|
Post by geraldgarrett on Jul 8, 2015 8:56:47 GMT -5
Orwell's 1984 is on a path to becoming a history book? Quite the contrary, Conservative. Orwell's masterpiece isn't so much a history book as it is a chillingly accurate prophecy that comes close to putting Nostradamus to shame.
The timing in the title is just off by 40 or 50 years. And that wasn't Orwell's fault. He originally called the book "The Last Man In Europe." It was changed because the publisher wanted something a little more eye-catching and, like the global warming alarmists of today, he also wanted something that would scare the readers back in 1949, when the book first appeared. If they had chosen something like "2014" or "2024" it is possible few contemporary readers would have cared, since most would have been dead by then.
It's like trying to predict the Second Coming. After almost 2,000 years, most of us alive today doubt that it will happen during our lifetimes - perhaps during the lifetimes of our children and grandchildren. But many of us hold out hope that it'll happen, like, TOMORROW. It may be our only way out of this Orwellian nightmare.
|
|
|
Post by alexsaitta on Jul 8, 2015 9:00:30 GMT -5
The point of trying to consolidate power through the central government goes back to 1789 when you had federalists like Hamilton and anti-federalists like Thomas Jefferson. There has always been this struggle. Because communication has so improved, the coordination at the federal level is much greater, hence making this new federalism across government, media, corporations and organizations possible today, but not in 1789 or 1860 for instance.
No, I don't think the economy is being crashed purposely. Yes, I think the economy is in a long-term slide that will result in a crash much like Greece, but that is a by-product of the extreme centralization at the national level. Federalists aim for more control and do that by expanding the reach of the federal or central government. That costs money, actually more money than the government had, so they borrowed and borrowed and continue to borrow, and that over-spending, and resulting over-taxation and excessive debt is at the root of the declining economy.
|
|
|
Post by conservative on Jul 8, 2015 10:58:51 GMT -5
The "Red States" are maybe the last bulwark against the seemingly inevitable demise of States Rights and any Federal power throttle. The political liberals seem to be in the middle of a well planned one-two knockout punch. The culmination of another dependent-minority Democrat voting bloc in Illegal sans legal emigrants is near and the current kick-off of the meme that neuters all Southerners as a permanent racist class. They now have all of our Slave-owning Founders and Civil War-defending American Patriots as evidence that we should shut up and move to the back of the bus. As once believed, we may again prove as SC goes, so goes the Confederacy. Only this time it's the Constitution. What will be left except total Federal Control? The "tell" will be when they proclaim Global Warming is solved.
|
|
|
Post by conservative on Jul 8, 2015 11:10:53 GMT -5
Gerald, If "1984" isn't yet completely "hatched" it feels like is is at least a contemporary threat, not futuristic. We don't yet have Kurt Vonnegut's "Harrison Bergeron" yet fully implemented, but they're trying and Political Liberals never give up.
|
|
|
Post by diamonddave on Jul 11, 2015 16:26:39 GMT -5
I just thought I'd make an analogy between politics and automotive paint. Blue is usually a next to least expensive color, with black, white, and consequently gray, being the least expensive. Red is always the most expensive color. If you don't believe it, go to Imperial Parts, NAPA, or O'Reilly Auto Parts. By the way, just in case you might want to try and call me out on the issue of my spelling, in spite of that I before E except after C cliché, along with the fact that the I is pronounced and the E is silent, the spelling is correct, including the capital R. Check the O'Reilly website if you want.
|
|
|
Post by alexsaitta on Jul 24, 2015 8:13:58 GMT -5
We were watching the 1963 movie, “The Great Escape” starring Steve McQueen, James Garner, Charles Bronson and James Coburn. It is about a group of captured allied officers in WWII that plot an escape from a Nazi POW camp. I got about 1 hour through the three hour movie and I thought, this is so unrealistic. There are no 4-letter words, no beatings, no executions, the Nazi’s don’t even yell at the prisoners. It was like Hogan’s Heroes, where they talked to the Nazi leaders like they were stupid and frankly the leaders were. I would bet this is where Hogan Heroes’ producers got their idea from. (The theme of the goofy comedy is right there for the taking in The Great Escape.) Watching either, you think how did the Third Reich nearly take over half the world with leadership like that?
