Update on the Voting Investigations

In Milwaukee, the coordination and collusion with the Far-Left groups was unbelievable. Personal meetings, daily reports on ballots received and where they originated, push by the Left to get actual data files - it's hard to imagine that the election officials didn't realize that this was open election fraud.

The mayors of the five largest Wisconsin mayors were holding virtual meetings on the election in May and June of last year. They coordinated their efforts to apply for millions from the Zuckerberg-funded CTCL.

Just what is that Zuckerberg organization?

It's actually a pair of organizations designed to throw ALL elections to the Dems (at least as long as they reliably vote the way that the Tech Oligarchy wants them to).

One part is the CTCL - Center for Tech and Civic Life; that's the part that funnels money to election boards, in the form of grants. Those grants are administered by the EII - Election Infrastructure Initiative. That last organization is not to be confused with the Government agency, Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA). Check out the agency's website - it's an eye-opener.

Although, that is is, may be the whole point.

The other part is CSME - the Center for Secure and Modern Elections.

Now, who could be against that?

Me. Because the name, although seemingly bland and harmless, doesn't convey the actual scope of the organization - or its Dark Money funding.

The report on the Amistead Project is here - just click to download (and, prepare to be shocked).

“This report paints a clear picture of a cabal of billionaires and activists using their wealth to subvert, control, and fundamentally alter the electoral system itself,” Kline added. “We must act now to prevent such privatized elections in the future. The American public deserves transparent and fair elections, not lawless elections directed by powerful private interests.”

In addition to Zuckerberg, the main foundations funding the effort to subvert the electoral system were The Democracy Fund, New Venture Fund, Skoll Foundation, and Knight Foundation, according to the report. Key nonprofits involved in distributing the money include CTCL, the Center for [Election] Innovation Research, the Center for Civic Design, the National Vote at Home Institute, the Center for Secure and Modern Elections, and Rock the Vote.

The report demonstrates that funding from nonprofits was especially unnecessary in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, as the federal government had already provided sufficient funding through both the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) and the CARES Act.

Now, one question that may be concerning you is:

Why all of these organizations with similar goals?

Several reasons:

• Some of them are set up so/ that ordinary people will confuse innocent organizations (similarly named, but with other purposes, or that are government agencies), with these Leftist NGOs.
• Some of it is to give competitive people a leadership position, paid for with money that is tax deductible. Essentially, as it is a tax-exempt organization, the donor is getting that employee at 1/2 price.
• Some of it is to siphon off the energy and ambition that would otherwise hamper the parent organizations. Divide the leaders up, and they will spend their time trying to impress "Papa Organization", rather than plotting the leadership's downfall.
• It offers a testing ground for leaders.
• Who is able?
• Who is good at directing/controlling their troops?
• Who focuses on the bottom line - defeating the official enemy - and not getting sidetracked in empire-building?
• Who is ruthless at stamping out dissent?
• It allows the opportunity to exercise limited authority in a confined space, and therefore is useful for developing leadership skills.
• Many of them are women, who can be bought off cheaply with a title, some discretionary money, and some minions.
• The interlocking nature of the structures are confusing, and thereby escape the notice of the dimwits in the Media.

Saturday Randomness

I was reading Fred on Everything (he is interesting - an ex-cop with a jaundiced view of some of them, an expatriate living in Mexico, who contradicts many of the stereotypes about Mexicans, etc.), and he posted on a hot topic - police presence in Black neighborhoods.  His take is - refreshing.

Another column of his that is worth reading is his analysis of how America is already in the dumps - BEFORE Trump.  We've already been taken over by special interests, and no longer live in a democracy (or republic).

If, like me, you want to return to a time of more freedom, pre-Federal-government-runs-everything, we might want to start planning how to take the Feds down - NOT with warfare, but with resistance, tactical refusal to give them our money, and state-by-state resistance.  I'm NOT talking revolution - that's a dead idea.  Instead, let's work incrementally, to chip away at Leftist strongholds.

Some starting points:

• Stop sending them money.  Find work that can be done under-the-table.  No taxes, no Social Security.  That last part would be difficult, but COULD be made up by the local authorities, who could collect at that level what is needed by people with no other resources.  The fact is, most people have other resources (and, when they don't have to pay Federal taxes, they have more).  Stick your extra money under the mattress - you don't want to leave it in banks, where it is vulnerable to being confiscated.


