Sometime soon, these local officials need to start getting SUED

"Learn to do good;
Seek justice,
Rebuke the oppressor;
Defend the fatherless,
Plead for the widow."
Isaiah 1:17

Yesterday, Tony McDonald had a piece about the constitutional authority for local officials to issue the hostage in place edicts we've seen across Texas.  While we recommend reading the piece in full, the TL,DR version is that such authority is non-existent.  Unfortunately, McDonald also points out that courts have a long history of siding with government during times of alleged 'crisis.'

While it may make long-term sense to file such a suit to make the constitutional point...odds of it begetting short term relief are likely low.

There is, however, another alternative.

It's not a secret that these hostage in place orders are causing massive economic damage.  Perhaps it's appropriate to make the relevant local entities pay for the damage they've caused.  Thus, you'd be going after them for the practical damage they've caused, rather than some abstract constitutional point.

It gets better.  Because, odds are, such a suit wouldn't even have to be successful in court (though you would need to be prepared to argue it).  Just the threat of such a lawsuit would likely spur these local entities to change their behavior.

The biggest question is when.  We're still, obviously, in the process of having information about both the virus and the economic impact come in.  By some point between Thursday of next week and Tuesday of the week after (Apr. 16-21).

Bottom Line: We're not there yet, but the time is rapidly approaching.

BOOK REVIEW: Breakthrough, by James O'Keefe

Over the past five years, no journalist has had a bigger impact than James O'Keefe.  From defunding ACORN, to helping to change laws, to forcing staff changes at major media organizations, Project Veritas gets results.  That's why the left despises O'Keefe.

Breakthrough is O'Keefe's memoir of Project Veritas' first half decade.  O'Keefe narrates the roller-coaster ride in riveting detail.  We were astonished how much action they'd seen in such a short time.

Long before Barack Obama made him a household name, O'Keefe was a student of Saul Alinsky (16). Prior to the ACORN sting, O'Keefe partnered with Lila Rose on the original Planned Parenthood operation.  The ACORN investigation, rather than being financed by nefarious 'billionaires', was put on O'Keefe's credit card:

My critics would later insist that right-wing billionaires had to be funding what would prove to be a remarkably successful sting on a notoriously corrupt organization, but they were profoundly wrong.  I was so broke that summer I had to hit up Stan for the gas and take a long route over the Chesapeake Bay to avoid paying tolls on I-95 through Baltimore. (38)

But enough money came in, the investigation moved forward, and the results speak for themselves:



Following the ACORN investigation his luck turned.  A botched operation in New Orleans (105-122) gave the Obama administration the pretense they needed to put the screws on O'Keefe, which they did.  The middle section of the book details O'Keefe's struggles with the Federal judicial system, which ultimately led to O'Keefe pleading to a minor misdemeanor and spending three years on Federal Probation.  During this time, O'Keefe could not leave the state of New Jersey without permission from the Federal government.

Breakthrough details more incidents than we can do justice with an online review.  The common thread is using unconventional means to discover truths powerful people would rather keep hidden.  Project Veritas' successes inevitably creates a backlash, where the powerful use government to intimidate citizen journalists.  The specifics vary, but the results move the ball forward.  Cahnman's Musings wholeheartedly recommends this insightful, provocative, thrilling, expose of James O'Keefe's Guerilla War to Expose Fraud and Save Democracy.

 Update: Read Twisted Conservative's Review here.

Alinsky in Austin

"Present arrangements must be disorganized if they are to be displaced by new patterns that provide the opportunities and means for citizen participation.  All change means disorganization of the old and organization of the new....The organizer dedicated to changing the life of a particular community must first rub raw the resentments of the people of the community; fan the latent hostilities of many of the people to the point of overt expression....An organizer must stir up dissatisfaction and discontent; provide a channel into which the people can angrily pour their frustration."

Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals, p. 116-7.

(Author's note: We were in the Capitol Tuesday night; this piece is based on our observations but should not be taken as any sort of definitive factual statement.)

Tuesday night, Saul Alinsky showed up in Austin wearing pink sneakers.

It was a weird night.  We didn't feel comfortable in that crowd, but neither did we feel in danger.  It was a tragically fascinating event to watch.

There's been a lot of speculation about what Wendy Davis hoped to accomplish with her filibuster.  She knew Governor Perry would call  the legislature back into town to pass the legislation.  That's already happened.

We think the Alinksy quote explains Davis' actions.  It's not secret that the left wants to take over Texas and that they need people to give them their contact info to succeed.  Davis' filibuster was designed to make people angry enough to show up and give their e-mail address to Battleground Texas.

