Rob's Random Rants

On Violent Revolution

2012-02-29T16:57:00.000-05:00

Let me share a secret with you thatother people will say is not true. This secret is that violentrevolutions will take place and will succeed.

Now I'm sure there are some peopleshaking their heads at this with the response "But that cannever happen here as we are far too civilized for such things."

The truth is it can happen here and hasin very recent terms.

"Ah ha You must be talking aboutthose violent people in those things called TEA Parties"

No. I am not. Here Violence Violence Violence Violence Sure two of those werethe results of sporting events but it is an indicator of how easilyviolence can start especially when one was the result of their teamwinning not losing.

You start the violence then direct themindless rage of the mob you create towards a target which the mobthen destroys. Then when those people in the mob realize we can getwhat we want if we do this again the violent revolution begins. Thusbegins the French Revolution destroying civilization before them tobe replaced by ironically named Temples of Reason as a mob is notbased on any thought or reason at all. The directors of this violencewere then chewed up by the violent nature of the mob they helpedempower just like the people in charge before were.

The Fundamental Difference between theFrench Revolution and The American Revolution was shown in this where the British Soldiers were giventrials and even defended by John Adams which contrasts with a handfulof guards surrendering to a mob and being torn asunder at theBastille. Thomas Jefferson who at first supported the FrenchRevolution was repulsed by it's actions.

Violent revolutions generally fallapart degenerating into violent chaos which leads to the same sort ofpeople the revolution was against retaking power because they willeliminate the chaos with a rigid order. making people feel theillusion of safety.

I'm making this without using the alltoo easy examples that the so called Occupy Movement gives me of theviolence a mob uses to become a revolution. I am also ignoring theall plentiful examples of unaccountable government agenciesgenerating the sympathies in the civilized portions of society for amass cleansing of said government if need be through revolution.

The difference I think is this. A manwho grows his own food which a more powerful organization then comesand takes not leaving enough to feed himself and his family isrevolting against his destruction. A man who receives the food takenby the more powerful organization is revolting against theelimination of the stolen food. Both men are motivated by the desireto eat to avoid death by starvation for themselves and their familybut one is a producer and the other is a taker.

The taker if he wins his Revolutionwill if need be enslave the producer justifying his actions by sayingthe producer can only grow his crops because of the greater societyand it is for the public good. The producer if he wins his Revolutionwill grow his crops feeding his family but not enslave the taker whomay or may not starve if he chooses to become a producer himself.This is the critical difference in thinking that separates theorigins of a Revolution and what it ends up becoming.

Progressive MADness

2012-02-28T12:37:00.000-05:00

This is a hard blog to write as I canbarely retain my rage that liberals claim I have that any momentmight erupt into violence. You have to remember Progressives arealways comparing things to events like the German Death Camps or theactions of Timothy McVeigh or the Klu Klux Klan. There are never anycomparisons to the Soviet Gulags done by Soviet Communists or theviolent actions of the Earth Liberation Force a Socialist RadicalEnvironmentalism Organization or the mass slaughter carried out byChairman Mao of Communist China or the actions of Ted Kozincsky theCommunist Unabomber or the Radical Socialists who comprised theWeathermen.

They meaning people like Rachel Maddow,Keith Olbermann, Al Sharpton, Joe Biden, Ed Schultz, Barack Obama andso many others are always eager to make comparisons to terrorists,hostage takers, racists and any other smear they can find whileignoring the real violence coming from individuals and organizationsthat are rooted in Socialism, Communism, Progressivism, and Marxism.

Look at the lack of actions takenagainst Occupy Wall Street and it's derivative organizations. Unionlawyers and Progressive outfits are busy guiding, setting up andadvising these people and progressive Government officials are busycircumventing all the rules and regulations any other individuals oroutfits would have to comply with. They ignore the violence andracism because these people are on their progressive side with thehatred of Free Markets and Love of Nanny Government.

Imagine if someone infiltrated aviolent organization plotting to use homemade bombs against say theDemocrat National Committee at their big event. Thanks to thispersons effort's these people were stopped and no one was hurt oreven killed. This person would be celebrated as a Hero and their namewould be dropped with love by every Progressive mouthpiece out there.

