Repeat the Lie, Repeat the Lie, Repeat the Lie….

 Shortly after the inauguration in 2009, Rahm Emmanuel uttered what has come to be regarded as one of the signature lines of the Obama administration: “You never want to let a good crisis go to waste, because you have a chance to make things the way that you want them to be.”  Spoken like a good, solid Democratic Socialist.  Castro would’ve been proud.

Well, we certainly have a legitimate crisis in front of us now.  The thing that strikes me as the most interesting about all of it is simply this:  when a child is faced with genuine responsibility for one of the first times in his life and finds that he doesn’t like any of the limited choices available to solve his dilemma, he typically runs away or begins to act out.
See Wisconsin.  See Obama vs. Cantor.
From where I stand, in any argument in which two diametrically opposed viewpoints clash, it’s usually the one with the most to lose that becomes the most demonstrative.  It becomes rather difficult to mask the scent of desperation.  It’s very distinctive.  Depending on where you’re standing, there are times that it smells really good.
Truth be told, my initial reason for putting this article together stems from the “role” that I’ve decided to take on from time to time here at AR.  My feeling is that since the 2012 campaign has essentially already begun, it’s extremely important that the American people never forget what these Democrats represent generally and President Obama more specifically.  Consequently, I’ve decided to look at the “larger concepts” that are behind the Liberals’ modus operandi.  I feel that these far-Left Democrats are little short of domestic enemies of the United States, and as such, we all need to know our enemy.
As I’ve said, we’re facing a legitimate crisis right now in the debt ceiling debate.  The key word there is legitimate.  I believe what we’re witnessing in the far-Left Democrats response to genuine pressure – the constant press conferences, the claims that little Suzie won’t have her free hot lunch during school, no young people will ever be able to go to college again, threatening seniors’ Social Security – is that they don’t know how to handle a legitimate crisis or genuine responsibility.  They’re acting out; they’re desperate.
Do I think that there might be some heavy consequences if the debt ceiling isn’t raised?  I honestly don’t know;  I’m sure we’ll all feel it in some form or fashion.  What I do know is that the natural order of things is trying to re-set itself, but the elitist rich are trying to prevent that from happening by propping the economy up with our tax dollars.
With regard to what I stated earlier – what does the Left have to lose?  Or, better yet - fear?