This was an interesting opening gambit from Battleground Texas....

How to Kick the Left's Ass in Travis County

With the emergence of Battleground Texas, a lot of ink has been spilled about the left's efforts to flip Texas.  The threat is real, but we can beat it.  One key is to make the left play defense on territory it thinks it owns.

Cahnman's Musings has been a resident of Travis County for five and a half years.  We've always found the reports of it's liberalism, much like Mark Twain's demise, to be greatly exaggerated.  Before living in Travis County, we grew up in NYC and spend half a decade in and around Los Angeles.  Cahnman's Musings has seen places hopelessly up their ass with progressivism.  Travis county ain't it.

One thing we've always observed is that there are a lot of people in Travis County who are liberty minded in a general sense, but don't follow politics closely and don't vote.  Those folks are the key.  One example is the fraternities and sororities at U.T.  The Greek system is under assault from the permanent U.T. bureaucracy, and kids in the Greek system don't buy into progressivism in the same way other U.T. students do.  If you take 20 to 100 active members per house and multiply it by 20 houses, all of a sudden you're talking about meaningful vote totals.

And that's just one example.

In that spirit, Cahnman's Musings offers the following outline to put the left on defense in Travis County:

• Online Video -- This is an inexpensive way to push information.  Online video allows us to go around media gatekeepers.  The key is to use humor to capture attention.

• Identify, Register, and Turnout New Texans -- What do Glenn Beck, Chuck DeVore, and myself have in common?!?  We're all economic refugees from blue states, and we're all conservatives.  Economic refugees to Texas are a self-selected group.  The people moving to Texas aren't liberals.  As Governor Perry told Glenn Beck last week, "if they're takers who want government to take care of them from cradle to grave, they're going to stay in California."

• Follow the Money -- Big government inevitably begets boondoggles.  Nobody likes boondoggles.  On a related note, there could be a major scandal breaking in San Antonio.

• Make the Villains Household Names -- There are plenty of potential villains in Travis County.  In the spirit of Alinsky's thirteenth rule, Cahnman's Musings suggests raising these people's profile.  Personally, we'd start with this guy.

• Education -- We need to increase the economic literacy of average citizens.

Any effort to protect Texas from the left must include Travis County.  There are a lot of potential voters here.  In the short term, we can put the left on defense; over the longer haul, we can kick their ass.

How Marxists Subvert Western Society

This video from former KGB agent Yuri Bezmenov, who defected towards the end of the Cold War, explains the process by which Moscow undermined the West from within; understanding this process is crucial to understanding the Sexual Revolution:



Highlights:

• 85% of KGB activity was subversive.

• Subversion -- A destructive, aggressive, activity aimed to destroy the target country.

• Sun Tzu -- Subvert your enemy until he no longer sees you as an enemy.

• FOUR STAGES OF SUBVERSION

1. Demoralization
   
   • 15 to 20 years
   • The time it takes to maleducate one generation.
   • Influencing public opinion via various means.
   • Stiring up greivances
   • Textbook Alinsky
   • Destroy and ridicule Biblical Religion and replace it with sects and cults.
   • Distract education away from traditional academics.
   • Exploit a gullible media.
   • Moral relativism
   • A slow watering down of standards.
   • Destroy the relationship between employer and employee.
   • Flood influencers of public opinion with Marxist propaganda about 'equality.'
2. Destabilization
   
   • Economy, Law and Order, Military.
   • Radicalization of the bargaining process.
   • Make Constructive compromise impossible.
   • Raise contempt for traditional sources of authority
   • Media Puts itself opposite society
   • Students spring into action
   • eg. Occupy Wall St
   • Antagonistic Clashes between groups of society.
     
3. Crisis
   
   • Traditional sources of authority collapse.
   • Growth of non-elected committees
   • Population looks for a 'savior'
   • Strongman comes in to stop chaos.
   • Top down, Bottom up, and inside out.
     
4. Normalization

• Self-appointed leaders no longer need revolution.
• Stabilize the situation by force.
• Elimination of agitators from earlier phases.
• At this point, requires military force to reverse.

The easiest way to combat this is to bring a society back to Biblical religion; faith in God prevents subversion.

MOVIE REVIEW: "The Project" on TheBlazeTV

"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." John 8:32

Since the 2010 controversy over the Terrorist Victory Monument Ground Zero Mosque, Islamic cultural subversion in the United States has come under scrutiny.  "The Project" on theBlazeTV examines the state of play surrounding Islamic cultural subversion and is required viewing for anyone who wants to understand current controversies.  "The Project" should also be viewed by anyone who believes Islamic cultural subversion is not a big deal.