I almost turned it off thinking this was Pleasantville Hollywood pre-1965, the place the Monkees mocked in 1968 with their hit Pleasant Valley Sunday. It just wasn’t realistic. Then I thought again, about what Hollywood is doing to our culture, and what it is jamming down the throats of movie goers today – 4 letter words, blood and guts, sex, alcohol and drug abuse, teen recklessness and the gay life-style. It is raw entertainment at its extreme. And we wonder why 14 year olds are talking their clothes off and having sex, why some 13 year olds aren’t sure if they are a boy or girl and teenagers who truly should not have a care in the world are committing suicide. Throw all those adult issues at children, too many will repeat what they see, fumble many of those issues and end up worse for it. Today we are reaping what Hollywood has sewn.
If Hollywood can over-play reality today with leading characters who never miss a 40-foot pistol shoot, or read people’s minds or in so called true stories do things that never really happened, why can’t Hollywood under-play reality on the issues of violence, 4-letter words, sex, and drug use?
All were missing from The Great Escape, and realizing this all, I had a sense of relief, was happy about it and we finished up the movie. Remember, our children are always watching.
By the way, much of the post-escape part didn’t happen in real life, including this motorcycle scene by Steve McQueen and it was truly the dead of winter and escapees were underdressed. 76 escaped from the camp, 50 were killed and all but 3 of the rest were recaptured. Two did escape by boat, Coburn's character did make it to Spain, but not on a bicycle. Generally true, but simplified and exaggerated at times.
|
|
|
Post by alexsaitta on Jul 29, 2015 15:44:21 GMT -5
Here are some of the comments I put on Facebook about the Presidential primary.
Trump is from New York. He has some liberal positions. For instance, he was very pro-choice at one time. He has made a lot of donations to Democrats. I admire he speaks from the heart, but really doesn't come across as a guy who has done his research. If you are going to talk that much, you better make sure you know more than everyone else.... If Trump was running as the President, the entire US Congress and the Supreme Court, I'd consider him. However he is not and can not. You have to know how to push the buttons and pull the levers of a divided government and be able to move it to the right. You can't just order the Senate or other elected representatives to do this or that like he does at Trump Enterprises. For that reason a Trump presidency in my opinion will be a media circus train wreck. Run for the US House or as the mayor of New York and prove you can have success in this strange organization called government, and then run for President of the United States.
Most of my very conservative friends like Cruz. In a field of 16 or 17 you have to start somewhere. For that reason Cruz is one of the first ones I looked at. He held up through that first review. I wish he had some executive experience. I would love to see a person with experience as governor and then the US House or US Senate... Kaisch has that but his answer yesterday on immigration made me a bit nervous so he'll need more research.
I do like Santorum's family values positions, but he voted for No Child Left Behind. When in the House he voted against Clinton's debt ceiling increases, but voted for those under Bush when he was in the Senate. He was too cozy with Bush who was a moderate. My personal opinion is he probably shouldn't be running given his last failed attempt. I don't think he'll make the debate stage. Just my opinion.
I just have to make a vote in the SC primary and started doing a bit of research. Likely, most of these candidates will be out by the end of the year, so I'm not spending a lot of time researching them, because the field will probably be cut in half by the SC primary.
I think there will still be a lot on the ballot, but more than half will be out by then I think. For instance, I voted for Rick Perry in the SC 2012 primary (he was on the ballot), although he was all but out of the race by then.
|
|
|
Post by alexsaitta on Jul 29, 2015 15:44:56 GMT -5
The basic over-riding problem I have with national politics and putting a lot of time into it is, I feel the national government is lost. Anything short of a Constitutional Convention and some serious amendments to the Constitution by the states (Article V), the direction will not change. It is hard for me to get excited by any one candidate. Our government has a design problem, not a personnel problem. The restrictions in the Constitution have been too weakened, and the trend toward more and more federalism is harmful.