That ‘s easy to answer – if the debt ceiling is not raised and the economy doesn’t collapse (save for some mild turbulence), everything that they’ve been preaching for the past 40 years will at the very least come into question if not exposed as the complete charade that it is.  If they’re shown to be deceptive in this legitimate time of crisis, about what else might they be lying?
This all leads me to the “larger issues” to which I alluded earlier.  As part of my time to relax during the summer, one of the books into which I’ve thrown myself is called The War Against Boys, by Christina Hoff Sommers, which, in all honesty, could be effectively re-named “The War Against America”, and the book wouldn’t miss a beat.  I was pointed to this book, believe it or not, because of some of the disciplinary matters that I had to handle at our school during the second semester, situations that I’ll only say defied the very foundation of basic logic.  Truth be told, I never truly engaged in conflicts, confrontations, or disputes with the young men – it was always with their mothers, which I began to find more and more seriously disturbing.  Eventually, at the end of one of the school days in question and sharing some general notes with a colleague, I remarked, “these mothers are destroying their sons….they’re unwilling to allow them to grow up and face adversity on their own.”
At which point my colleague pointed me to said book, which can only be described as gut-wrenchingly infuriating – which is saying something, because I read a lot of history, both general and that which pertains to the social course of our country.  As an educator, I’m shocked to learn what’s being perpetrated upon our young men, and I’ve been an educator for two decades now.  That’s what happens when you work in the private sector – one becomes blissfully unaware of the machinations and effects of those working in the public, and it is exactly this awakening to what’s been done to our society and culture that we’ve been witnessing over the past two years.  Private citizens have suddenly begun to notice that the public sector is beginning to push on their world, and they don’t like it.
I suppose the “larger issue” that will tie together the points that I’m about to make is simply this: as we edge closer and closer to serious campaign time, it’s a good bet that we may hear more and more about all of the “crises” that we’re facing, none of which will have any evidence to back them up.  As has always been with totalitarian Leftist ideologies – Nazism and Communism – the lies are big and they’re always repeated, until they become presumed fact.  In fact, as Hitler himself once intoned,
But the most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly and with unflagging attention. It must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over. Here, as so often in this world, persistence is the first and most important requirement for success.
  -  ”War Propaganda”, in volume 1, chapter 6 of Mein Kampf       (1925), by Adolf  Hitler
Of course, if a person is one of those who still refuse to acknowledge or believe that the Nazis were Leftists, well….I’ve come to that bridge and crossed it too many times in my writings.  ’Nuf ‘Ced.
In this case, we’re talking about the body of work of the manufactured crises that we’ve been manipulated into enduring over the past forty-odd years.  While many of us probably have a passing knowledge of the objectives of the feminist movement, The War Against Boys presents in stark detail the machinations of the radically-leftist feminists, which are aimed squarely at the one quality of “maleness” that is part of the soul of America: individual strength.  Boys – and by extension, America – are to be weakened, by any and all means necessary.
Allow me to also get this out on the table, so that there’s also no debate about my motives and ideals: I’m all for women’s rights and equality in all facets of life.  I am also, however, just as big a supporter of boys being raised to be boys and girls to be raised as girls.  Bring on the Tonka trucks – know what I’m sayin’?
Further, while I want to present a sense of the book, my intention here is not to do a comprehensive critique of the work; rather, my goal is to show our readers that we’ve been inundated for the past several decades by issues, movements, and “crises” that are actually nothing more than political agendas dressed up as “really, really smart” science.
In her book, Sommers presents a shocking picture of the lengths to which the radically-Left feminist movement is willing to go in an effort to attack what it sees as a “sick” patriarchal Western civilization, a civilization that is presumably predicated on the innate violent tendencies of males and the male subversion of women (seems I’ve heard of another culture that meets those requirements, but what do I know?).  Much of what she has to say is founded in the fact that these are not individuals to be trifled with; on the contrary, since roughly the early-to-mid 1980′s, they have garnered more and more support – both political and financial – in the Department of Education, and consequently, have managed to more and more influence the manner in which young females are lifted up and young males are taught that they are little more than future batterers, rapists, and criminals.  To these people, it’s of little significance that there’s not a scintilla of evidence to suggest that girls are being shortchanged in the classroom.  In fact, there is a mountain of evidence to suggest that it’s the boys who are shortchanged.  That doesn’t matter, however; repeat the lie until it becomes unsubstantiated “fact”.
In fact, just a few nights ago, my wife attended a function at her high school alma mater, during which the conversation moved into a discussion of the disposition of today’s typical girls as opposed to 25-30 years ago.  The general point on which many of the women agreed was that today’s girls, in many ways, behave like boys: they seem to have been taught to compete with one another rather than to “lift each other up.” I can’t speak to the latter of those two points, but I will say this – I think these “relativist roles”, if I may coin a phrase, is an excellent metaphorical reflection of what’s happening to our society and culture.  The natural order of things is being at best blurred and at worst deliberately turned on its head.
A rather telling passage from the book that I feel cuts to heart of my point(s) here reads as follows:
      It is precisely in drawing this conclusion [that young boys are essentially proto-criminals]
     that they go badly wrong, for they fail to distinguish between healthy
     and aberrant masculinity.  Criminologists   distinguish between “hypermasculinity” (or
     “protest” masculinity), on the one hand, and the normal masculinity of healthy
     young males, on the other.  Hypermasculine young men do, indeed, express their
     maleness through antisocial behavior – mostly against other males, but also through
     violent aggression toward and exploitation of women.  Healthy young men express
     their manhood in competitive endeavors that are often physical.  As they mature,
     they take on responsibility, strive for excellence, achieve, and “win”.  They assert
     their masculinity in ways that require physical and intellectual skills and self-
     discipline.  In American society, healthy, normal young men (which is to say, the
     overwhelming majority) don’t batter, rape, or terrorize women; they respect them
     and treat them as friends.   (pg. 63) (emphases mine)
It might just be me, but that sounds a lot like the basis for America and her strength, which, for some reason, is now under attack.
As I’ve continued reading Sommers’s work, it occurred to me that this is just another arm of the multi-pronged attack that might be effectively referred to as the original “stealth jihad” before the stealth jihad.  In our growing complacency, we’ve allowed the birth of a number of “scientific test balloons” that have eventually risen and flourished, the wind currents of which have been supported by our tax dollars.  We have no one to blame for this except ourselves; our lack of vigilance has led us to this point.  The “science” that the far-Left has released for public consumption over the course of the past forty years or so has worked wonderfully for them in their attempt to establish global socialism.