• Refuse to give ONE penny to any college for worthless degrees.  Tell your kids - "I'll pay for you to get a trade".  That's likely to be the best thing you'll ever do for that kid - it's a way of earning a living that is less likely to be outsourced.


• Maine is one of the states that reduced its welfare rolls by insisting on able-bodied people actually looking for work, enrolling in job programs, or working at part-time unpaid activities.  Surprise, surprise, as Gomer Pyle would say - almost all said, "Not worth it", and dropped off the rolls.  Other states could do this.


• Return the Federal lands to the people.  In several states, this could be a new Settlement Rush.  If there are FEMA-type trailers stored in the state, let them be re-purposed (NO complaints about their condition - the receivers fix them up themselves, and Caveat Emptor).


• Take back the schools - clear out much of the administration, turn them over to local organizations, who are responsible for finding the funding.  Except in the poorest sections of town, schools should be fully funded by the LOCAL neighborhood.  Yes, I'm talking breaking up the big city schools.  With the administration gone, costs should drop, while STILL allowing the teachers to get paid reasonably.  Replace the assistant principals with recently retired military - the AP's are mostly used for muscle to control the students, so let's get in people who know how to keep people in line.  Actually TEACH reading - anyone who cannot read at grade level should spend 1/2 their day in disciplined phonics-based reading programs - reading content-rich practical text, or NON-dystopian literature.  Anyone who cannot do math at grade level should be spending the class time on old-fashioned programs, like Saxon Math.  What little time remains should be spend on civics education that actually teaches about the Constitution and other foundational documents and principles, and practical science.

This is a link to a VERY pessimistic column.  I'm not so sure they are right - while the young seem to embrace the Socialist Revolution, at this point, it's theoretical, and their "enlightened" attitudes don't cost them.  Once the impact of the price exacted comes home, I doubt they will continue their "yeah, let's spread money around" thinking.

One MAJOR reason that the country has changed is that there are a whole lot of women who are supported by government, whether directly, with welfare or government employment, or indirectly, in nonprofits and niches like Human Resources, which are required to be so bloated because of governmental regulations.  Take away the regs, and many women in these staff positions will find themselves on the street.  At that point, they MAY come to their senses.  Either way, citizens will no longer be funding their hectoring.

I'm thinking divide & conquer:

• Use legal means to reduce government.  Fewer regulations, liberation of federal lands (with encouragement to settle on them, we might reduce the numbers in the cities), reduction of administrative bloat in government.


• Write GOOD curriculum for all ages, to explain what good government looks like, and what limitations on the federal government already exist.  Offer it, free, to schools, along with e-books telling stories that reinforce those ideas.

Lastly, here is a link to someone who, like me, supported Cruz.  Now, she has to decide which candidate will do the LEAST damage to the USA.

I've been getting rosy economic stories from Liberal/Progressive friends.  Apparently, thinking that Obama's disastrous economic policies have created a hollowed-out economy is blatant racism.

Mea culpa.

Of course, there is this, and this.  BTW, that last stat?  Straight from the Labor Dept.



 

Apparently, no matter how you massage numbers, the damned things just keep adding up to the same conclusion.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

How People Choose Their Leaders

Actually, it's a LOT like they choose their bands, shoes, cars, and spouses.

Emotion.

In all of the above, they like how their choice makes them FEEL.

I was having a discussion with a friend who is passionate about rock bands.  I said, "My husband likes his 1950's singers for the same reason you like your bands."

He started to argue with me, pointing out all of the reasons why HIS bands ruled - the lyrics, the instrumental virtuosity, the unforgettable music.

Nope, I said.  You chose them for the same reason.

They make you FEEL like you were young again.  They remind you of how it was to be young, at the peak of your physical powers, and attractive to potential partners.

You love the FEELING, not the music.

Many people pick their shoes the same.  I've long been puzzled by the many celebrity women, who, judging from the deformations of their feet, will wear tremendously uncomfortable shoes, that cause their foot and toe structure to undergo permanent damage.

When you ask them why they wear those shoes, they exclaim that the shoes are SO comfortable.

Their own body tells the lie.

So, why do they choose those shoes?

Because when they wear them, they FEEL glamorous, sexy, stylish.

It's about the FEELINGS.

That's a major reason why Ted Cruz - some say the MOST qualified person in the presidential race - cannot gain traction.

True, he is also handicapped by a (until recently) crowded field.  But, that doesn't tell the entire story.  He is appealing to our reason, our logic - but, that's NOT how most people make their choice.