Well this happened and his name isBrandon Darby but it wasn't actions taken against a ProgressivePolitical outfit but the Republican National Committee who violentProgressives were plotting against. Now the true face of Progressivesemerges as he is treated with vile and rage by those same people wholove to make out they are against Violence because of all thosethings nasty Republicans Might do. ACTUAL PROGRESSIVES plotting REALviolence with REAL bombs against REAL people holding POLITICALBELIEFS that run CONTRARY to what PROGRESSIVES believe is IGNORED bythese same PROGRESSIVES seeing into the spirits and minds of TEAPARTY outfits and other organizations where NO VIOLENCE has happenedto SEE SINISTER MOTIVATIONS,

Progressives also like to worry aboutTHEOCRACIES when Republican Candidates are trying to get into officewho don't throw their religious beliefs away as an act of politicalconvenience to sooth the worry of all these progressives. They fretabout people (People of Faith) taking away Rights and run specials onreligious organizations. They moan about Social Conservativesthrowing out the much beloved moderates. They worry about Oppressionof speech and how sinister government agencies will sweep in themiddle of the night to whisk people away to sinister places. Theyworried about women and homosexuals will be treated.

Well except for Muslims who come outand say we are working to make everywhere a Sharia compliant area ina Global Caliphate. It is funny how the outfits actually workingtowards a GLOBAL THEOCRACY get ignored by these Progressives worriedabout the Religious Right. Not just ignored but celebrated orprotected by the same people whining how the Religious Right is goingto treat Women and homosexuals. Lets see the same people who riot andthen kill people over books that were defaced by their own believersare victims who should be kowtowed too. The people over therestopping the violence against women and homosexuals whose hands aretied because of ridiculous rules trying to make the same people whoriot and kill feel better are the people who are really at fault. Itliterally makes zero sense.

The Truth is that Progressives arescared of Islamic Violence and not frightened at all of Christiansdespite the talk of how dangerous the Religious Right is The Proof isin the coverage where ISLAMIC VIOLENCE gets relabeled as somethingelse or gets called the action of a lone individual. Progressives arenot frightened at all of trashing Christianity because they do itdaily. So they are afraid of the people saying we are going to imposea Global Theocracy which they ignore and not afraid of the ReligiousRight who they claim are going to impose a Theocracy which theyaren't. The two reasons Progressives are afraid of Religious peoplenot corrupted by Progressive infiltrations are because those peopleare willing to make value judgments where moral relativism is thrownout of the mix and it interferes with creating a land whereGovernment is worshiped as the true savior.

Progressives also like to makestatements where they want to appear as the voices of logic andreason except when logic and reason won't let them acquire more powerover peoples lives. Remember President Obama and his cohortsscreaming We need to do this right now there's no time to think aboutit and it has to be done right now. We need more laws right now. Weneed more rules right now. We need more Government Oversight rightnow. Everything needs to be done right now.

Well strangely enough right now doesn'tapply for things that don't fit the world view of The President andhis Ilk. Congress asks for records to do some of that GovernmentOversight that needs to be done Right Now and the ObamaAdministration does not turn it over right now but says give us time.On the Keystone Pipeline where the Government doesn't have to spendany money and has already been delayed another 3 years because of theObama Administration its not get it done right now but give us moretime. On working on jobs its not do it right now but months wherethey do everything but work on jobs then its give us more time. Onthe economy despite what they claim was justified as Right Nowactions for all the spending they did it's give us more time.

Progressives love making rules but hatefollowing them when it restricts what they want to do which fits intothe right now narrative. They care about process when it allows themto achieve their goals but the same process they demand other peoplefollow gets tossed aside when inconvenient. Right now is an Emergencyclarion that justifies ignoring the rules because somewhere somethingreally bad is happening. Never mind these same people will fill theirdays with pointless agendas ignoring whatever they will for monthsthen suddenly find it requires action Right Now.

Progressives don't care that out fitslike the EPA and other Government outfit are using their powers tobankrupt people enforcing rules that don't make sense. In fact theylove it despite all the talk about how they are for jobs and thelittle guy because it gives them more power. They don't care aboutrights for individuals except in ways where it hurts building a senseof pride of American Exceptionalism. They care about the Powers notrights Big Labor has of collecting Union Dues which gets funneled tohelp Progressives stay in or get elected to Office. They don't worryabout the violence Their Supporters do except when it makes them lookbad . They talk about the Utopia Progressives will create but ignorethe results when Progressives Hold Power for decades.

