Brains Not Included

Cracked Up, Whacked Out and Completely Out of Control

Contradiction & Accountability

As I watch the swirling controversy over Nancy Pelosi and her constant changing of positions about what she knew about water boarding and other interrogation techniques used on the animals that committed the horrible act on 9/11, I am struck by the level of contradiction in her statements.

Another thing that strikes me as odd is that her colleagues don’t seem to be willing to hold her accountable for her obfuscations. Also, I think it is interesting that many (some in the press even) want to talk about former VP Cheney and attempt to take the focus off of what Speaker Pelosi is doing.

It seems that history has proven one thing time and again. Those who can be defined as Liberal have a close political resemblance to many of the worst actors on the world’s political stage when it comes to double standards.

What I mean here is that those that espouse a belief in conservative values appear to be lambasted for the same hypocrisies committed by those that embrace liberal views. The liberal appears to be able to contradict themselves while avoiding accountability for their hypocrisy.

The Cult of Personality

I’ve come to understand why this is so. I once heard a song by the band Living Color. The song was Cult of Personality and it talked about how ordinary people would blindly follow leaders with dynamic personalities.

What history has shown us is that Dictators, Communist and Socialist use the Cult of Personality to cover their own contradictions and to avoid accountability. They force the populous (you and I) and their political opponents to adhere to one standard while they adhere to another.

This sounds crazy right? But it’s not just the ramblings of a right wing blogger (which I’m not by the way, more of a libertarian/independent thinker type)….anyway, I digress… The way that Liberals use Contradiction and Accountability (or the lack of it as it applies to themselves and application of it as it applies to their political opponents) is spelled out in a strategy written back in the 60’s and 70’s by a political organizer and author named Saul Alinsky.

Rules for Radicals

Alinsky was quite a fellow. His most famous book; Rules for Radicals is basically a play book for causing political change. What is interesting is that the book itself is filled with contradictions, rules for accountability and rules for hiding ones true purpose in order to reach political change.

According to Wikipedia ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saul_Alinsky ) Alinsky begins his book with this tribute: “From all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins – or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom – Lucifer.” That’s right, his book uses the Devil as one of it’s sources for how to rebel.

Not withstanding any religious beliefs, let’s not go down that slippery slope; let’s say we believe the bible to be a book of mythology. As in intellectual observation, it is odd that this author would choose to emulate the ‘evil’ force rather than use the ‘good’ forces for his examples.

He goes on to say; “Organization for action will now and in the decade ahead center upon America’s white middle class. That is where the power is. … Our rebels have contemptuously rejected the values and the way of life of the middle class. They have stigmatized it as materialistic, decadent, bourgeois, degenerate, imperialistic, war-mongering, brutalized and corrupt. They are right; but we must begin from where we are if we are to build power for change, and the power and the people are in the middle class majority.”

The Middle Class as a Pawn

It’s not hard to miss the hypocrisy here. Essentially what Alinsky is saying is that he doesn’t like the middle class. However, the political power lies with these masses and if the rebels want to succeed, then the middle classes must be convinced to align with the rebels.

The reference to ‘our rebels’ is to the rebels that have brought about populist social justice themes and are adherents to socialist democracies or so-called Democratic Socialism which in and of itself is another contradiction in terms. How can one have a Democracy aligned with Socialism, it doesn’t work…

Alinsky also felt that the Liberalism of his time was a farce. He saw that movement as docile and weak. His goal was to radicalize the movement in order to bring about his definition of social change ….Socialism…

Examples of his Words in Action

When we look around the world and delve into mankind’s history we see the works and words of Alinsky in practice. Some practiced his words before he even wrote them. Just look at the movements headed by Stalin, Hitler, Mao Tse-tung. Some practiced his words even while he wrote them, look at Ches Guevara, Castro, Qaddafi, Pol Pot and some practice his words today. Just look at Kim Jong-il, Chavez and other Socialist Dictators.

Now comes the billion dollar statement, the one that will get me in a huge amount of trouble with many who read my blogs. The power structures that currently run the Democrat party were educated in the principles of Alinsky and while they may not actively refer to the writings of Alinsky, they instinctively use his teachings to control the political spectrum whether they realize it or not.