Cruz is not gifted with the ability to touch people's emotions.  I'm not sure that it's a teachable skill - it my be one of those things you either have, or have not.

______________________________________________________

I think I figured out WHY Rubio was so slow to quit the race.  He had to realize that the numbers were not his friend.  So, it makes sense that winning was not, after the first few primaries/caucuses, his motivation.

I think he stayed in deliberately to tank Cruz's chances.  I think his ego was involved.

Why Cruz?

Because only Cruz could block him from being the FIRST Hispanic President.

And, therefore, being in the history books for all time.

Anyone else wouldn't keep him from realizing his dream.  Only Ted stood in the way.

Too Busy, Too Hard to Post

I haven't had a lot of extra time lately - grading, exercising, working on catching up on housework and financial papers - and, on top of that, actually teaching full-time.

Work is SUCH a hindrance to blogging regularly.  In part, this is because I can't access many sites at work, even on my lunch break.  Also, our network is locked to prevent us from using our own wifi devices - my iPad, alas, will not connect.  Right now, I've got at least 2 posts I haven't had time to upload from that iPad.

I truly can't complain.  My work is mostly congenial.  I'm blessed to be able to afford a gym, and Gold's hours are more convenient than the Y's were.  I'm privileged to have a house, however messy.

Last weekend, we attended a baby shower for my son and his girlfriend (I know, I'm not thrilled about their situation, but - not going to cut them off, either).  The trip took about 18 hours, more or less, with stops.  So, we started the week more than a little tired and achy.

I'm just not that into the election right now - can't influence the vote, don't want to waste time speculating about the outcome.  It's time to rest up, clear up the rest of my life, and trust to God.

Sunday Leisure to Worry

This is my last day of the weekend, during which I usually prepare for my next week's classes.

Today, I've been looking at the news and analysis of that news, and it's not a calming scenario.

We have a "Progressive" administration that believes in re-writing history (shades of 1984 and NewSpeak!).

Central Command has been under investigation by the Pentagon's inspector general since last year when scores of CentCom intelligence analysts complained to the watchdog that their findings were being selectively edited to paint a far rosier picture in 2014 and 2015 about the U.S. campaign against the Islamic State than the facts warranted.

The New York Times reported in November that military officials alleged that important e-mails and files that should have been turned over to the inspector general had instead been deleted. But that report also said the Pentagon's inspector general could not verify the files had been deleted. At the time, Nunes himself queried the inspector general about these deletions.

Well, at least the "Progressives" are getting good information about the Energy Crisis!, and can make their plans, sure that the mass transit they are committing the American Taxpayer to pay for will, at least SAVE us money.

Eh, not so much.  In fact, not at all.

Why you should stop bargaining with your principles - if you just read ONE thing this month, read this.

Ben Carson - a Virtual ATM for his money people.

Speaking of scams...

Oh, I'm SURE that NONE of that money that was released will go to fund terror operations!

Sanders' money problems - of course, he will NOT face charges about his violations, unlike D'Souza.

On My Last Nerve

I'm pretty well worn out today, by a combination of things:

• House(s) issues - they seem to drag on forever, and, just when you think it's over, another problem pops up.


• Money issues - my husband and I disagree on spending.  He has declared, for the last 5 years, that THIS SUMMER, we will take a cruise.  Each time I hear that, I say, "as long as we don't put it on a credit card", which is the match lighting for a good fight.  I think we have WAY too much stuff; he thinks of shopping as a recreational activity.


• I've been trying to work out on a regular basis - life keeps handing me a curve ball.  Sometimes, I have gotten injured; other times, I'm so overloaded with meetings and grading, I just don't have the energy.  I'm still stuck at the same weight I have been for 3 years.


• Politics - I never thought I'd say this, but I'm sick of it - BOTH Democratic and Republican.  Trump is on a roll, in great part to the ego problems of people who wouldn't get out of the race until the last 2 weeks.  Neither Cruz nor Rubio will budge (although I think they should meet, and show their hole cards - what do they have on the other, that would make their loss in November a virtual certainty.  I'm personally guessing that Rubio has a woman problem - no evidence, but that's my gut feeling.  For that reason alone, I think he should gracefully bow out, and support Cruz.)  At this point, I just think whoever drops out should cede their support to the other, and beat Trump.  The more the public learns about him, the less they like him.