Contemporary Islamic cultural subversion is very similar its Communist equivalent from the 1930's to the 1950's.  The project, written in 1982, is a document discovered by Swiss Law enforcement two months after 9/11.  Similar to the 1963 goals of the Communist Party USA, the project outlines the Muslim Brotherhood's "Grand Jihad" to "eliminate and destroy Western Civilization from within."  The project advocates taking over Western Civilization by deception and evolutionary sabotage, rather than revolution.  The endgame, however, is exactly the same as Usama bin Laden's

Islamic 'scripture' commands all Muslims to conquer the Globe in the name of Allah.  While they agree on the goal, Muslims disagree on timing and tactics.  Moderate Muslims believe the time of Global Dominance is so far in the future that they have no special obligation to bring it about.  Radical Jihadists, however, believe they are obligated to bring Islamic dominance into being.  There are two types of radical Jihadists: violent and stealth.  Violent Jihadists, like Usama bin Laden, believe in direct confrontation.  Stealth Jihadists, by contrast, seek to weaken us from within first and kill us later; the Project details the plan for stealth cultural subversion.

"The project" chronicles Islamic cultural subversion in the United States over the past decade.  Just like the minions of Saul Alinsky, the primary strategy of civilizational Jihadists is to entrench themselves and corrupt influential institutions from within.  That starts with culture, education, and media then moves quickly to finance and government.  For Islamic cultural subversives, the current operational objective is to silence honest discussion of Islamic 'scripture;' their primary tactic is political correctness and the word 'Islamophobia.'  Islamophobia, a term deliberately modeled after similar homosexual efforts, is designed to slander anyone who honestly discusses Islamic 'scripture' as a bigot.  Of the many examples cataloged, I find the purge of FBI training materials most disturbing.

This is not a Democrat/Republican issue.  Both parties are guilty.  Infiltration by Islamic cultural subversives began under George W. Bush, it's gotten infinitely worse under Barack Obama.  This past summer, when five members of Congress sent letters requesting more information to the Inspectors General of five federal departments, they were first attacked by Republicans.  The only difference is that where establishment Republicans are either willfully blind or ignorantly profiteering, the Barack Obama Democrats are deliberately treasonous.

Moving forward, making public the documents already possessed by the executive branch is the top priority.  In the 2008 Holy Land Foundation trial, the Bush Justice Department provided 80 boxes of discovery material to the defense.  After the Obama administration came into office, those boxes were sealed away in a federal warehouse.  While the public cannot access those documents, an even bigger outrage is that Congressional Intelligence Committees cannot access them either.  The United States cannot solve this problem until the public (or at least Congress) grasps its magnitude.

For those of us who believe in the Judeo-Christian foundation of Western Civilization, a dirty little secret exists.  The struggle against Islamic cultural subversion is almost identical to the struggle against Communist cultural subversion.  With courage and truth, we can defeat both; hopefully without firing a shot.  Andrew Breitbart famously observed that culture, education, and media lie upstream of policy; that's just as true for cultural Jihad as cultural Marxism.  Step 1 is to honestly, if belatedly, define our enemy and their objective.  "The project" on theBlazeTV does exactly that, using that enemy's own words.  Do you want to face the ugly truth, or are you afraid?!?

Read the 1982 document here.

Read the 1991 follow-up document here.

Subscribe to theBlazeTV here.

Farm Subsidies: The Continuing Failure of U.S. House Republicans

 

This morning, I received an e-mail from Americans for Prosperity, money quote:

It’s hard to believe, but the numbers show that a whopping eighty percent of Farm Bill spending goes toward food stamp and nutrition programs.  The rest is welfare of a different kind: corporate welfare. The bill includes pork-like programs that do more to support special interests than small farmers, since the benefits go toward the biggest and best-connected farms that know how to navigate the Washington maze.

Every five years Congress must vote to reauthorize these USDA programs or watch them expire, meaning that the so-called Farm Bill is an opportunity to make serious reforms and real cuts to the billions we waste on farm subsidies and food stamps.

The Senate already rammed the Farm Bill through, and they failed to make meaningful cuts. The
House of Representatives is expected to take up the issue this week, and they need to hear from you that you oppose spending hundreds of billions of dollars on even more food and farm welfare.

