Archives July 2012

BEWARE, COMMUNISM REMAINS A SERIOUS THREAT

Until recent times, the great menace of the world was Communism. We fought Communism, both on the battle field and in the so-called cold war. Communism posed a threat to the entire world, led in particular by the Soviet Union and their autocratic leaders who threatened to bury us, from outside, and from within. That threat continued through the 1980’s, and the collapse of the USSR.

Communism still rules many nations of the world with an iron fist…where freedoms of speech and press and religion are suppressed beyond the wildest imaginations of naive young Americans who did not grow up under the nascent threat. Yes, China, Viet Nam, North Korea, Cuba and Russia provide education, health care and even housing free to their citizens, but at what cost?

The cost of freedom.

We feared Communism much the same as we feared Nazism, because the ideology is rooted in totalitarianism: Defined better as total government control over the lives of its subjects. Under Communism, the government allows you to live, to be educated, to have housing and to be well. There is no competition, no free market, no ownership.

In recent years, Communism has morphed into a state of respectability. It is no longer a dirty word. Attitudes and perspectives have changed immensely. Today, people (like myself) who warn of the threat of Communism rising from within are considered right-wing nuts.

Socialism has become an acceptable term, even an acceptable form of government for many Americans. One might ask, what is the difference between socialism and Communism? Answer: Not much. Communism is simply the extreme end of socialism. The line between the two ideologies is blurry, at best. It doesn’t begin at any one point.

Nowadays, folks who support far left socialism are quick at name-calling and demonizing anyone who brings up the subject. No doubt, some of my readers will label me a McCarthyite, likened to the Wisconsin senator of the 1950’s who went overboard in his exposing Communists in the U.S., some of whom were wrongly vilified. Fact is, McCarthy’s mission was noble. He simply became blinded by zealousness. We should have more Americans in government today who would bring awareness of stealth enemies to the forefront.

The threat is just as valid today as it was of yesteryear. But time has passed and new generations who have lived blindly fat and happy in the age of technology, never to struggle and sacrifice very much. They are unaware of the oppression that people have suffered under Communism/socialism control around the world. It’s a threat we should not ignore.

I always make note of the Communist acronym U.S.S.R. The last two words of that national title was “Socialist Republic.” Today, many of my most liberal friends de-emphasize “socialism” as a threat, but as a humane system of government by which all citizens are entitled to government benefits.

Many American politicians and congressional members will readily admit they lean toward socialism and would strive toward that direction in future years. Then what? Where does it stop?

Rep. Maxine Waters slipped of the tongue in her congressional debate with Shell Oil representatives, basically threatening to “socialize” the oil industry with government takeover. Check it out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3I-PVVowFY

Not long ago, the Democratic Socialists of America, which changed its name in 1972 from the Socialist Party of America, released a list of seventy members who are elected officials in congress. For the list, visit:

http://www.therightperspective.org/2012/04/01/socialists-in-congress-revealed/

The news media excoriated Rep. Allen West, of Florida, for daring to suggest that more than seventy members of the present congress are Communists. Considering his distinguished background as a military officer and unbridled intellectual, I serious doubt he made this up from thin air.

Congressman says 80 fellow lawmakers are communists – First Read

Political pandering targets seekers of entitlements who prefer sustenance from the taxpayers instead of earning their way from blood, sweat and tears like we and our forefathers did. Just as with the proletariat of Russia in 1917, segments of the U.S. political arena are organizing unions and other organizations, like A.C.O.R.N. offshoots, to get behind far leftist candidates who make hundreds of promises for “easy freebees if you vote for me.” In reality, these politicians are only seeking more and more power, until one day, our lives will be ruled by the government as it has been in many other oppressive regimes that promise  everything to the poor.

The largest public employees union in the nation, including the SEIU, have come out of the closet, making no bones about their political leanings. Just look at the demonstrations in L.A. last year:

Communists and SEIU Members march together at May Day Demonstration, L.A., Ca. – YouTube

In 1958, Cleon Skousen wrote a book entitled, “The Naked Communist” in which he revealed the 45 declared goals of the Communist Party and their quest to overtake the United States Government. Skousen was a faith-based author and political theorist whose list is eerily accurate in hindsight. As I perused the list, I, too, thought that some of those objectives weren’t so bad. But, others are very troublesome. Check it out:

http://rense.com/general32/americ.htm

Now we have a president whose mentors and idols throughout childhood and into his academic surroundings have been firmly entrenched in Communist/Socialist ideology. One doubts that has changed very much, other than cloaking his stated positions in the red white and blue in order to gain power.

What bothers me most, is not his aims and objectives. It’s the people who will actually fall for the ruse and give him four more years in power in which he will no longer be concerned about being answerable to an electorate.