• Whoever wins the election, I'm going to be working to:
  
  
  
  • Get out of debt
  
  
  • Diversify my assets
  
  
  • Stockpile a WTSHTF go-box
  
  
  • Get the rest of my life in order
  
  
  
  

Folks, this disruptive time is NOT just about your personal survival - it's about the survival of our civilization.  Pray for America, but also work for its survival.

Yes, I DO Remember Those Days

...and, I am NOT happy to be repeating that time period.

Keep this in mind as you think about your vote in the primaries.  It's PAST time to indulge in the luxury of "sending a message" or voting for someone with no chance in H--L of getting the nomination.  Instead, pick one of the leaders (Trump - please, NO!, Cruz, or Rubio), and get on board with their campaign.  Donate money, time, and support any way you can.

I do understand that many see Trump as one who will voice their concerns without prettying it up.  I do see that appeal.

But, we cannot afford to send in someone so uncommitted to principles or truth. It's basically Cruz or Rubio.

Whichever of those two wins, I'll support - all the way.

Conventional Wisdom

One major aspect that is wrong with American Life is that minority viewpoints use our basic desire to compromise as a way of "pushing the camel's nose into the tent".  What is that?  Here is one example of the story:

One day an Arab and his camel were crossing the desert. Night came and the temperature became colder. The Arab put up his tent and tied the camel to it. The Arab went to sleep.

The temperature became slightly colder and the camel asked the Arab if he (camel) could just put his nose in the tent to warm up. The Arab agreed that the camel could just put his nose in, because the tent was small and there was no room for 2. So the camel's nose became warm and after a while the temperature went down even more.

The camel asked the Arab again, if he (camel) could just put his fore legs in because they were very cold. The Arab reluctantly agreed that the camel could only put his fore legs in and no more. So the camel moved in his fore legs and they became warm. After sometime the camel asked the Arab again that he had to put in his hind legs or else he won't be able to make the journey the next morning with frozen legs. So the Arab agreed and once the camel moved his hind legs in, there was no more room in the tent for the Arab and the Arab was kicked out.

The concept of conventional wisdom is always defeated by an entity determined to get its way, first asking for a "harmless" concession of a tired opponent, then, incrementally, continuing to push to achieve its long-term goal.  Just keep that in mind next time you're asked to make ONE TINY compromise.

Hold firm.

In other news:

P. J. O'Rourke has gone out of his mind.

He is foaming at the mouth about Ted Cruz.  Yes, TED - Blanking - CRUZ.  According to P. J., having Cruz as the Republican candidate would be THE Ultimate Worst Thing (I assume that he is patenting the phrase).

Why?

Because Ted is not fervently in favor of SSM (Same Sex Marriage) and legalized marijuana.

Really.

That's it?  One of the most qualified Republicans - one that ACTUALLY held the line when the Dems tried to push their agenda on the Senate - and the problem he has with Ted is that he thinks we ought to not upset a socially-recognized marriage tradition that has lasted for all of recorded history.  Oh, and, that, absent GOOD - not anecdotal - scientific evidence that pot is worth legalizing, we shouldn't change its status.

Really.

Now, many disagree about the SSM thing.  I do understand that.  From my perspective, I'd rather the government get the Blank out of the marriage endorsement altogether, and just institute Civil Unions.  Those who WANT to get married, can - assuming that they can find a minister, Internet-ordained person, Cultic Leader, or other person that can persuade a religious/spiritual/frankly-nutty-offbeat-organization to handle the ceremony.

No - absolutely NO - pressure on churches/temples/mosques to marry people against their principles.

Got few problems with that.

Oh, and, if someone has a preferred title - Mr., Mrs., Miss, Ms., Supreme Leader, whatever - let's accept that addressing them by that title is optional, not mandatory.  Most people will go along.  Some will have objections.

Let's just decide that "Citizen" is the acceptable alternative for those with philosophical objections.  As in, Citizen Cruz.  Citizen Clinton (either).  And, Citizen O'Rourke.

And, the pot thing?

Listen, I've taught for many years.  Before that, I often encountered people under the influence of Wacky Weed.  Including one of my roommates, and her friends.

I can assure you, with absolute confidence, NOT ONE of those so impaired was in any way smarter, more rational, or having razor-sharp reflexes.

In fact, there was little to distinguish them from someone born Lazy, Mentally Slow-Processing, and, to be honest, Dumb as Dirt.

NOT what I want to see as the norm for American Citizens.  Nor, for that matter, those under the age of 18.