Whether the result of the hectic nature of our day-to-day lives or just general ambivalence with regard to the work being done by the people who claim to represent our interests, we’ve taken our eye off the ball.  Further, as it appears that there may be a certain degree of truth in saying that many Americans don’t have either long memories or great attention spans, it is at this point  that I feel it necessary to take a look at all of the “crises” – both imagined and real – that we now face at this point in our country’s history.
The Imaginary
1) Global Warming (late 1970′s) - The three most telling facts about this geologic charade are that the climate crisis that apparently had initially gripped the human species in the early 1970′s was referred to as  ”global cooling”; the damning e-mails that exposed the climate controversy for the political agenda that it so clearly is; and, the fact that what was first “global cooling”, then “global warming”, is now more often than not referred to as “climate change”.  Any reasonable person must look at the objective facts, two of which are this: during the mid-1980′s, there were “climatologists” who claimed that by the year 2000, children would no longer know what snow looks like; further, be sure to remember that there are very, very powerful people in the world who have more money than you can conceive of invested into the successful implementation of this fraud, and they’re not going to let this go anytime soon.
2) A Green Environment (1970′s) - Let’s start with this, right off the bat: as I stated in my previous piece, I, like everyone else, would like a clean environment, one based upon common-sense initiatives – not draconian ones.  I refuse to give into the “clean environment” initiatives that are based in a person’s or a group’s political agendas.
If we are to believe those over on the far-Left, any current energy crisis that we may be experiencing – to this point, it would seem to be the cost of energy rather than the supply – is due to their being the more enlightened, intelligent caretakers of the planet.  Nonsense.  The environmentalist movement has been well underway since the beginning of the 1970′s, yet another political agenda wrapped up in what is at best junk science.
Liberals insist that we must move to “cleaner” forms of energy so that we don’t kill off Mother Earth.  I have a litany of problems with this child-like argument, the first of which is that Mother Earth seems to have stood the test of time pretty well.  I think we might have more to fear from a rogue asteroid crashing into the Earth than in our insignificant species managing to burn out a planet.  My second counterpoint is that all these alternative forms of energy – wind, solar, ethanol, etc., etc. – don’t really provide a lot of ummph, now do they?
Call me when I can power my car on wind.
And I hope all the Liberals who have young children never accidentally break a compact fluorescent  light bulb in their house.
Despite the fact that – according to different estimates – there is enough crude oil under the North American continental shelf to power America 24/7 for the next 250 years, we are currently “customers” for Brazil’s oil, aren’t allowed to offshore drill per our own President (who has and continues to ignore court-ordered injunctions against his moratoriums), and aren’t allowed to drill in the oil-rich Anwar region.  Why?  Politics – this is all based in spreading America’s wealth to the rest of the world and to put us in a position of dependency.  In fact, there’s a somewhat disturbing parallel in the Leftist’s apparent “belief” in borrowing - Barack Obama is simultaneously willing to not only borrow against America’sown oil reserves rather than drilling for our own natural resources but is also willing to borrow more money from China and to raise our debt ceiling rather than tap the human resources in his own country and put people to work, the very people who would create our own wealth.
But we’re supposed to believe that this is “smart”.  I guess I’m just “too limited” and “don’t understand”.  On the contrary – I understand all-too-well.
 3) Spend More to Improve Education (early 1970′s) -  Truth be told, I was somewhat torn as to whether I should have included this issue on the “real” or the “imagined” list.  Obviously, a very real crisis exists in our educational system, as our young people are in the process of having their minds systematically terraformed with courses and/or lessons in such things as boycotting big business, pitches for Obamacare, music that involves a re-written version of Battle Hymn of the Republic to Barack Obama, courses in gay history, “field trips” to mosques during which they were taught about Islam and made to pray to Allah, etc., etc.  The farce at the heart of all of it, however, is the supposition that the only way that the educational crisis in this country can be solved is to throw millions more dollars at it.