Proof is All Around Us

My proof is evidenced in the way that Contradictions and Accountability are handled by many Liberals and some in the media. There is one standard for those perceived to be Liberal and a completely different standard for those perceived to be anything else.

Right or wrong is not the question here, the facts are the facts and they are visible for anyone who chooses to ‘un-bias’ themselves so that they can see clearly. The truth is that Liberalism today has been hijacked by the activist-rebellious-Socialist of the late 60’s and early 70’s and the truth is that they despise the middle class and look down upon them.

The elites who head the Democrat party see their continuants as dupes and morons. They revel in the realization that they (the leaders of the party) have finally learned how to control this vast and powerful middle class bastion and now the party will use this control to completely change the face of America.

So what are you? A dupe and a moron? Or are you a free thinker, an independent citizen? How do you view your own contradictions and how do you hold yourself accountable. Shouldn’t our politicians be held to the same standards we hold ourselves?

Alinsky didn’t think so. Contradictions were to be used to frame debate in a way that would not allow for rebutal and Accountability was to be used as a club to bludgeon opponents with, requiring them to hold fast to a standard which nobody could meet.

Think about it… and while you do, here’s a short list of the current day politicians that learned and actively used Alinsky’s teachings to organize communities and run campaigns.
Obama; Clinton (Hillary); Carville; (there are others, simply watch their actions and see how they deal with Contradictions and Accountability). Can we add Pelosi and Reid to the bunch? I don’t think that would be a stretch.

These are not the ramblings of a right-wing zealot, moreover they are the thoughts and research of a center-right realist. After you’ve done the research, I’d love not know your thoughts. Respectfully, thank you for reading.

Filed under: Cons & Contradictions

Lending Lies

There is a great new show on Fox called Lie To Me. In the show the main characters are experts at facial expressions. They can literally tell when someone is lying by the look on their faces. Pretty amazing and fun to watch.

I wish I could get the bank execs in the room with these experts. Here’s why, the banks say they are lending, but are they really? The truth is that many banks have increased lending but at a paltry rate.

Bank of Americas recent revelation that they earned a profit of almost $4 billion dollars in the last quarter was quickly quashed and the ‘real’ number was reduced to $2.5 billion. But even that number may not be accurate.

B of A, Citi and other large banks would have us believe that these profits stem from an increase in lending to home owners, when the truth is that lending increased less than 2% over the same period last year. So where did the profits come from?

The profits came from thin air. As reported in a very eye opening article on MarketWatch.com, much of the banks profits were driven by the TARP money they received. With TARP plugging gaps in the banks balance sheets, huge write downs allowed by larger banks swallowing up smaller failing banks and additional relaxed accounting rules allowed by regulators, the banks all of the sudden look very strong.

But that’s not the real story. The real story is this, banks aren’t lending for good reason. After years of excess and easy money the banks have learned their lesson and their hording their cash to protect them from further market turmoil.
In a recent quote in The Wall Street Journal, Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke talked about the need for more education about credit by addressing the inequities in wealth between whites and minorities.

He stated: “Part of it has to do I think with financial education,” Mr. Bernanke told students at the historically black college. “There needs to be broader understanding in minority communities … about the importance of saving and building a credit record.”

In my opinion Mr. Bernanke missed the point. This is more than a white vs. minority issue. He could have just said; There needs to be a broader understanding …and a core curriculum starting in grade school that teaches… the importance of saving …money… and building a …good… credit record. (the bold comments are mine.)

Additionally, I still hold to my belief that America needs to change our economy from a spending based econ to a savings based economy. Some have argued that this will limit growth and achievement.

Those that argue against a savings based economy miss the point completely. All a savings based economy refers to is an economy where the pace of credit spending does not outpace the rate of earned income and savings.

Filed under: Cons & Contradictions

A Lesson on Greed

When you look around the world and see the haves and have-nots, does it make you wonder if this capitalist society filled with greed is injurious to the world?

A powerful question to be sure. I like the answer given by Milton Freeman and countless other modern day philosophers. Is there some benevolent benefactor within mankind that is so pure that they can order our society for us?