Oh, but, legalization will only affect those OVER 18.

Right.

Sure.

Of course, the fact that buying or using pot by a minor will be against the law will TOTALLY stop them from doing it.

Just like the fact that it's illegal now stops them.

/sarc

You Can't Be Virtual Always

Look, I'm a big fan of the online world.  It speeds up the collaborative process when at least a portion of it can take place online.  This semester, the teacher I'm mentoring and I have been doing at least part of our interactions online.

However -

At least 2-3 times a week, we find that it's necessary to get up, walk the relatively short distance to the other's room in the pod, and quickly confer.

Apparently, humans are just hard-wired to prefer at least SOME IRL contact.  I have people with whom I have only online interactions, and I find that I wish we were able to at least occasionally met in the physical world.

So, Rubio's decision to keep Iowa almost completely non-physical is probably a HUGE mistake.  More than the coastal people recognize, those living in the interior are accustomed to "pressing the flesh", and those politicians who haven't been face-to-face may not realize that they will likely be perceived of as "cold" - and, therefore, likely to stumble in the first hurdle.

A huge amount of human decision is Gut Feeling - basing our choices on how someone handles personal interaction.  If you think about it, we've evolved in our hardware, but our software (brain) still works hard to make sense of those tiny indicators that let us know that a stranger:

• Likes us - can be welcomed into our trusted circle


• Is telling the truth


• Will be loyal


• Responds to the same stimuli as us - shows disgust for what appalls us, feels his heart beat faster for what energizes/excites us, is suspicious of the same people that we mistrust, etc.


• Is a leader that would inspire us to follow him

Rubio may not realize the extent to which we depend on getting those cues - and how much better we are in person at putting those indicators into context.

I've often said that intuition is not what people think it is - rather than a mysteriously-based hunch, it's the accumulated judgement of minor observations - mostly conducted without being consciously aware of the process -  that allows us to handle interactions with strangers.  I suspect that it's handled by more primitive parts of the brain, and therefore less liable to be overridden.

Virtual is fine within your already-established trust circles.  It doesn't work with strangers.

What is Driving the SJWs to Action in the Universities?

Hint:  It's NOT about Social Justice, Bringing in a New Era of Racial Equality, or Protecting Poor, Fragile, Little Snowflakes (who are, unlike real life, not exclusively White).

It's about a Naked Power Grab.

The Old Guard (1960s Leftists) have hung onto their power too long.  The SJW leadership is tired of waiting for them to retire/die/fade away.

They have manufactured this take-over in the footsteps of Obama, who wrested power from the Old Guard Democrat Clintons, and are putting the Alinsky Handbook into practice in that effort.

They will likely be successful.  Don't cheer their success, even though they finally rid us of the Clinton Dynasty.

Like the Bolsheviks, succeeding the Mensheviks, they will be worse - more ruthless, less bumbling, and more determined to eliminate ALL who oppose them.

BTW, for anyone who hopes that their particular cause will, at least, benefit from the change-over, lotsa luck.  YOUR interests aren't even on the radar.  This is about power, NOT fundamentally transforming America.  Any transformation is simply a means to an end.

Candidates - Bernie Sanders

He LOOKS like such a kindly, if slightly cranky, uncle.  His appeal is that he is for the "Little People".

But, is that reality - or a carefully crafted misleading of the American people?

[caption id="attachment_1037" align="alignleft" width="275"] Lovable Lil Socialist[/caption]

Let's start with his record on Free Speech - he's against it - at least when it comes to speech HE and his Progressive Friends don't approve of, like the right of corporations to lobby for their interests, those opposing Conventional PC Thought, or those who would dare to disagree with the Fashionable Left.

Sanders was against American involvement in Vietnam - BUT, it was NOT because of his deep love for humanity - like most Progressives/Leftists, he averted his eyes to the atrocities of the South Vietnam bloodbath after the Americans left.

[caption id="attachment_1038" align="alignleft" width="278"] Not As Far Left As Bernie[/caption]

Honestly, if you want to know just how Bernie will destroy America, just look at this list:

1. Rebuilding Our Crumbling Infrastructure
   
   
   
   1. Now, this could be CHEAP - ONLY $ 1 trillion!
   
   
   
   


2. Reversing Climate Change
   
   
   
   1. He wants to "transform our energy system away from fossil fuels and into energy efficiency and sustainable energies." He thinks the Federal government should weatherize our homes - last time I did so, I paid for it myself.  Guess that makes me a chump, doesn't it?
   