With all due respect to AFP, the real outrage isn't the content of the bill, it's the fact that a group of allegedly conservative representatives, who were elected with an explicit mandate to cut spending, are doing a farm bill in the first place.  Our government has operated has operated exclusively via continuing resolution for three years now (*).  Nothing ever gets done under normal business these days, yet the House GOP is taking the time to do a farm bill.  Why?!?

The answer, of course, is pork.  Much like the Highway Bill House Republicans passed earlier this year, farm subsidies are a favorite tool for big-spending Republicans to continue business as usual.  I've written about dismantling the U.S. Department of Agriculture before, because nothing good comes out of Federal farm programs.  That Congressional Republicans have chosen to make agricultural pork a priority clearly demonstrates how little they've learned.

After 18 months, the failures of Republicans in the 112th Congress are myriad.  They caved on the Debt Ceiling.  On Fast and Furious, they have combined buffoonish rhetorical bluster with far too little action far too late.  They've caved (multiple times) on the Keystone Pipeline.  They haven't (with the notable exception of Congressman Pete King) lifted a finger to address the ongoing infiltration of the U.S. Government by the Muslim Brotherhood.  Heck, they caved on defunding Obamacare.  On each of these examples, the Republican position has enjoyed public support, yet Republicans in Congress have allowed Barack Obama to psych them out using Alinsky's first rule.  Given countless opportunities to go for the jugular against Obama, House Republicans flinch every single time.

In the 113th Congress, this cannot continue.

As long as the conservative grassroots continues to do what we've been doing for three years, Republicans will win bigger in 2012 than they won in 2010.  Simultaneous with winning the current election, the conservative grassroots needs to lay the foundation to hold President Romney and the 113th Congress accountable in 2013 and 2014.  On a practical level, that means a post-election, mid-November, leadership fight.  John Bohener (along with Eric Cantor and Paul Ryan) and Mitch McConnell have repeatedly demonstrated inept political judgement combined with spines on linguine.  In 2013, Louie Gohmert and Jim DeMint must run Congress.

Returning to the original topic of this post, you can help AFP kill the Farm Bill here.

* I apologize for linking to Wikipedia but it's the site that presents the data most clearly.

Ron Paul's Pathetic Twelve Percent

"if your organization is small in numbers, then do what Gideon did: conceal the members in the dark but raise a din and clamor that will make the listener believe that your organization numbers many more than it does."

- Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals, p.126


The Ron Paul crowd had an opportunity to make a statement last night; they delivered less than 12%.

This is HUGE.  Yesterday's Texas Primary was the perfect storm (I apologize for the cliche, but it's appropriate) for the Ron Paul crowd.  The Presidential race was over.  There was a competitive U.S. Senate race, where Rick Santorum and Ron Paul endorsed the same candidate, which lowered the temperature between conservatives and Ron Paul types.  I actually have conservative friends who voted for Ron Paul as an anti-Romney protest vote.

For all those advantages; the Ron Paul crowd delivered less than 12%

What does this mean?!?

It means that the Ron Paul crowd is a minority, and not a particularly large one at that.  Now look, I want to audit the Fed.  I'm growing increasingly comfortable with currency competition.  The Ron Paul crowd is excellent on Second Amendment issues.

If the Ron Paul crowd wants to have an impact, then they need to come to terms with their minority status.  Then they need to grow up.  Ayn Rand makes some excellent points on economics, but her overall philosophy is terrifying as a basis for society.

I won't hold my breath.

Why We Need to Dismantle the Agriculture Department

Today, in discussing this story, Rush made the following point:

But I'm gonna tell you what's gonna happen. This is as predictable as the sun coming up in the morning and setting in the evening. All these organic food people are eventually going to become conservatives, because what's happening now is the government is figuring out that these organic food places exist, and that they're outside the regulatory process, and they're outside the tax- and-fee structure. And that can't stand. So what's gonna happen is the cities where these people operate and the state they operate, and the Feds are gonna get involved they're gonna start regulating this stuff eventually. They're gonna regulate what your free range chicken is given to eat.

Rush got me thinking about Agriculture Policy, and the basic existence of a U.S. Government Department of Agriculture scares me. There are lots of economic arguments against subsidizing agriculture (starting with the fact that's it a corporate welfare boondoggle), but the core issue is who controls land and the production of food.

Whenever Communists come to power, they seize control of land and food production.  Stalin did it.  Mao did it.  Fidel Castro did it.  Obviously, the U.S. Government hasn't (yet) seized farmland; but the infrastructure is there.  At this point, I've read enough Marxism, and seen enough things I thought impossible actually happen, that I can't put ANYTHING past this government.  After this government's assault on Chrysler do you really trust them with land and food?!?