How’s that worked so far?
The only thing that all of the dollars allocated to “saving the nation’s schoolchildren” has done is to enable the jobs program that the public sector has become.  In order to secure those Democratic votes, the politicians need to keep their “constituents” - the unions – fat and happy.  Are there good teachers in the public sector?  You bet there are, and some of them are beginning to speak out and break ranks, even at both personal and professional risk.  While it is wrong to paint all public-sector educators with a broad brush, there’s no question that the entire system is almost irrevocably broken and will only be made worse with any infusion of more tax dollars.
Further, don’t forget that for the most part, millions of those tax dollars are being allocated to groups whose sole purpose in writing curriculum is to teach our young men if that they don’t “self-immolate”, they’ll be nothing more than future criminal, batterers, rapists, and murderers.
My self-esteem is shot to hell.
4) The Need for Continued Spending - During President Obama’s July 11 press conference regarding the debt ceiling, he addressed the issue of the Republicans’s firm stance against raising taxes in the current economic climate.  His general statement was that he had no intention of pushing for tax hikes right now; no – that would happen “in 2013 and further out”.  Translation? “My talking points are directed at my ideological base (the far Left), in that they love to hear about higher tax rates, because it is higher tax rates that tie lead weights to the capitalist economy; if I’m re-elected, however, I plan to drop the tax hammer on everyone.”
My response to this junior high foolishness is only to state the obvious: raising taxes on individuals – in general principle – is never a good idea, as all it does is to impede the natural flow of the economy; however, I think we all understand that the federal government does need some form of revenue stream in order to fund its basic functions.  Beyond that, we need to listen carefully to yet more of the liberal Left’s “code language” in what the President had to say next, when he claimed that “we can then use that revenue to invest in our future, infrastructure, education”, yada, yada, yada.  Translation? “I have every intention of spending and spending and spending until this economy simply buckles under the stress.”
Since the mid-1960′s, hearkening all the way back to the Cloward-Piven strategy, the radical Left’s entire agenda has arguably been underwritten by the concept of overwhelming the economy.  Their intention has been to collapse the system from within by taking the America down such a blind path of spending – on what, it doesn’t really matter – that the country would eventually go bankrupt, default, and leave us beholden to the will of other nations.  It might just be me, but doesn’t that kind of render the Declaration of “Independence” somewhat moot?
Which of these “special programs” are, indeed, so “special” that they’re proving to be of vital national interest?  The one aimed at saving the salamanders in California?  The turtle tunnel, or bridge, or whatever it is, in Florida?  Those people who enjoy viewing themselves as “intellectual” and therefore “Liberal” need to consider the first-grade truth staring them in the face: we don’t need to and cannot continue spending.  On what?  For what reason?  To prevent a “catastrophe”, as this President has claimed on several occasions?  If a Republican said something like that, it would be “fear-mongering”; if a Democrat says it, though, it’s just “smart”.
I think I’m gonna light myself on fire.
Here’s a thought for the true-believers: if there’s any one of them who run their household finances in such a ludicrous manner, please leave a comment and inform me of such.  I’ll schedule some type of intervention.
5) Health Care for Everyone Has Finally Been Achieved - Another campaign talking point that we’re likely to hear over and over again will be little short of a victory lap for the crown jewel of socialist utopia – the fact that everyone in America now has health care.  Of course, this “sounds” very nice; the thought that our elected officials would make such a munificent gesture to its citizenry is simply beyond comprehension.  No more doctor’s bills, no more paying for medications – hey, it’s just like being a state employee!
Well, um, actually, that is kinda the end game in all of this.
