can remake it the way you want to. My little brother does the same thing when I try to make animals with Play-dough. That makes me sad. My Daddy told me that we don't have as much money for ice cream and toys because you are taking more of his money to give to lazy people, and because Daddy's customers have less money to spend at his company for the same reason. If my Daddy's company doesn't have enough customers, will he lose his job? That would make me sad, because he said he would take us to the beach this year if we had enough money. I like to build sand castles.
Mr. Obama, are you going to take away people's guns? Our Principal said that a bad man hurt some kids with a gun and we should tell a teacher if we wanted to talk about our feelings. If a bad man comes to our school, who will help us if my teacher isn't allowed to shoot him? I would be very sad if my friend Timmy had to go to heaven because there was no way to stop the bad man. Timmy's birthday is next week, he is having a party.
My favorite story is "The Little Red Hen". It is a about animals on a farm that want some bread, but the hen is the only one that will work to make it. The other animals still think they should have the bread. My Daddy says that they think they are something called "entitled". That must mean "lazy". He says that you really need to read that book. If you come to our story time, I can read it to you.
I hope you get my letter and read it to the world like you do with letters from other kids. Please stop hurting my Mommy and Daddy. It makes me sad.
Your pawn,
_ _ _ _ _ _
A common tactic used by up and coming tyrants and power hungry narcissists is to be surrounded by children during public appearances and use the power of cuteness to sway the masses toward any number of self-destructive policies. When children are not personally available for use as props or set decor, it's also typical to pull out a letter allegedly written by some dis-advantaged elementary school kid, who was so concerned about the issue-at-hand, that they decided to sit down and write their president a letter about it. As we all know, the one thing eight year olds love to do is write letters. I'm also pretty sure that there is no chance that the parents of these children had anything to do with their children's sudden interest in public policy. And it would surely be crazy talk to even suggest that someone desperate enough to exploit children for political purposes might go as far as to fake a "Dear President" letter...so I won't go there.
In keeping with the idea that what's good for the goose is good for the gander, I decided to adopt this tried and true liberal tactic myself. So here is a letter to President Obama that may or may not have been written by my daughter.
Dear Mr. President,
My name is _ _ _ _ _ _ and I am eight years old. My Daddy says you are trying to destroy our country so you can remake it the way you want to. My little brother does the same thing when I try to make animals with Play-dough. That makes me sad. My Daddy told me that we don't have as much money for ice cream and toys because you are taking more of his money to give to lazy people, and because Daddy's customers have less money to spend at his company for the same reason. If my Daddy's company doesn't have enough customers, will he lose his job? That would make me sad, because he said he would take us to the beach this year if we had enough money. I like to build sand castles.
Mr. Obama, are you going to take away people's guns? Our Principal said that a bad man hurt some kids with a gun and we should tell a teacher if we wanted to talk about our feelings. If a bad man comes to our school, who will help us if my teacher isn't allowed to shoot him? I would be very sad if my friend Timmy had to go to heaven because there was no way to stop the bad man. Timmy's birthday is next week, he is having a party.
My favorite story is "The Little Red Hen". It is a about animals on a farm that want some bread, but the hen is the only one that will work to make it. The other animals still think they should have the bread. My Daddy says that they think they are something called "entitled". That must mean "lazy". He says that you really need to read that book. If you come to our story time, I can read it to you.
I hope you get my letter and read it to the world like you do with letters from other kids. Please stop hurting my Mommy and Daddy. It makes me sad.
Your pawn,
_ _ _ _ _ _
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