As I've discussed before, Obama (and the New Left's) goal was "a long march through the institutions."  A federal Agriculture Department that controls food and land is a tool they can use in that march.  The 2010 Shirley Sherrod scandal proved that the Agriculture Department is already populated with Communists.  Whether or not some of the conspiracy theories are true, the fact that a U.S. Government Agriculture Department exists in the first place threatens every landowner in the country.  Given everything we've learned about Marxism via stealth, we need to dismantle the tools they can use in the future.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture: End it, don't Mend it.

Why Barack Obama REALLY Needs His Base

"The first step in Community Organization is community disorganization....Present arrangements must be disorganized if they are to be displaced by new patterns that provide the opportunities and means for citizen participation.  All change means disorganization of the old and organization of the new.....The organizer must first rub raw the resentments of the people of the community; fan the latent hostilities of many of the people to the point of overt expression."

- Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals, p. 116

"There is nothing more draining, nothing more fatal, than this classical politics, with its dried up rituals, its thinking without thought, its little closed world....As the welfare state collapses, we see the emergence of brute conflict between those who desire order and those who don't....To the point that any return to normal is no longer desirable or even imaginable....It is now publicly understood that crisis situations are so many opportunities for the restructuring of domination....How does a situation of generalized rioting become an insurrectionary situation?!?

- The Invisible Committee, The Coming Insurrection, pp. 11-19

"[W]e decided to declare May 1st, 2012 a People’s General Strike. Instead of calling upon unionized Labor to make a specific demand (illegal under Taft-Hartley), we are calling upon the people of the world to take this day away from school and the workplace, so that their absence makes their displeasure with this corrupt system be known."

- OccupyMay1st.org

Barack Obama cannot win this election.  He knows it.  That's why he's deliberately sowing chaos.

For months, people have been accusing President Obama of ginning up his base to help his re-election effort.  They miss Obama's purpose by a country mile.  Barack Obama isn't ginning up his base to show up at the polls, Obama is ginning up his base to riot.

The dirty little secret is that Obama's base isn't big enough to win an election.  That is why Democrats have to lie and pretend to be conservatives in order to win elections.  Furthermore, Obama's base doesn't reliably vote.  But people who don't vote will still riot.

Barack Obama's base consists of certain minorities (mainly blacks), Jon Stewart's audience, and the Unions.  If you look at who is fomenting chaos, it's these three groups.  The New Black Panthers are the Black element.  Occupy Wall St. is Jon Stewart's audience.  Unions are notorious commie thugs.  I expect La Raza to get into the action soon.

 The purpose of riots is to disrupt daily life, which confuses and frightens the broad apolitical middle.  This has three potential benefits for the left:

1) Overwhelming the New Administration - I think this is the real objective; as I wrote in February:

Barack Obama's allies in the #Occupy movement have clearly stated their intention to "Recreate [the chaos of 19]68" in 2012.  To understand why recreating 1968 benefits the hard left, one needs to properly understand the events of 1969.  In 1969, Richard Nixon assumed the Presidency following the Biggest Expansion of Government (prior to Obama) in American History.  Nixon's inauguration was followed shortly thereafter by Leftist Campus Takeovers, the Emergence of the Weathermen, Homosexual Attacks on the NYPD, the Manson Murders, and the Marxist-inspired 'Days of Rage.'  Against this backdrop, and a continuing War in Vietnam, conservative efforts to unwind Medicare and the War on Poverty floundered.  From the perspective of the Hard Left, which seeks to expand government and does not particularly care who holds elected office at any given time, 1969 (and Richard Nixon's entire Presidency) was an unqualified victory.

2) Bullying the Broad Apolitical Middle so they 'volutarily' Give The Left What They Want -  If the situation gets stressful enough, people who don't follow politics closely may decide that the path of least resistence is to give the rioters what they want.

3) Instigate a Massive Crackdown - This is what Glenn Beck thinks is the end-game.  George Soros has expressed similar sentiments.  I'm skeptical; as Alinsky says:

As an organizer I start where the world is, as it is, not as I would like it to be. That we accept the world as it is does not in any sense weaken our desire to change it into what we believe it should be — it is necessary to begin where the world is if we are going to change it to what we think it should be.