Communism has not disappeared in America. Not by a long shot. And the Communist Party would not be endorsing a candidate for president if he  was not not their man for furthering their objectives.

Communist Party USA Endorses Obama for 2012 | Independent Political Report

Communist Party USA Endorses Obama & Democrats for 2012 | Fellowship of the Minds

A MOSAIC: OBAMA, ISLAM, COMMUNISM | Marshall Frank

 

COLORADO SHOOTING: SEARCHING FOR ANSWERS

The best way to describe people like the Colorado shooter, James Holmes, is that they are actors. They are people with deep-seeded disturbances who live in two worlds; The real world and their own world behind closed doors. They are able to fool us all.

     In the real world, they adapt to every day norms going about work, school and play as though completely normal, one of us. They laugh, they strive, they love. Many times, in my thirty years on the job at Miami-Dade Police, I heard the words, “He seemed like such a nice boy!”

    Ted Bundy seemed like a nice boy.

    Then, there is their secret world. When the door closes behind them and the rest of the world is shut out, they wallow in fantasy. Some are sexually based. Some are hate or power based. An Islamist terrorist blows up innocent people based on a religious and/or political callings.

     Others are simply inexplicable. Thus, the Colorado shooter.

     James Holmes will become the subject of media pundits and experts all across the country with every hypothesis imaginable trying to determine where the blame lies. What made him go crazy? What about parents? Drugs? Most of all, why didn’t anyone see the signs?

     The world has seven billion people, and the U.S. has 310 million of them. We cannot monitor every human being.

     James Holmes might have been a loner, a weirdo, a non-conformist, but none of these traits are illegal nor reason to bring someone in for psychiatric testing. Having never been arrested, he slipped through the proverbial cracks.

     Multiple killer, Ted Bundy, who did not always sexually assault his victims, was a bright law student with good looks and a mountain of charm. A typical Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, he lived a life fooling everyone, normal as apple pie. He used trust as a weapon to accomplish his goals. When those doors closed behind him, he lived in fantasyland, pondering where and how to carry out the impulses that drove him to violent behavior.

     These people are sociopaths. They have no feelings of guilt or remorse. They can pass a polygraph with flying colors, despite being guilty.

     Sociopaths are not limited to killers. They can be your neighbors, your politicians and even your family members. They live a life of deception in order to achieve their goals, even if only for money and power. There are politicians and other celebrities who live two lives, one in front of the camera, and the one behind closed doors. Unfortunately, we have no choice but to accept the imperfections of an imperfect world. That’s certainly no consolation to the victims in Colorado, living or deceased.

     Pro and anti gun warriors are already coming out to defend and/or to condemn guns in America. The 2nd Amendment is here to stay, as it should. But it’s not impossible to pass laws that restrict the nature of guns people can buy and own. Free speech does not protect the dangers of crying “Fire!” in a crowded theater. Neither is it sensible that average citizens can own assault weapons of mass destruction that are intended for military conflict.  Meanwhile, because this is such a high-profile news item, look for politicians to exploit and capitalize to their individual benefit.       

     There will always be sociopaths among us. John Wayne Gacy was an affable man who entertained as a clown at kids parties. Jeffery Dahmer ate his victims. Charles Whitman, also 24, gained fame as the Texas tower killer in 1966, killing sixteen innocents. In 2007, a South Korean student opened fire and killed 32 people on the campus of Virginia Tech.

     I’ve often looked at the family pictures of child victim, Jon Benet Ramsey, age 6, who was strangled to death at her home in 1996. Physical evidence and circumstances at the scene show it had to be committed inside, by one of three family members; mom, dad, brother, age 11. One of those is a sociopath who can fool everyone by seeming to be perfectly sane.

     I came to know hundreds of violent criminals in my police career. Many had a conscience. The most dangerous were the ones without, because they were just like you and me.

     Don’t be surprised that one day you’ll be uttering the words, “It’s unbelievable. He seemed so nice.”

FALLOUT FROM MOOCHING OFF THE WELFARE SYSTEM

Signs posted in national parks read, “Don’t feed the animals.” When animals are fed, they stop hunting.

If you keep feeding the alligator, the alligator will eventually eat you.

Zoo animals are never released to hunt for food, because they can’t. They never had to.

Such is the analogy of the welfare state. Provide sustenance to people who are otherwise capable of supporting themselves, and they will learn to live off hand-outs rather than earn their own way. Eventually, that well runs dry.

Study the tragic life of one man. At 18, Bernard had a drug problem. His divorced father sought medical, psychological and other treatment which cost into the thousands in 1978. Also deemed bi-polar, Bernard was eligible for “disability” according to doctors. Old Dad arranged to be the payee, which helped Bernard obtain disability compensation from Social Security, to be applied toward treatments.