If you go back to 1798 and the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions, Jefferson and Madison wrote states were in a contract with the new federal government and had a right to nullify un-agreeded upon actions/ mandates of the federal government. The nullification of 1832 over a high national tariff said, if nullification didn't work states could leave the Union.
Both of those things gave the states leverage or a check against a too expansive federal government. Gettyburg wiped out nullification and succession options, the FEDERAL Courts now determine all federal-state disputes so the states have had no check or leverage since then. Since 1865 the federal government has just been growing and expanding at the expense of states and individual rights. Unless the states reign in the monster they've created (the federal government in 1789) via Article V, there is little hope I think on that score. Sooner or later the federal government will fall under its own weight/ mainly excessive debt. At that point the states (if full of exceptional leadership) will rise again to pick up the pieces.
Mine is not an optimistic assessment (quite out there), but the future is becoming clearer and clearer in my mind with each passing year.
I saw Carly yesterday on Fox News Sunday and she is strong on pointing out Hillary's weaknesses. Communicates well, but lacks the depth I'd like to see. Other than that, I have not looked at her that closely yet... I don't think she'll win anything but will remain in the race a long time because she is there for one thing -- to be the Hillary attack dog. The GOP needs to get a lot of mileage out of her and will fund her into April or May, and she'll remain active until November and will land a seat in a Republican administration.
More below.
|
|
|
Post by alexsaitta on Jul 29, 2015 15:45:29 GMT -5
Unless she gets out of the single digits, I think she is an unlikely VP choice because she'll never deliver her home state of CA. The VP choice will be someone that runs strong through the primaries and/ or can deliver their (swing) home state like Bush (FLA) or Walker (Wis) or Kaisch (OH). TX is going to the Republicans in November, so Perry and Cruz I don't think will be in the running for VP unless they run a close 2nd or 3rd nationally. If I was the nominee I would be looking to name Bush, Kaisch or Walker as my VP and have them work to deliver their home state, and Rudy Guiliani would be my early attorney general choice and I would have him work the northeast and Fla... The GOP has a lot of good assets on the field, must raise the value of a few during the primary and them utilize them well in the general election campaign... In contrast the Democrats have just one asset, Hillary, that's it. The GOP should win in November 2016.
I haven't looked at Rubio yet, but do like his bio and all the reforms he made in Florida as the Speaker of the state house. He if 44 years old, and clearly is a climber. I like to see people get into a job and invest time in it, make an improvement, then move up. He did that in FLA in many ways like I mentioned, but not in the US Senate where he hasn't even finished up his first term yet. Clearly he sees the Senate seat as a stepping stone, so that is one demerit in my eyes. I suspect he'll be a top VP candidate to pull in the latino vote and FLA... I hate to keep bringing up Gov. Haley, but the same applies. She was in the State House a few years, accomplished nothing, got the job as governor and accomplished nothing. Rubio showed legislative capability in the FLA House, plus he has good relationships with the GOP leadership (miles ahead of Haley), but again he doesn't have that record in the US Senate. I'd like to see Rubio run in 8 or 12 years after he was a leader in the US Senate for a while... Ted Cruz has the same problem as Haley. Very conservative, sounds great but what has he accomplished in the Senate? Nothing He's been there since 2012, and really hasn't been able to work with the GOP leadership. He wasn't even in the state legislature. Cruz is a principled conservative, but can he move a big bloated government? That's lacking from his record.
|
|
|
Post by alexsaitta on Aug 4, 2015 7:13:34 GMT -5
I watched the 14-candidate forum tonight in NH. First observation, the primary season starts too early. Bobby Kennedy announced for the President on March 16, 1968. He was on his way to getting the nomination when he was shot a few months later. The problem with the early start of the campaign today is all the candidates have the speaking down. They all sounded very good because they have already said the same thing numerous times. Christie nor Pataki are telling us how moderate they are. Ditto for Bush and Graham. Trump will do the same. I suspect all of them will fall in the polls once the press starts to look at them closely. Like what happened to Giuliani, when they dug down a bit and saw how socially moderate he was.