Progressives wear down Conservatives because we don't want to gather power. We don't want to run everyone else lives while Progressives do. We don't think we know everything while Progressives do. We don't look down on people who don't see the need to get in massive debt for a College Education to do work they enjoy that doesn't require it while Progressives do. We think Big Government fails to work because it is so big and massive while Progressives think the reason failure happens is because the right progressives aren't running it and its not big enough yet. We think the Constitution is the Bedrock of the Country while Progressives think it is a snare holding them back from great deeds that government could do.

We think the Rule of Law needs to be consistent, sensible and only apply to people doing really bad things while Progressives want to expand laws so much so everyone is ensnared and under their control. We think people are not perfectible through rules and regulations while Progressives think the perfectible man only requires their benevolent attention to happen. We think results are an indication of failure or success in degrees of an idea or a plan while Progressives think Intentions are what really matter and results are an insignificant side effect. We think Iran's leader is entirely serious when speaking of what he intends to do to Israel while Progressives think its just silly talk to make him look good.

We think everyone has a chance to make something better for themselves despite their personal circumstances if they work hard and don't give up while Progressives think some people will always fail no matter how hard they work unless Government steps in and steals from others to give to them. We think failure is as important than success as it teaches character and striving for your goals while Progressives want to eliminate failure by controlling who and how much success people can acquire.

People say just compromise because all this arguing is really bad and makes us all feel upset. How can you compromise with people who believe Socialism is great?

Intentions, Reflections, and Results

2012-02-22T19:36:00.002-05:00

Most of us have a lack of depth to ourknowledge of history because we are generally too busy with life thatis moving forward to take the time to look back past the half myths,lies , distortions and so on that gloom on to real events. That's oneof the reasons I can't stand Howard Zinn as he took what the realpurpose of history is to show us what these people in the pastthought and did to then filtered all that through his Pro CommunistLens. He didn't care about history as a tool of what has gone wrongand right before but thought of it as a propaganda tool for hisagenda.

Why am I talking about this?

I just finished reading Patrick Henry:First Among Patriots by Thomas S. Kidd which goes through the manslife step by step not trying to cover up his flaws or trumpeting hisvirtues which makes Zinn's attempts at Historical Narrative look thinand propagandist which it is. The reason why Progressives and all theothers love Zinn's work is because it reinforces their own particularviewpoint which is more important than if the history is real or not.

This is the fundamental flaw that theintentions matter more than the results. It doesn't matter if whatthe real reflection shows is a history bin full of failure but thealteration of that mirror reflecting history gets treated until itshows what a certain group wants. Instead of the fat man getting on asensible diet with exercise they wheel out a mirror that takes thereflection of a fat man altering it into one that shows a thin manwhich makes the fat man and them happy until he dies of a massiveheart attack.

Their intentions were good because theydidn't want the fat man to feel bad about himself so instead ofhaving the mirror reflect the accurate picture they altered it toshow the image they wanted of a thin man. The fat man if confrontedwith an accurate picture of what he honestly looked like might haveor might not have changed his ways. He can't do it because he wantsto honestly believe what the mirror shows him never mind the realitythat confronts him in other ways if he was willing to be honest withhimself. The dishonesty though in the narrative that he is thin wouldshine through if people were willing to take an honest look at himand say the facts.

I want the honest discussion despitewhat some might claim. I do not want the discussion however to startunder dishonest assumptions. I want what the people that make up ourhistory to be shown in what they wrote and thought and what otherswrote and thought because that helps show us things that while itmight not be pleasant or pretty it is what went on. I also howeverwant to remember what the context is of the reality they lived in atthe time not what our modern views ascribe to what they did.

The final thought on this below.

Our personal experience is the historywe get shaped by making it sometimes hard to understand events thathappened before that begins. We don't understand why people reactedto events in this way or that way because we project our views ontohow they should have responded. We also have the benefit of knowinghow events turn out making it even harder to understand sometimes whypeople do what they did. The reality is always more complex than whatwe project it is that makes up history.

Cynics, Powers, and Accountability

2012-02-17T13:50:00.001-05:00

My nature is cynical as everyone knowsa cynic is a person whose romantic tendencies have been crushed bythe reality of peoples nature. I know there are good people out theretrying to do good things but again the reality is no matter how goodyour intentions the things you do in the name of good can be easilytwisted to do the opposite.

It is the reason I do not want so muchpower collected into any one individual or group or collection ofgroups hands because no matter how good their intentions may be theend results are often evil and as bad as what really evil peoplecould do if they had the same control of such power. I do not agreewith the phrase Power Corrupts and Absolute Power Corrupts absolutelybecause it ignores an element called accountability. The Lack ofAccountability corrupts and Zero Accountability Corrupts Absolutely.