Bernard ran away at age 19, to be missing for three years. Dad wrote the government a letter cancelling all government payments and to remove Bernard from disability rolls. During that time, Bernard had married a pothead stripper and moved to a far away state. Each held odd jobs until one day, the Social Security office summoned him — out of the blue — to the local office. They informed Bernard that the government owed him $16,000 in back payments for the time they didn’t know where to send the checks.

What a bonanza for a couple who enjoyed growing their own marijuana. Shortly after Bernard’s payments resumed, (yes, resumed) the wife got pregnant. After the baby’s birth, she got pregnant again. For every child, the couple was awarded more payments.

Bernard worked occasionally in restaurants, but never long enough at any place to jeopardize his government check. If he showed he could hold a job, he would lose the money. Eventually, he and his woman exploited the welfare systems as a sole source for support. That included free medical care for the entire family, on your dime. Could he and she have worked at a regular job and paid their own way? Absolutely, but what for?

Fast forward to 2012. Little has changed. Bernard’s children were raised by a joint venture of a children’s home and a pair of loving grandparents because Bernard and his mate gradually lost the capacity to be responsible. Bernard got divorced and has since lived with two other women, also on government assistance…naturally.

Now over fifty, with fried brains and an addict to pain killers, Bernard has lived in a twilight zone tethered to government welfare and Section Eight housing and food stamps which is useful for buying extra pills on the street. Now, he is virtually unable to work if he had to. The welfare system enabled him until he became truly disabled. Over the years, Bernard would lose all his teeth to extractions, each worth more refills of pain medicine.

I know Bernard. He’s a member of my family. I watched like a bystander as his sense of ambition and incentives to be independent completely vanished, thanks to a generous government that refused to sever the umbilical cord of entitlements.

Welfare fraud statistics are inherently inaccurate. They only itemize the people who are actually caught. Many more illegitimate recipients are not caught, and they continue to mooch off the system. Bernard would have been considered “legitimate” in their records. Multiply him by a few million.

Folks who receive $15,000 to $20,000 a year in unemployment are supposed to claim they are looking for work. Undoubtedly, many are. Undoubtedly, many lie. We are supposed to accept them at their word. This is where millions of welfare folks decide to live together without getting married, because the benefits double. According to the OMB, unemployment compensations in FY 2012 will be in excess of $64 billion.

Today, there are 46 million people receiving food stamps, compared to 32 million when the current president took office. That can buy a lot more than food. It also buys a lot of voters.  If there are people who think that all those folks are in true need of food stamps, I have some beachfront property for sale on the moon.

We are fast becoming a full entitlement society, ceding to government the reins of our individual lives, which will create an entire culture of Bernards, sucking the taxpayers dry, aided and abetted by the government.

The tax dollars that Bernard has collected every month has not only helped him to remain unemployed, but hooked to his habits. In truth, Uncle Sam didn’t help someone to become productive, it enabled an addict. Taxpayers and politicians continue to feed into the handout scam with good intentions, when in fact they are helping millions to remain dependent, rather than independent.

We can multiply Bernard’s story by several million, like those animals that are fed without having to hunt. The costs are incalculable, not only in money, but in the waste of human potential.

Bernard’s name is fictitious, but he’s not.