The answer is NO. When you look around the world, the truth is that the societies with a free enterprise system (capitalism) have the highest living standards on the planet. As a matter of fact the freest people have the best quality of life.

However, look at the world where governments restrict free trade and control societies. Their standard of living is squashed and the motivation to improve society is squandered.

Ah, but human nature is not abated. The leaders of these ‘controlled’ and closed societies are greedy. We need only look at the standard of living the leaders enjoy as compared to the poverty they force upon their populous. Is this not Greed?

The problem with heading towards socialism was best stated by Margaret Thatcher when she said that the problem with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.

But I think there is an even greater problem. When you look at the history of countries that trend towards Socialism and Communism you see what happens when men are entrusted with ultimate power.

Their Human Nature overtakes them and the next thing you know you move towards Totalitarianism. In a free trade, free enterprise, capitalist society with a Republic form or government, the market and the rule of law helps to minimize our human nature and acts as a checks and balance to human greed.

Sure, greedy people do succeed, but so do people those that aren’t greedy. In a capitalist system, the non-greedy can compete with the greedy and many times the non-greedy win. This creates a better society, not control by some authoritarian overseer.

Some would blame our current economic situation of the greed of capitalism, but the truth is that this situation was caused by poor government policy, shoddy oversight and mismanaged regulations.

In other words, this problem was caused by powerful politicians attempting to dictate to industry how they should operate.

Now the USA moves towards Socialist policies and I find it ironic that as our President visits his once vaunted campaign trail in Europe he is being met with cold shoulders and words of warning.

Even the once Socialist stalwart nations of Germany, France and Italy are now looking upon the actions of Barak Obama with disdain. They have publicly questioned the soundness of the Presidents push for governments to spend more money to get the world economy moving again.

What they are saying (without saying it) is that this has been tried before. They have tried it before …and…. IT DOES NOT WORK!

So I leave with this one question. If the great Socialist Utopias of Europe are not willing to go further down this path because they understand that it will only do more harm than good, then why are we the citizens of the freest nation on earth allowing our government to lead us this way?

Watch the video and learn… I welcome your opinion.

Filed under: Cons & Contradictions

Watch the Birdy

Recently in the news there was a lot of furor over AIG giving out millions in bonuses to some of it’s top executives. I don’t want to get into the argument of whether that was correct or not, I’m sure there are many opinions on both sides.

What I want to point out today is something that many of us missed. While the left hand was waving for our attention the right hand was doing something else that the dolts in the media didn’t see.

While the spectacle of Chris Dodd stuttering uncontrollably as he tried to explain his way out of allowing the AIG bonuses without throwing the Obama administration and Timothy Geihtner under the bus was amusing. It served to dupe the one-sided media types.

What didn’t get reported this weekend and last week was the fact that the Feds decided to throw and additional $1 Trillion dollars at the market and made an additional $6 billion dollar commitment to keep buying MBS (mortgage backed securities).

Sounds good right? What’s so bad about that. Well I’ll tell you. They don’t have the money …or should I say WE don’t have the money to do this with. So the printing presses were pushed into full gear and just to top the bad news off with more bad news… ready…

We used the freshly printed money to buy our own debt. Now in the real world this is essentially like ‘kiting’ a check. You know, you go down to the bank and you deposit a check from your own account back into that account.

You don’t really have an extra grand in the bank but for a brief while the books show that you do. The government just did that. I dare you to try it! They would nail you for fraud and throw you in the slammer for sure!

But the hypocrisy of all this nonsense is not the worst part. The worst part of all this is that we know, everyone with any common since and historical economic knowledge knows that printing money devalues the currency and leads to inflation.

Our only saving grace is that monetary policy with regard to printing new dollars has been relatively tight over the years and we are in a recessionary time, so maybe, just maybe we make it without getting dinged to hard this time.

It’s scary out there. While things should start to improve, we won’t see real improvement and wealth generation until the bureaucrats and blow-hards in Washington quit with their Tax & Spend ways.

America, this is our wake up call! We can’t spend our way out of the mess this time. We need to save and our government needs to save along with us. It’s time to STOP spending money we don’t have.

That’s my opinion, I welcome yours.

Filed under: Cons & Contradictions, Economics 101

Blogging on the Road