   
   
   


3. Creating Worker Co-ops
   
   
   
   1. He likes the idea of workers owning their business in common with their co-workers.  So much for job mobility, diversifying your investments, or not taking your work problems home with you.
   
   
   
   


4. Growing the Trade Union Movement
   
   
   
   1. Now wait a minute!  I'm confused - is he anxious to make workers fat-cat bosses, or angry proles?
   
   
   
   


5. Raising the Minimum Wage
   
   
   
   1. "The current federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour is a starvation wage." Can't wait until those worker-owners hear that demand!
   
   
   
   


6. Pay Equity for Women Workers
   
   
   
   1. "Women workers today earn 78 percent of what their male counterparts make." De-bunked repeatedly.
   
   
   
   


7. Trade Policies that Benefit American Workers
   
   
   
   1. He will "develop trade policies which demand that American corporations create jobs here, and not abroad."  Can't wait until he finds out that the President does NOT control every business in the USA.  Which, if he wins, will be VERY few.
   
   
   
   


8. Making College Affordable for All
   
   
   
   1. This is too amazing to cut short - here it is, complete.  "In today's highly competitive global economy, millions of Americans are unable to afford the higher education they need in order to get good-paying jobs. Further, with both parents now often at work, most working-class families can't locate the high-quality and affordable child care they need for their kids. Quality education in America, from child care to higher education, must be affordable for all. Without a high-quality and affordable educational system, we will be unable to compete globally and our standard of living will continue to decline."  So, in addition to taking over the cost of college, the federal government will also pay for child care.  At least, the Institutional Kind of Care - not that sweet grandmotherly woman who watches your kids now.
   
   
   
   


9. Taking on Wall Street
   
   
   
   1. "The function of banking is to facilitate the flow of capital into productive and job-creating activities. Financial institutions cannot be an island unto themselves, standing as huge profit centers outside of the real economy."  Boy, oh, Boy!  I guess no one has let him know where the majority of the money the Democratic Party has came from!
   
   
   
   


10. Health Care as a Right for All
    
    
    
    1. "We need to establish a Medicare-for-all, single-payer system." Ya' think we should let him see the figures for Obamacare?  Better not - he might stroke out.
    
    
    
    


11. Protecting the Most Vulnerable Americans
    
    
    
    1. Except for those oooky little bundles of tissue.  Those Americans only live due to the benevolence of their Parental Unit - the XX ones.  Or if both are XY, the most Twinkly one.
    
    
    
    


12. Real Tax Reform
    
    
    
    1. " It is not acceptable that major profitable corporations have paid nothing in federal income taxes" - however, it IS acceptable that almost 1/2 of the working age population pays NOTHING, and is a net beneficiary of government money.
    
    
    
    

From all of this, I'll bet that you have figured out that "Uncle Bern" is unlikely to receive my vote.  In fact, I think it's a fair bet that Al Sharpton is likelier to get my vote.

NOT Pushing a Single Candidate...

I thought a USEFUL task for me would be to pick a single candidate each post, and focus on what is GOOD about that candidate - no matter what the party.

No one does this, to my knowledge.  Feel free to pass on links to those acquaintances who might not be getting this information from the media.

Today's candidate, in no particular order, is:

TED CRUZ

You may be most familiar with him from his sterling defense of the Republican candidates from the media's shameless attacks disguised as questions.  Here is a video, along with an explanation of that fighting tactic.

The Wall Street Journal had good things to say about Cruz's Flat Tax proposal. This could lead to REAL GROWTH in the economy, which we haven't had in years.  I'm generally for flat taxes, because they benefit the frugal, who DON'T buy a house that is way too expensive, on the grounds that they will make up the cost on mortgage deductions.  In the business world, this would lead to encouragement of more frugal management practices (which would lead to more profits).

It would also benefit many people who pay no income tax (but do pay other taxes), by giving them some reason to care about government spending - which helps us ALL.

Sheer GENIUS!

No, I mean it.  Genius is an online tool that you can use to annotate text.  It was designed for song lyrics, but you can use it for any kind, including speeches.

I used it for the intro to Hillary's Benghazi testimony.

Rush is Running the Numbers...

...and, it completely upends what the pundits are saying about the fundraising of Democrat and Republican candidates.

There is an embedded app that allows you to toggle the total amount raised and how much is contributed by small donations.  I won't tell you the details, but it gave me a new appreciation of Ben Carson.