The information that has generally not been allowed to make the rounds through the public discourse, however, is that the alleged “health care bill” is actually nothing more than a massive, massive, generic form of more regulations than you can imagine, most of which have nothing to do with medical care.  For example, why is there lengthy, specific language about the people’s right to own gold in medical legislation?  Why is there specific language regarding the government’s right to take a percentage of home sales?  Does that have anything to do with medicine?  Maybe the best one is the entry regarding the establishment of a “constabulary force” that ensures proper implementation of the bill.  Hmmm…why would that be necessary?  Further, once the health care legislation is “properly implemented”, will the said “constabulary force” be disbanded?
I was just wondering.  I wonder a lot.
Once again, people who fashionably position themselves on the Left need to come to grips with the fact that they’ve been had.  As that legislative wunderkind Nancy Pelosi said herself, “We need to pass it so that you can all see what’s in it.” Uh-huh.  Obviously, Nancy didn’t even know what was in it, probably still doesn’t, and most likely doesn’t care.  As long as it moves money around in as many nonsensical ways as humanly possible, I’m sure she’s fine with it.
Of course, my wondering why such odd items are in a piece of medical legislation is yet another example of my being far and away “too limited” to understand such complex stuff.  Maybe if my really smart local Democratic representative would actually take the time to sit down with me and explain all of this really difficult stuff, I might be able to muster up enough mental energy to grasp a bit of it.  In the meantime, I’m sure that this is yet another issue that will be repeated over and over and over again, simply because those currently in power have every reason to believe that there just might be enough people out there who pay zero attention to what’s really going on in the world and will simply eat up all the superficial talking points.  Unfortunately, they may be right.
The Real (issues that the Left will deliberately try to avoid mentioning, because they make too much common sense)
1) The Financial Solvency of the United States - one concept that has always boggled my mind is that many of the true-believing Liberals – those who ardently insist that their outlook is not an ideology and that they’re viewing the world in generally the same way as most everyday, working Americans – seem to think that there’s always going to be more money.  Certainly, we now see this with young people today.  They’ve been raised with such a flagrant sense of entitlement – either as a result of parents who simply take the path of least resistance or from the predominant messages that emanate from our modern culture and/or the mouths of the media elites – that they crook their heads like confused dogs when responsible adults tell them “no”.  I think, in many ways, this is the mindset of many average people in our country at this time in our history.  If and when our economy collapses under its own weight, a lot of people are going to look around and wonder how it all happened.
Look, I’m not going to stand here like a Republican schill and say that the GOP has not been big spenders; both parties have brought us to this point in their never-ending quest to be re-elected.  I’m a schill for common sense.  What I would hope is that any person who considers him or herself a staunch Democrat would look objectively at which party has brought us the vast proportion of this spending problem.  One doesn’t have to look much beyond the fact that Barack Obama has racked up more national debt in less than one term than George W. Bush did in eight years.  Further, don’t forget that it was the Democrats who essentially controlled the purse strings in Congress between 2006-2010.
How can one look past that?  With industrial blinders, I suppose.
The debt-ceiling debate may well be, in fact, that moment in history for which the far-Left has been waiting.  From where I stand, there’s simply no argument to be made against holding the line on current tax rates and going cold turkey on borrowing.  It’s not real wealth; it’s phantom, imaginary.  If I were in the House of Representatives, the only thing on which I might consider signing off would be a very, very limited increase in the debt ceiling, only so much as would relieve some of the building pressure and to allow us to pay off some immediate notes.  The entire system needs to be allowed to re-set.  It’s currently being propped up by the financial equivalent of cotton candy, and the only real reason that that’s even being allowed to happen is that all the elitist financial cronies in both government and on Wall Street are being protected.  As for us, we’re being fed cake, and stale cake at that.
Maybe we should ask some people in Europe how the big-spending philosophy has worked out for them.