To me, some are clearly out-gunned by the job. I love Ben Carson's intellect, but he lacks first hand knowledge on foreign policy or running the executive branch of the government. Santorum, love the family values, but couldn't carry his own state. I like Fiorina -- very sharp woman, but again she couldn't carry her home state of CA. Graham knows foreign policy and probably is seeking the job as Secretary of State or the head of the Defense Department. He would be a good choice there. He is strong on national defense. That is what he is putting on display as he campaigns for one of those jobs. Too moderate outside of Foreign Policy for me though. I love Rick Perry's record (voted for him in 2012), but he simply can not articulate what he has done like Bobby Jindal for instance. I suspect Carson, Santorum, Perry, Fiorina and Graham will not rise much over time.
As impressed as I was with Rubio, Cruz and Paul -- very refreshing, they lack experience. I love Cruz's anti-Washington establishment stance. He gets it. Senators are no longer representing their state, but the Washington establishment. Paul will stick to the Constitution, and continually stresses that. He is a lone wolf there. All three need to rise further in the US Senate (accomplish something there) or go back to their home state and run for governor and come back for the presidency of 2024.
To me the ones that sounded the best qualified where the governors because they had a strong grasp on running the executive branch, especially Kasich, Jindal, Walker and even Pataki didn't sound too bad. It is unfortunate that Jindal won't make the stage for the first debate. I think if he hangs in, gets in some debates, he will rise in the pack.
It is early, but that is what I'm thinking now.
|
|
|
Post by alexsaitta on Aug 7, 2015 6:34:31 GMT -5
The problem I'm having with this decision is the ones who are the most capable and are accomplished at this level of government seem to be the moderates like Bush, Kasich and Christie. The ones who are the most conservative like Cruz, really haven't moved the government at this level. The ones who present the best and can woo voters in the general like Fiorina haven't accomplished anything in the government environment. Perry has done that, but doesn't present well and would never win in the general election. Jindal has run a state and is conservative, but doesn't have a chance. Who is conservative, presents well and has proven he can be effective in government at this level? I'd love a principled conservative like Cruz, who presents like Fiorina and is as accomplished as Kasich in a swing state. I don't see that candidate.
|
|
|
Post by conservative on Aug 7, 2015 12:20:50 GMT -5
Alex,
There's much time for the unexpected to reveal itself, but I find a Walker/Fiorina ticket interesting and hopeful. They bring a "basket" of skills, experience, success with individual life stories most Americans can relate to. Obama has proven to be too aloof to lead and Hillary will be a repeat of this ugly bearing. All of the GOP candidates bring something positive. Outside of Trump, I'd like to dream that this present slate of choices could, in it's entirety, represent a turning point if each one was installed in an influential executive role related to their strengths under a Presidential leader. What would it look like if cabinet-level leaders actually could lead and inspire excellence within Constitutional mandates and limitations? Could that be the impetus for slowing Government growth and charting a new course for fiscal strategy and discipline? A debate moderator asked if Trump would promise to run only if chosen by the GOP. I'd ask all to promise to fill a role under the eventual GOP candidate and run as an entire team. America's team.
|
|
|
Post by alexsaitta on Aug 7, 2015 17:24:10 GMT -5
Agreed. I can see a lot of those candidates in the new government. The problem now is they are all so well rehearsed at this point. If any person did that over and over, sooner or later they'd sound that good. Interviews probably aren't the best way to pick a President. Obama presented well, and so did Clinton. I think Republicans will win in 2016, but the course will not change enough to advert what lies ahead.