I'm Beginning to Lean Towards Several Candidates

I've been only sporadically keeping up with the Republican "pit bull fights" - er, "debates".  Not disinterested, just REALLY busy with other things in my life.

So, I really do depend on analysis of their performance from trusted sources on the Internet.  What do I consider a trusted source?

• Someone who cites reputable sources, with links, for their argumentative points


• Someone who is upfront about their affiliations, donations, and political leanings/votes


• Someone who does not merely repeat talking points


• Someone who does not demonize or smear the opposing side

This is a relatively small group.  They support different candidates, but generally will order that support on a continium - Prefer X, but Y is OK except for issue B, and Z would be terrible, because of....

That sort of reasoning, that is an assist to, but not a replacement for, keeping up generally on the candidates' progress/statements/background (verifiable).

What I read of Cruz's work on modifying/eliminating FTC regulations makes me willing to give him a second look.

Republicans Need to Work on This

Nikki Haley is leading a fight that will have repercussions in the 2016 election.  She is calling for the Confederate flag, currently flying on the State Capitol grounds, to be taken down.

The urgency of the action is being driven by the recent tragedy in the Charleston church, that took the lives of 9 people.

It's a divisive issue - the lawmakers were only able to get the flag, which was put in place in 1962 (Hollings, Democratic governor), moved from the Capital dome to another spot on the grounds in 2000 (Hodges, Democratic governor).  As a result of that action, lawmakers were forced to make a compromise that made any further movement require a 2/3 vote - a REALLY high bar to change.

South Carolina is funny - the people are generally pleasant (Black and White), polite, and not given to screaming and yelling.  As a result, the aggressive actions of protestors strike the natives as distinctly uncivilized, and lead many to reject the message.  Perhaps that's the intent of the protestors - perhaps not.

The people who display the Stars and Bars are in the minority - generally less educated, more rural, and long-time South Carolinians.  The more urban parts of SC have had their "unreconstructed" heritage diluted by the influx of people from other parts of the country and the world.  Many of the Republican party have not responded to the Charleston Post-Gazette's poll of legislators - that may be because they don't want to rush into a decision, it may be because they are opposed, but don't want to go on the record until they have to.

This is a time for leadership on the part of Republicans.  If you are in SC, please contact your legislator, either thanking them for supporting the issue, or urging them to support the issue.

I sent this text to legislators:

I am writing you to urge you to support removal of the Confederate battle flag from the state grounds. Among the reasons to do so:

- As a gesture of respect for your fallen colleague, Senator Pinckney
- Opposition to this proposal would cement the perception that Republicans are not supportive of either civil rights for all citizens, and of Black people in general
- Failure to declare for this proposal would have a devastating effect in the 2016 election, and likely for some time to come
- It's the right thing to do - it's time for change

Thank you for your support,

Linda Fox
1131 Christopher Circle
Rock Hill, SC 29730

Nearing Halloween - Strike That - It IS Halloween

It's the dread of teachers everywhere, right up there with pre-Christmas inability to concentrate.  And, it's not just limited to elementary-age kids.  High school students spend hours talking about their costumes, and carrying around treats for their friends.

Although Michelle Obama's Grim Substitutes, the vegetable tray and other low-calorie treasures, may stop that.  We've been told - officially - NOT to bring in treats.  For ANY reason.

I never thought sugar and fat would become the New Crack.

I've never been that into Halloween, post-elementary age.  Until well into the 1980s, it was a relatively minor holiday.

No more.  Adults and teens have taken over the grim festivities, with gruesome body parts, truly repulsive costumes, and weeks - even months - of planning for the parties.  It's chance for women to unleash their Inner Slut, men to experiment with Cross-Dressing, and for all to use conspicuous consumption as a signal of their Elitist Status.

Eh.

Don't like horror movies.  Don't enjoy dressing up.  Hate parties, for the most part.

Not my holiday.

The funny thing is that this all comes at a time when few believe in Hell, most think their "sins" are not an offense against God, and many try their Wildean best to avoid the appearance of aging, and throw money in a futile Faustian bargain at doctors, trying to avoid their inevitable death.

For all that many enjoy the Lion King's Circle of Life song, they can't quite see themselves as nearing the end of that Circle.  And, for those without spiritual underpinnings, that "endless" circle is broken.

<hr>

10/31/2014

I started this several days ago, just was too busy to finish.  My bloglife is a lot like that lately - not that I'm not interested, just too busy.