I don't think the American people are far enough gone, yet, to accept a massive crackdown.  A crackdown could wake up the broad apolical middle to the point where they wise-up to the left.  To me, instigating a massive crackdown seems too big a risk to the broader Marxist project.  On the other hand, if they could instigate a massive crack-down several years down the road, under a Republican, then they could demonize it.

If Barack Obama's base is angry, they'll create chaos, which is Obama's real objective. Historically, authority figures cave to this sort of thuggery, or tragedy ensues.  The possible difference, this time, is that there might be a critical mass of citizens who understand the game being played.

Conservatives need to wrap their heads around this reality.  We are going to win this election, then we're going to assume power amidst massive chaos.  When that happens we need to understand the game the left is really playing.  As the Invisible Committee said:

The Goal of any insurrection is to become irreversable. (130)

Forewarned is forearmed.

How Obama Can't Win and Wants Chaos -- The Strategic Petroleum Reserve

It's been clear to me for some time that Barack Obama can't win, he knows he can't win, and he's deliberately sowing chaos along with the Hard Left to prevent his successor (Hint: This Guy) from unwinding his previous legislative 'accomplishments.'.

People don't necessarily agree that Obama can't win, and I'm going to catalog the reasons why at some point soon.  I've already sat down to do this, but it's a MAJOR undertaking and it's going to take some time to do it right.  I ask for your patience.

In the meantime, just today we had an example of an action coming out of the Obama administration that makes zero sense from the perspective of winning an election, but makes all the sense in the world from the perspective of chaos and crony capitalism.

Today, you had the Obama White House leak that they would release oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve followed almost immediately by a retraction.

This makes ZERO sense from the perspective of winning an election; consider...

1) Voters know it's a gimmick, releasing SPR oil never lowers prices.
2) Even if you think the voters are stupid, you wouldn't do it 8 months before the election
3) You wouldn't release the information this clumsily; releasing this information this clumsily both creates uncertainty in financial markets AND it makes your campaign look inept.

If, on the other hand, your goal isn't re-election, but chaos, this begins to make sense.  I don't pretend to have access to any inside information about Obama's real motives, but consider:

1) Market Uncertainty gives Crony Socialist insiders opportunities to make oodles of money.
2) There was Major Uncertainty Over Energy leading up to the 2008 crash
3) Market Uncertainty hurts the economy, which makes sense if you want people on Food Stamps and prepared to riot if your successor tries to cut food stamps next year.

Again, doing this move this clumsily makes no sense from the perspective of winning an election, but makes all kinds of sense from the perspective of Creating Chaos and Crony Capitalism.

The Great Lie and Marxist Sexual "Freedom"

"Now the Serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made and he said unto the woman(1)....your eyes shall be open and you shall be as gods (5)....and the woman said, the serpent beguiled me, and I did eat (13)."  Genesis 3:1-13

"Lest we forget an over the shoulder acknowledgement to the very first radical...who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom -- Lucifer." Saul Alinsky

Marxist Sexual values are the tip of the Cultural Marxist spear that is poisoning our society.  Cultural Marxism uses Marxist ideology to reshape basic social values.  To paraphrase Herbert Marcuse one of the founders of Cultural Marxism:

the current organization of society [has] produced "surplus repression" by imposing socially unnecessary labor, unnecessary restrictions on sexuality, and a social system organized around profit and exploitation. In light of the diminution of scarcity and prospects for increased abundance, Marcuse called for the end of repression and creation of a new society.

Cultural Marxists understand that in order to re-create society in their evil image, you first need to undermine the "bourgeois" values that create a successful society in the first place.  In order to undermine self-reliance, Cultural Marxists use sex to sabotage the discipline necessary to delay gratification.  By surrendering to your primal lusts, instead of controlling (to the best of your ability) those lusts, you undermine your own self-respect; anyone who has ever taken a walk of shame knows this.  This is a deliberate form of mind control; once individuals give into chaos and disorder in their personal lives, Cultural Marxists know eventually society will give into chaos and disorder followed by tyranny.  Cultural Marxists use sex as a smokescreen, a VERY tempting smokescreen, and they've been VERY successful.

Potential for sexual decadence (which, in reality, never materializes as planned) makes utopianism an easy sell. As author Lisa Fabrizio has noted the Marxist:

conception of sex is that exercise of bodily functions that exists only for the use of human beings by other human beings solely as instruments of physical pleasure; often perversely so.

Cultural Marxists understand that, once people give into basic sexual urges, you can then re-shape their values in all sorts of other ways.  As just one small example, once we've made our own souls subservient to physical urges, it's a small step morally to make an unborn child's very life subservient to those same urges.  Marxist values re-define sex from an act of sharing and creation into an act of selfish gratification.