2) Terrorism - Though this White House has played political Twister in its maniacal attempts to portray the last decade or so of terrorist attacks on US soil as the work of a small fraction of Islamic fundamentalists, it’s a pretty safe bet to say that the vast majority of Americans don’t feel a whole lot safer as a result of any efforts to beef up security in our airports and other places of mass transit.  Of course, the administration is correct in saying that it is only a fraction of extremists that are responsible for terrorist activities; any sensible American would immediately acknowledge that these militants are not truly the voice of Islam and that we cannot paint all Muslims with a broad brush.  That does not, however, change one irrefutable fact: all of the terrorist attacks have been carried out by Muslims.
From the outset of this administration, those in power have tried to twist the threat of “terrorism” to one involving home-grown terrorism, but not of the type involving American Muslims; no, according to this administration’s company line, the “terrorism” of which we should be truly frightened is from “radical right-wing militia types” or, even worse, those really evil U.S. veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan.  Remember, when Major Nadal Hasan summarily executed 13 of our servicemen at Fort Hood, we were instructed by our President that we “should not rush to judgement”, but it was apparently A-OK to judge those radical terrorists, the Cambridge Police, as having “acted stupidly.”
As President Obama tries to run for re-election, don’t expect him or his sycophants in the media to address any genuine threats to our safety as originating in the Middle East.  Rather, I somewhat expect that he and his followers will try to drive home the idea that he’s somehow made America a safer place by “improving America’s image abroad”.
After all, we’re really not all that derisive any longer.
3) Border Security/Illegal Immigration - Taking an educated guess, I’d say that it’s probably been at least two decades, if not more, since our federal government began turning a blind eye to the traffic of illegal immigrants crossing our Southern border (perhaps even our Northern one as well), but this administration certainly strikes me as having thrown the gates wide open.  On paper, we have some very straightforward and reasonably easy-to-attain requirements that a foreigner must fulfill in order to become an American citizen, and our government still spouts the company line of “bring me your tired, poor”, yada, yada, yada.
There are clearly reasons that both parties have engaged in this “see no evil” immigration non-policy, and from the perspective of the Obama administration, the desire for minority, Democratic-machine votes is the most obvious.  The other reason that even the most uninformed person can see is that the wealthy elite really dig that cheap labor, especially the elitist Democrats, who are busy ensuring that all of their unionized constituents are grossly overpaid in salary, benefits, and pensions.
Of course, this makes the elitist Democrats little better than exploitative slaveowners, which, traditionally, the Democratic party always has been.  But that’s another story for another time.
The ramifications of this unspoken, open-door non-policy have been beyond horrific.  Mexican drug cartels have virtual control over parts of our Southwest, border officials are being executed (in some cases with our own weapons, i.e., “Fast & Furious”), everyday citizens are being kidnapped and either held for ransom or even killed, and human trafficking – slavery – is being practiced essentially with impunity.
Governor Brewer of Arizona has valiantly and legally attempted to take matters into her own hands by signing into law legislation that makes it much more difficult for illegal immigrants to reside in her state without fear of prosecution.  Inexplicably and in complete opposition to kindergarten-level common sense, our federal government has attempted to stop one of its own states from doing the job of protecting American citizens and their rights, a job for which it is responsible but seemingly refuses to do.
I think the American people are finished scratching their heads as to the reasons that our own borders aren’t secured.  We welcome anyone who wants to come to our country to be a productive member of our free society.  We just want them to do it legally.  If it’s necessary to militarize the border for a period of time and/or to build a serious fence the length of our Southern border, so be it.
Naturally, I only expect Janet Napolitano to re-assure all of us that “the system is working”.