Which, is OK with me right now.  In the past, I hovered over my blogs.  Were enough people reading them?  Had I responded to a political issue?  In short, did I put my 2 cents in?

Eh.

I still have strong feelings.  But, more often now, I've found other people (in REAL LIFE) who are willing to listen to me, and respond in their turn.  Taking the blogging discourse into real life is FAR more satisfying.

Plus, over time, I've found those on Facebook and Twitter who are simpatico - some of them friends or family offline, as well, others - not.

So, even though I still have a burning desire to have my say, I - more often than not - can get that in other ways.

Right now, I am tired.  Weary of the political ads, the "issues", the "news" clawing at my attention.

Work is tiring - not bad, but truly fatiguing.  I'm temporarily overscheduled - mentor stuff, grading, planning, and, now, getting signed up for a Gifted & Talented course - or, rather TWO courses - that I have to take to teach the Honors classes next year.

I'm 2-3 years away from retirement.  By that time, I likely will be REALLY ready for the rest.

At that point, I will - FINALLY - have time to write.

Which is my plan.

In a Temporary Lull

The Battle of the Border is at a temporary standstill.

Congress continues to struggle to investigate:

• Benghazi


• IRS


• Fast & Furious


• VA scandal

Elections are months away, and most Democrats are running for cover, and hoping to survive.

Republicans may have their own scandal in MS, with the Senate primary.  Pity - they should fully cooperate, and let the chips fall where they may.

I've an uneasy feeling - no particular reason - one of those "just before the storm" feelings.  I hope it's not justified.

Political Opponents are NOT Klingons

...who must be CRUSHED if they cross the line.

He/she is a HUMAN BEING - made in the image of God.  They are not perfect; some may use sharp language in arguing their beliefs.  They may delight in the foibles of their political opponents - laugh at their pratfalls, enjoy the scandals, and gloat over their defeat.

That doesn't excuse you from doing the same.

We're SUPPOSED to follow the Christian example - turn the other cheek, return abuse with a gentle smile, act decently, even when reviled.

Yeah.  That's NOT easy.  For me, I have to work - HARD - to avoid using intemperate language when insulted.  My natural inclination is to give it back - with some extra spin on the ball.  Particularly aiming at the face.

Sometimes, you might argue, it's not possible to respond without some venom.  That opponent, you say, has EARNED the biting retort through their nasty speech.

Really?

Let's examine one such case, and consider the FULL story.

Forbes Magazine had a recent look at Sarah Palin's bringing up the Ukraine in the 2008 debates.  The first line reads:  Sarah Palin may not have been able to see Russia from her house, but she might have been right about Russia invading Ukraine.

BTW, Palin NEVER said she could see Russia from her house - that was Tina Fey.  She DID say, correctly, that from some parts of Alaska, you could see the shores of Russia.

“After the Russian Army invaded the nation of Georgia, Senator Obama’s reaction was one of indecision and moral equivalence, the kind of response that would only encourage Russia’s Putin to invade Ukraine next,” Palin claimed in 2008, during her vice-presidential bid alongside John McCain.

Are the Liberal media falling over themselves to apologize for mocking her earlier words?

Don't be ridiculous!

Has Sarah gone a little over-the-top in crowing about her prediction coming true?

Well, yeah, she has rubbed it in.

Can you blame her?

WHY Do Democrats Demonize the Koch Brothers?

Charles Cooke has an interesting analysis.

He points out that, although the Kochs have some relatively common Conservative positions, the

Kochs are not as simple as the hysteria would have them be. Indeed, even the lightest of research reveals them to be in favor of gay marriage, of drug legalization, of reforming and expanding the immigration system, of withdrawing troops from the Middle East, of cutting defense spending, of curbing the NSA’s overreach, and of helping to balance the budget by raising (some) taxes.

Is it their money?  They made it legally, as did Warren Buffet - who is lauded by the Democrats.

Is it that they donate money (their own) to affect the elections?  Unions do the same thing - with MORE money - NOT their own - and Democrats don't seem to have a problem with that.

Is it that Harry Reid, and others who spew their name like a curse, believe that ANY opposition to the Democratic agenda must be annihilated?

Sounds to me like some Democrats have a peculiar idea of what representative government is about.  If Harry can force politicians to avoid the Koch brothers, lest they be tainted by the association, that should have a dampening effect on their chances to win elections.

Maybe THAT'S the point.