Cultural Marxists redefine freedom by confusing liberty and license.  Actions have consequences; traditional Western values believe you should be free to engage in the actions you choose so long as you're prepared to accept the consequences.  Marxists pervert that definition of freedom into one where you're encouraged to engage in self-destructive actions and some mythical "rich" person will subsidize the consequence.

There's a vast difference between letting people make their own decisions and celebrating their worst traits.  For example, should a woman choose to get gang-banged by the football team, traditional western values wouldn't stop her from engaging in that action, but they would insist that her and her family and her church bear the full cost of it's consequences.  Marxists, on the other hand, would say that she's the victim of a sexist 'power structure' and is thus entitled to a "free" abortion or treatment for the ensuing STD.  For the record, most women I know don't define freedom as having the government pay to have their insides scraped out by some abortionist after getting gang-banged by the football team.

These sexual decisions have very real economic consequences for society.  As history teaches, once a society collapses morally, economic collapse shortly follows.   As Dr. Melissa Clouthier details:

The nut of Sandra Fluke’s argument is this: pay for my contraception. If it doesn’t work, pay for my abortion. If I decide to have the kid, but not work and do something like “community organizing” or “reproductive rights activism”, pay for my lifestyle choice. 

And herein lies the problem with a purely libertine argument: Someone has to pay for all this freedom.

True personal liberty comes with a lot of personal responsibility.

The way it stands now, though, feminists are pushing for the state to take care of everything.  ...A truly “free” woman would pay for her choices, but the fact is, that these choices can all be very expensive.

Simply put, subsidizing the consequences of bad sexual decisions for everyone in society will undermine the individual personality traits that allows a productive economy to exist in the first place. 

Marxists claim they're the descendents of the Summer of Love and Woodstock.  That's true.  What Marxists fail to mention is that, just as night follows day, Altamont, Kent State, and Roe v. Wade are the inevitable consequences of the Summer of Love and Woodstock.  The sexual revolution lead to dramatic increases in abortion, divorce and illegitimacy; none of that is good.  Sex always has consequences, both good and bad; as a society, shouldn't we seek to maximize the former and minimize the latter?!?

Morality is the character to do what you should, and a free society in the traditional sense depends on it.  Sex, as anyone who's been sexually active for more than thirty seconds knows, can be either the most amazingly wonderful thing in this world, or the most terribly awful.  Whether sex is amazing or terrible depends on the underlying moral framework you approach it with.  As Match.com has documented married, conservative, Christians have the most and the best sex.  Marxist sexual values, on the other hand, lead to really, really, REALLY bad sex.  Good sex NEVER ends in a walk of shame or abortion; traditional sexual morality never necessitates "Rape Free Zones."

Marxist sexual values are the serpent, and the rest of us are Eve.

Author's Note: I wrote this piece over three sessions.  During the first session, I could not help overhearing/eavesdropping on a conversation three tables down about some girl's attempt to get a cervical cancer screening via Planned Parenthood and her four month (and counting) wait time.  This has to be said....

Financial Terrorism, the 2008 Crash, and the Coming Chaos‏

I finished Kevin Freeman's Secret Weapon a couple weeks ago.  I highly recommend it if you're interested in knowing what really happened in 2008 and how the same folks are setting us up for an even bigger attack later this year soon.  The short version: the 2008 crash was a coordinated financial attack on the United States by foreign enemies.

First things first, everything we know about the 2008 crash is still true; it's just that the collapse of the housing bubble didn't cause the crash, the bubble bursting merely left us vulnerable to an attack from foreigners.  Essentially, our government forced our banks to make loans to people who couldn't pay them back, then dumped those loans into Fannie and Freddie, which then left all sorts of folks over leveraged when the you know what hit the fan.  That's when the foreign involvement comes in.

The Cliff's notes version follows: using Naked Short Selling (short selling without ever borrowing, let alone Owning, the underlying asset), Credit Default Swaps, and the Wall Street herd mentality/group think foreign entities launched bear raids (spreading rumors to undermine confidence in a company) to attack first Bear Stearns, then Fannie and Freddie, then Lehman in order to collapse the U.S. Stock Market and Economy.

To put it mildly, they succeeded.