4) Constitutional Crisis - Naturally, we’ll never hear any liberals and/or Democrats acknowledge what they’re attempting to do to our Constitution, because in all honesty, the Constitution is only an impediment to them and means nothing.  Conservatives – and, admittedly, quite a few Liberals – understand that the whole purpose of the Constitution is to protect the individual person from another person(s) in government who would attempt to use the power of the rule of law to exploit others.  For that reason, the concept of government – while obviously necessary – was broken down to such small component parts that it was effectively de-clawed.
Our government has, unfortunately, evolved to the point that the Founders must have feared.  The checks and balances that are at the heart of our rule of law are badly out-of-whack, as there is now far too much power vested in the Executive and Judicial branches.  For example, I’d be willing to bet that not many people are aware that one of the very first things that this president and his administration attempted to do after his inauguration was to alter the military oath from swearing allegiance to the Constitution to swearing allegiance to the president himself.  This is to say nothing of the number of times that this president has blatantly ignored the rulings against his policies by federal justices.  We have a Judicial branch that now essentially legislates from the bench and a Legislative branch that has been rendered practically meaningless but now seems to be waking up and asserting itself.
As I said, don’t expect the Obama re-election campaign to try to drive home the idea that we desperately need to return to Constitutional principles.  If I were a conservative Republican candidate, however, I would think that that would be a slam-dunk part of my platform.
5) “State-of-the Union” - Liberals enjoy painting themselves as being all about the common folk, but it has now become abundantly clear that they’re truly only one thing, and one thing only: self-aggrandizing elitists.  The morale of the people for whom they allegedly care so much is about as low as I’ve seen it in my lifetime.  The self-awareness that people once had of being fortunate enough to live in a free country is dissipating rapidly, and with each passing day more and more of them are beginning to see that the man who is supposed to be representing them at the highest level of our government is either completely bereft of common sense or has little to no regard for the feelings and sentiments that they have for their country.   As of this writing, the news has been released that a New York Court has given the green light to the construction of the Ground Zero Mosque.  Do the groups in question have the legal right to build a house of worship wherever they’d like?  Of course they do.  Does it run aground of basic common sense at every level?  Why do I even have to ask these questions?
I can tell you this – if the bone fragments of anyone in my family were still somewhere on that site, that Mosque would, in fact, be built over my dead body.
Of course, President Obama and all of his acolytes will attempt to make the case to the American people that things are getting better and will ask God to “bless the United States of America.”
Fittingly, as I”ve referenced Christina Hoff Sommers’ work as a metaphor for what’s happening to America from within, and as I’ve ended it by once again calling attention to the construction of the mosque at Ground Zero, another passage from Sommers’s work might be an apt conclusion:
It is very rare these days to hear anyone praising masculinity.  The dissident feminist writer Camille Paglia is a refreshing exception.   Her observations are effective anecdotes to the surfeit of disparagements.  For Paglia, male aggressiveness and competitiveness are animating principles of creativity. “Masculinity is aggressive, unstable, combustible.  It is also the most creative cultural force in history.”  Speaking of the ‘fashionable disdain’ for ‘patriarchal society’ to which nothing good is ever attributed, she writes, “But it is patriarchal society that has freed me as a woman.  It is capitalism that has given me the leisure to sit at this desk writing this book.  Let us stop being small-minded about men and freely acknowledge what treasures their obsessiveness has poured into culture.” Men, writes Paglia, “created the world we live in and the luxuries we enjoy.” ‘When I cross the George Washington Bridge or any of America’s great bridges, I think - men have done this.  Construction is a sublime male poetry.”
(pg. 63-64)
Substitute the word “America” for either masculinity or men, and the passage still works – perhaps even more effectively so.
Some months back, Congressman Steven Cohen, (D), Tennessee, attempted to apply the totalitarian euphemism of “repeat the lie, repeat the lie, repeat the lie” to Republicans and conservatives.  Obviously, Congressman Cohen doesn’t know his history very well.