|
|
|
Post by conservative on Aug 7, 2015 22:08:09 GMT -5
Sadly, realistically, you're right. Hopefully, (paraphrasing Rumsfeld) we'll discover what we didn't know that we didn't know. The end of the Carter era was pretty hopeless. Reagan made a difference and inspired a nation. Government deficit and debt is the game changer this time. It's the irresistible force meets the immovable object.
|
|
|
Post by alexsaitta on Aug 10, 2015 9:15:34 GMT -5
More government provided ____________. Fill in the blank. This time it is college education. With $18 trillion in debt. Those on the left always find more ways to add to it more. College student debt is $1.2 trillion. About 40% is behind. The aim should be plans to reduce the debt and slow the making of such bad loans. Instead, they just make the debt more affordable, looking to grow it, and increase the amount the US Taxpayer has to pay off. finance.yahoo.com/news/clinton-propose-350-billion-college-041429011.html
|
|
|
Post by conservative on Aug 11, 2015 16:47:19 GMT -5
Our healthcare cost is someone else's responsibility, now our cradle to college education is expected to be, as well. As the Democrats prepare to close in on a permanent one-party-rule scheme via creating a majority-of-minority voting blocs, Utopia dreamed of in the '60's seems to be near. The only problem left to conquer, since debt is now not one, will be for the masses to agree on what Utopia is. For Hillary, it might be an obedient electorate, a bigger White House and an Obama provided open-ended pardon for crimes discovered and not-yet-committed. For me, AstroTurf to replace my 2 acre lawn and a bigger boat. Utopia could get complicated.
|
|
|
Post by alexsaitta on Aug 21, 2015 7:51:15 GMT -5
From this article: NEW YORK (AP) — The U.S. stock market endured its worst performance in 18 months on Thursday, driven lower by another slump in Chinese shares and heavy selling by technical traders. The global rout started in China, where sharp declines in energy and property stocks pushed the Shanghai Composite down more than 3 percent. That selling soon spread to European and U.S. markets, where the Dow Jones Industrial Average moved further below a closely watched trading level. What trading level was that? About 17,350 where that trend line was. If you go to my home page (my background picture at the top), you’ll see this same 5-year Dow Jones Industrial Average chart from a few months ago. Then the market was above that long multi-year uptrend line. Well today the market broke below that trend line. A technical sell signal. What does that mean to the average investor? Looking at the chart below, the market uncorked a massive uptrend from 10,400 low in November 2011 to 18,350 peak in May 2015. Evidently bullish fundamental force(s) pushed the market upward and on-ward, keeping consistent upward pressure on the market, always holding the price above that line for about 4 years. The price dropped below that line today, indicating whatever bullish force or forces were exerting themselves on the market, those forces have dissipated or disappeared. Time to get out, so they sold, and will continue to sell the next few weeks. Using this method, this decline should drop the Dow about 33% of that uptrend or to the 15,702 level. That previous low of 15,800 will would also be considered support (see chart again). Myself, I bought the market at 18,185, anticipating the uptrend was resuming and would push the Dow up to 18,850. I was wrong. The high was only 18,351 and after the market failed to follow through and dropped back to 17,800, I bailed on the investment. Learn to love your small losers. I’m still invested in commodities (losing money) on my position which is ¾ invested (I still have to buy another ¼). I can’t see oil staying down here forever or things like copper remaining so weak with construction on the rise. The dollar will begin to weaken soon as it becomes clearer the Federal Reserve is not going to raise interest rates, and likely the world central banks will start the printing presses again. While the US is growing at 2% and will continue to grow into 2016 or 2017, the rest of the world (which is in worse shape) isn’t. In sum, the world’s central bankers are desperate. Too much debt. Too many obligations. Not enough income. No other options but to crank up the presses and I think they realize that. Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by alexsaitta on Aug 27, 2015 7:41:45 GMT -5