"TED" – A DISGUSTING MOVIE

 
 Ted
If ever there was a motion picture that reflects the degradation of the society we now live it, it’s 106 minutes of garbage entitled; “Ted.”
The only reason I remained in chair was to write a short piece as a blog to share my disdain with readers and urge everyone not to spend one nickle to support this picture, and to absolutely prohibit your kids and/or grandkids from seeing it.
I’m happy to report that my sixteen year-old grandson in Asheville told me he attended the movie and walked out at the halfway point, in disgust. Kudos to Aidan Lytle.
Yes, the movie is rated “R” which is supposed to prevent young kids from seeing the movie, but you know how that goes. And when it comes out in DVD rentals, every child from the age of four and up will have an opportunity to view it from the couch, unless some thoughtful parents or guardians do the right thing. Most won’t.
I’m no prude. I write books with smatterings of foul language and some sexual content. Profanity is a part of today’s lexicon. But this was not only over the top, it was totally disgusting.
Mark Wahlberg, an otherwise good actor, plays a young man who grew up with a talking teddy bear, his best buddy with a Boston accent just like him. Teddy is supposed to be the laugh maker who shocks the audience with a constant barrage of “F” words, which precedes every noun as an adjective. His disgusting language is exceeded only by his sexual appetite which goes even further.
What’s disgusting? Let’s start with Mark coming home with his girl, only to find Ted on the couch with four hot chicks. On the floor is a huge pile of human manure, deposited there by one of the chicks as a joke. The frenetic scene is all about who, what and when…and how it will be cleaned up. In the theater, as the teddy bear continues to utter unfunny expletives, young teens are actually laughing and I’m wondering … why? In it’s most broad-minded context, there was nothing funny.
I know I’m over the hill and detached from the youth of today, but not that detached.
In another scene, Ted makes goo-goo eyes at another hot chick and starts flirting by simulating sex… that is, sex in every position imaginable, including oral … followed by squirting hand cream over his face with a pump jar…from which the theater kids howled.
Meanwhile, every other scene (seemingly) depicts the sweet loving teddy bear with Wahlberg smoking pot via the glass bong…having a great time, glorifying drugs, inviting every kid in America to give it a try. Why not?
So, you get the idea.
If this is what Hollywood calls humor in 2012, we have not only reached the slippery slope of morality in America, we are at the edge of the cliff. Mark Wahlberg, an Oscar nominated actor for “The Fighter” should hang his head in shame for signing a contract to play in this movie. Seth MacFarlane, who wrote and directed the film, and was the voice of the despicable teddy bear character, should be banned from the movie making industry.
But that’s not going to happen, because the movie is a box office smash, currently number three in the country, grossing over $123 million thus far…and counting. And look for “Ted 2” in another year, even more repulsive than the first.
Even more amazing than the film itself, are the professional reviewers who lured young people to sit in the seats of this cinematic tragedy by giving it high ratings. Such was the case of several reviewers, including Roger Ebert, who praised the film as the best comedy screenplay of the year.
Ebert’s reviews are as much garbage as the junk movies he praises.
That’s one old man’s opinion.

“TED” – A DISGUSTING MOVIE

 

 Ted

If ever there was a motion picture that reflects the degradation of the society we now live it, it’s 106 minutes of garbage entitled; “Ted.”

The only reason I remained in chair was to write a short piece as a blog to share my disdain with readers and urge everyone not to spend one nickle to support this picture, and to absolutely prohibit your kids and/or grandkids from seeing it.

I’m happy to report that my sixteen year-old grandson in Asheville told me he attended the movie and walked out at the halfway point, in disgust. Kudos to Aidan Lytle.

Yes, the movie is rated “R” which is supposed to prevent young kids from seeing the movie, but you know how that goes. And when it comes out in DVD rentals, every child from the age of four and up will have an opportunity to view it from the couch, unless some thoughtful parents or guardians do the right thing. Most won’t.

I’m no prude. I write books with smatterings of foul language and some sexual content. Profanity is a part of today’s lexicon. But this was not only over the top, it was totally disgusting.

Mark Wahlberg, an otherwise good actor, plays a young man who grew up with a talking teddy bear, his best buddy with a Boston accent just like him. Teddy is supposed to be the laugh maker who shocks the audience with a constant barrage of “F” words, which precedes every noun as an adjective. His disgusting language is exceeded only by his sexual appetite which goes even further.

What’s disgusting? Let’s start with Mark coming home with his girl, only to find Ted on the couch with four hot chicks. On the floor is a huge pile of human manure, deposited there by one of the chicks as a joke. The frenetic scene is all about who, what and when…and how it will be cleaned up. In the theater, as the teddy bear continues to utter unfunny expletives, young teens are actually laughing and I’m wondering … why? In it’s most broad-minded context, there was nothing funny.

I know I’m over the hill and detached from the youth of today, but not that detached.

In another scene, Ted makes goo-goo eyes at another hot chick and starts flirting by simulating sex… that is, sex in every position imaginable, including oral … followed by squirting hand cream over his face with a pump jar…from which the theater kids howled.

Meanwhile, every other scene (seemingly) depicts the sweet loving teddy bear with Wahlberg smoking pot via the glass bong…having a great time, glorifying drugs, inviting every kid in America to give it a try. Why not?

So, you get the idea.

If this is what Hollywood calls humor in 2012, we have not only reached the slippery slope of morality in America, we are at the edge of the cliff. Mark Wahlberg, an Oscar nominated actor for “The Fighter” should hang his head in shame for signing a contract to play in this movie. Seth MacFarlane, who wrote and directed the film, and was the voice of the despicable teddy bear character, should be banned from the movie making industry.

But that’s not going to happen, because the movie is a box office smash, currently number three in the country, grossing over $123 million thus far…and counting. And look for “Ted 2” in another year, even more repulsive than the first.

Even more amazing than the film itself, are the professional reviewers who lured young people to sit in the seats of this cinematic tragedy by giving it high ratings. Such was the case of several reviewers, including Roger Ebert, who praised the film as the best comedy screenplay of the year.

Ebert’s reviews are as much garbage as the junk movies he praises.

That’s one old man’s opinion.