  1. Anonymous says:

    My creator cursed me with this IQ and common sense of mine….. it is becoming increasingly impossible to put up with this nonsense.

  2. T.I.M. says:

    The Ground Zero Mosque is a testament to hypocrisy, considering that Muslims not only do not allow other religions, but consider apostasy worthy of beating or killing (i.e., the Minister now facing death in Iran).

    A caller to Limbaugh this morning had an interesting challenge for Obama: go ahead and tax the true billionaires (and millionaires), and see how many of them are liberals. (Check the newsmeat celebrity listings, and see all the red zeroes in the GOP donation column).

    John: Do you have any verification on your claim that Obama was changing the military oath to support of him rather than the Constitution? Every source I could find claims this was merely satire. Thanks.

  3. John Feeny says:

    T.I.M. – I’ll see if I can get the link for you.

  4. John Feeny says:

    T.I.M. – this is a passage from my book; the link is included. My guess is that as this administration is won’t to do, they may have released this as a “test balloon” to gauge the public’s reaction, pulled it back, and claimed that it was a “hoax”. The passage is pretty specific:

    Secretary of Defense Robert Gates is extremely frustrated with orders that the White House is contemplating. According to sources at the Pentagon, including all branches of the armed forces, the Obama Administration may break with a centuries-old tradition. A spokesman for General James Cartwright, the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, states that the Obama Administration wants to have soldiers and officers pledge a loyalty oath directly to the office of the President, and no longer to the Constitution. “The oath to the Constitution is as old as the document itself.” the spokesman said, “At no time in American history, not even in the Civil War, did the oath change or the subject of the oath differ. It has always been to the Constitution.”*

    Interestingly, this link no longer brings up anything related to this issue.

  5. T.I.M. says:

    The test balloon theory makes sense, especially the fact that many of same consist of hot air, which politicians have plenty of.

    The evidence says that, satire or not, this is something the BO White House might have actually considered.

    Thanks for the follow-up

  6. Randy Wills says:

    Another great piece, John. I am well aware of the time and effort that creating an article such as this requires, and I thank you for that.

    For me, the most important sentence in the whole article was “The natural order of things is being, at best, blurred and, at worst, deliberately turned on its head.”

    This is the crux of the problem that we face in society in the 21st century. We are seeing, if not the glorification at least the societal acceptance of every type of perversion of natural law imaginable. We kill our unborn, we declare the homosexual lifestyle, including “marriage”, morally equivalent to heterosexuality, shrug at indiscriminate sexual behavior, now starting in grade school, we tell people that they have a “right” to survive on government handouts when “there are jobs that American citizens won’t do” so we rationalize illegal immigration, and that the President has “stash” that he can dole out at will. I could go on and on, but can we not face the fact that we have become a nation of perverts, relative to “the laws of Nature and of Nature’s God”?

    The disregard for the words of Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independance pointing to “the law of Nature and of Nature’s God” as the basis for self governance will be the downfall of not only the United States, but, as it has been all across history, the inevitable result of any attempt to govern mankind on any other basis.

    The growth of today’s “Big Government” is the direct result of unregenerate human nature attempting to circumvent this basic truth, and in so doing, we have almost totally eroded the ability of the masses to engage in critical thinking regarding the logical, long-term, effects of their behavior. Thus we find ourselves living out the inescapable truth of “There is a way that seems right unto man, but the end thereof is destruction.”


  7. John Feeny says:

    Amen, Randy. Amen.

  8. Dee says:

    John, this is an excellent article and I also appreciate all the time it must have taken you to write it. Regarding the “natural order” of things, there is an article in our paper how the windmills in Pennsylvania killed 10,000 bats last year. This causes insects who destoy crops to stay alive and then the farmer has to rely on increased use of pesticides, etc to save the crops and therefore to cover the these costs, the farmer increases the price of his produce. I’ve also read that there are times in the colder regions where the windmills are inoperable because the oil, I think it’s the oil (my meager IQ does not permit me to know everything), freezes.
    I have already seen BO bumper stickers for 2012. I hope the GOP comes up with a strong candidate because I’m afraid this upcoming Presidential election is going to be very interesting and BO will do anything he can to win again.

  9. Stupid or Treasonous?

    It’s becoming more and more difficult for the rational thinker to deny / dismiss the latter.

    “Because the Only Good Progressive is a Failed Progressive”

Speak Your Mind