This leaves some obvious questions, the first one being 'who is they?'  The short version is that we don't know, these financial transactions occur behind a veil of secrecy that us rubes in flyover country aren't supposed to penetrate.  The longer, and probably more accurate, version is that strong circumstantial evidence suggests it was a combination of the ChiComs and various Muzzie groups in the Middle East and Gulf.  It seems safe to guess that the usual suspects between the various Leftist (incl. Putin, the ChiComs, and Soros), Islamist, and Drug Cartel groups worked together in some form.

Next, have we addressed our vulnerabilities since 2008?!?  Good Grief no, we've only made them worse.  Part of the purpose of the 2008 attack was to get the U.S. govt. and Fed to spend massive amounts of money to bail out the various institutions attacked and their various counter parties in order to ruin the balance sheet of the Federal Government and soften the U.S. up for the next attack (which is probably coming this summer).  Think about how much weaker of a position our national balance sheet is in as a result of Obama's spending.  Making matters worse, despite public claims to the contrary, the government has taken ZERO steps to actually fix our underlying vulnerabilities to economic terrorism while it has simultaneously jacked up regulations in just about every other area of the economy.  These jacked up regulations (which, it cannot be emphasized enough, do ZERO to address the underlying causes of the 2008 crash) meanwhile stifle the economic growth that would make another economic terrorist attack at least manageable.

So, what is the next attack?!?  Hard to know for sure in advance, but once Greece inevitably defaults, it will set off a chain reaction of Global Chaos that will provide the perfect backdrop for an invisible attack on the dollar.  The long term objective is to collapse the dollar and replace it as the global reserve currency.

I'll answer questions to the best of my ability, but you're better off just reading the book; you can get through it in about six hours if you're diligent.

I hope this helps.

Update (4/1/2013): Ok, so the crash didn't happen last year; but it's more inevitable than ever.

Big Corporations and Barack Obama's Faux "Centrism"

One of the persistent myths about Barack Obama is that, because he hasn't (yet) destroyed corporate America, and often works with large corporations that that makes him some sort of centrist.  This myth, while absurd, nonetheless has a certain persistent hold on the public and thus needs to be explained.

The most important thing to keep in mind when discussing Barack Obama's Marxism is to understand that Barack Obama is a Marxist from the Saul Alinsky school.  That means Obama's primary goal is to use stealth to corrupt existing institutions and use them to advance his agenda.  As author Richard Poe explains:

Alinsky viewed revolution as a slow, patient process. The trick was to penetrate existing institutions such as churches, unions and political parties.

(Sidenote: This is also what Planned Parenthood is doing through the Girl Scouts)

That is why Obama has worked with large corporations as President.  Saul Alinsky taught, and Barack Obama learned, that it was much more effective for Marxists to infiltrate and corrupt existing institutions from within than to fight them openly.  Big Corporations have money and power (for now) that sophisticated Marxists like Alinsky and Obama would rather channel to their own ends than provoke into opposition.  Corporate Welfare has the same effect on the corporate soul as individual welfare has on the individual soul; both end in the government owning said soul.  If you hook them on government now, they'll be too weak to fight you later.

While Barack Obama's 'centrist' patina doesn't fool anyone not looking to be fooled, it does confuse a lot of people.  This helps the Alinksyite Obama, because confusion creates the atmosphere for deception.  As Stanley Kurtz explains in his book Radical in Chief the entire purpose of a community organizer is to use deception to promote Marxism via stealth.  When nominally 'private' corporations align themselves with the political agenda of the government, it allows the government to disguise the source of that agenda to deceive the public.  As Author Yichao Hao explains better than I can:

The fact that Obama has never openly advocated socialist policies and has recently appointed Clinton-era “centrist” bureaucrats to his staff are no reasons to exculpate him from the accusations of socialism. Any intelligent socialist who doesn’t want to end up like perennially irrelevant and invidious Ralph Nader would blend in with the mainstream crowd to produce actual change...Policy-wise, Obama and the 111th “Do-something” Congress has done the most to move the country toward socialism since Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society: universal healthcare, one of the largest expansions of government debt in history, the Ted Kennedy National Service Act and numerous others. Washington Post blogger Ezra Klein called the 111th Congress the “most ‘do-something’ Congress we’ve seen in 40 years.” A centrist would never have passed so many pieces of legislation; a centrist keeps the status quo (or cooperates with the opposition like Clinton).

 Barack Obama is no 'centrist;' he's an Alinskyite Marxist who uses deception and stealth to corrupt existing institutions from within.

Update: The Poe article linked above also contains this gem from Alinsky himself: "I feel confident that I could persuade a millionaire on a Friday to subsidize a revolution for Saturday out of which he would make a huge profit on Sunday even though he was certain to be executed on Monday."