www.cnn.com/2015/08/26/us/james-holmes-aurora-massacre-sentencing/After watching the videos of yesterday’s shooting of the journalists, the killer’s video-taping it all, writing and then sending off a 23-page manifesto after the shooting and then calling ABC news while he was on the run, and seeing how this is being covered in the news media and how these killings get so much of society’s attention, plus how all of this has become common place over the past few years, I’ve reached the conclusion our culture is suffering from mental illness in this respect. That is, if our society was an individual, I think he would be slapped with a mental diagnosis. Beit all the violence Hollywood turns out, the news media too and now how much violence the internet is feeding people even our children, how 24-7 media coverage makes these mentally ill killers house-hold names, glamorizing them with infamy, and how our mental health and systems of justice are failing to deal with them, NONE OF THIS IS HEALTHY! If a person has a seed of evil in him, feeding him all of this encourages turning his/ her evil thoughts into an evil reality. This was not the dynamic of our culture in 1950. Today it is; heck today we have terms like “snuff movies”. No need to say more; collectively we are in a downward spiral that we need to grab hold of and stop. How the media encourages and glamorizes all of this violence and killings, I could write a book about. But given another story in the news yesterday, let me expand on how our system fails to deal with these mentally ill folks turned mad killers. Look at James Holmes, the man who gunned down 12 people at the Arizona movie theater. He planned in detail (which guns, how to dress, the most vulnerable target, his escape route, etc.) to kill as many people as he could, who were innocently watching a Batman movie and eating popcorn. He was caught. We spent about $10 million trying this calculated killer. He was convicted and sentenced to 12 life terms plus 3,300 years yesterday. The judge made it sound like they were dishing out such a tough punishment -- "now leave my courtroom!" Comical. Holmes got away with murder. The sentence was a joke. Continued below.
|
|
|
Post by alexsaitta on Aug 27, 2015 7:42:04 GMT -5
Twelve innocent people are dead. He is alive. And we’ll spend another $3 million plus on him for the next 50 years. Something needs to be change with the media and culture encouraging all this. No doubt. We also need to better identify and then give the mentally ill more help, and do more to prevent those who might become violent, from becoming violent. But with those who do become violent and there is no doubt they committed the crime (the James Holmes of the world) there should be no appeals, and they should be executed in short order.
We are way too tolerant of these monsters like Holmes and Bryce Williams who are now planning all this, looking to maximize their carnage and using the media to generate maximum infamy in doing this to us all.
|
|
|
Post by alexsaitta on Aug 28, 2015 11:41:44 GMT -5
www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2015/08/27/new-york-daily-news-virginia-reporters-murdered-live-tv-newspaper-cover/32469823/I heard about this story early yesterday. I saw the New York Daily News cover (it is all over the internet), and agreed it was too graphic – basically there is a gun pointed at the two being interviewed in one frame and them reacting to being shot in the next frame. It further supports what we all realize, there is too much graphic violence shown in the media. I watch NBC Evening News each night at 6:30, and right after that is Entertainment Tonight. I was slow getting up from the couch and turning off the TV, so I saw the start of ET and Hollywood actors complaining about the graphic Daily News cover. I thought right message, phony messengers. The same thing the three actors and actresses said about the Daily News, they could have and should have said 100 times over about Hollywood producers. But you’ll never hear that because pushing gratuitous violence is one of the mainstays of how they make their millions. Such is the duplicity of the phonies in Hollywood that too many look up to. Hollywood creates and peddles most of the violence depicted in our culture today and is the reason our culture is now so anesthetized to it. In 1960 the shower scene in “Psycho” got us to react. In the movie Batman: Dark Night something like 75 different weapons were used to kill people in all sorts of gruesome ways. After 50 years of this, covers like the Daily News are what get as a result. Like Hollywood, the newspapers are looking for a reaction or an emotion to cash in on, and just a bit more is always needed. They are both wrong, and such condemnation should be dished out in the same breath.
|
|