There was a man minding his ownbusiness just trying to do his job to earn his paycheck who wasdragged from his truck savagely beaten including have a cinder blocksmashed onto his head inflicting permanent brain damage.

There was a woman jogging in the parkjust minding her own business who was savagely attacked by a gang andgang raped.

There was some innocent store employeesjust doing their jobs working in the store when a gang burst insetting the store on fire and killing at least one store employee.

There was a wife who left her abusivehusband to be free of that violence who had her life sliced away.

Wheres the justice for those peoplefrom these fine defenders of Justice ?

In the first case the jury found thepeople who did the violence not guilty despite the overwhelmingamount of evidence indicating they did it. An Elected official who iscurrently in office defended the man who took the cinder block andSmashed the guys head. She said she understood his rage.

In The second case there were multipleconvictions due to the Evidence despite the actions of a single manwho swept into town and created a MOB where the woman was a whitedevil and entirely responsible for what happened. This man now has aNational Cable News show. Later on one man came forward and said hedid all the rapes and DESPITE the OVERWHELMING evidence people triedto get the other people convicted off.

In the Third Case well the manResponsible for Creating The MOB who swept in and torched the storekilling at least one person NOW has a National Cable News show whereHE lectures piously about Racial Intolerance and the Lack ofJUSTICE.

In the fourth case the KILLER of hiswife and her friend DESPITE the evidence of blood, a glove , a trailleading from the scene of the crime to the car to the man was foundNOT GUILTY by a jury.

What do all these cases have in commonsince I started the blog off talking about my cynicism ,accountability and power?

In the first case the person assaultedwas a white man attacked by a black mob. The Currently still Electedofficial who said the man who used the cinder block to smash theman's head was innocent is a black woman. In the second case theperson gang raped was a white woman attacked by a black mob. Theperson who generated the Mob who blamed her is a Black Male In thethird case the people who owned the store and in the store wereJEWISH attacked by a black mob. The person who generated the mob is aBlack Male. In the fourth case a white woman and a JEWISH man werekilled by a black man.

If the situation were reversed wouldthat elected black female official still be in office if she was awhite woman defending a white man who took a cinder block and smashedit on a black man's head?

No the fury generated over herdefending someone who got off from smashing a cinder block into ablack man's head would be so overwhelming she would have the mediaand her party demanding she resign in disgrace.

If the situation were reversed so itwas a White man or a JEWISH man who created a mob defending a bunchof white gang rapists or Jewish arsonists/killers would he have aNational Cable news show where he is taken seriously as some sortvoice on racial justice and racial tolerance?

Hell No. He would be treated with theproper revulsion such a person deserves and would never be granted anational audience where people treat him with respect and deference.

If the Situation were reversed so itwas a white man who got off for murdering his black wife and herIslamic male friend would there be a large group of people talkingabout his innocent?

Hell No. There would be outcries aboutthe justice system being fatally flawed and how the jury either wasbribed or intimidated in some way and how the Judge was anincompetent moron who deserved to be kicked from the bench.

See the CYNICAL view is that thesepeople who claim they want Racial Justice and Social Equality onlyreally mean for a certain spectrum of Skin Color. The Collection ofPOWER that the cry of Racism has given them allows them to do thingsthat if reversed no one would tolerate or be silent on. The lack ofACCOUNTABILITY this creates Allows them to do ever increasing blatantacts that other people copy generating an ever expanding gulf ofRACISM that they claim they want to get rid of.

Teachable Moments and Other Nonsense

2012-02-14T12:13:00.000-05:00

What can we learn from the inferred ifnot actual in evidence of the death of another star this time in themusic business?

Nothing really that wasn't alreadyknown by people with sense. If you mix medication with alcohol orother medication then bad things can happen like death. Its likesaying someone who takes a toaster oven in the bath with them thatthen falls in electrocuting them is somehow a teachable moment foreveryone else. It is not a teachable moment because people with somekind of sense already know mixing electrical appliances with water inwhich you are immersed is a bad idea.

People are saying why didn't someonestep forward and do something as if it is easy to stop people fromself destruction. I am telling you from my own personal experiencesthat this is impossible to do if the person heading to thatdestruction does not honestly want to stop more. This is notsomething you try at but something you either do or do not do.

I have experienced the truth of thephrase the road to hell is paved with good intentions. You canjustify it by saying If I do not stay around then someone worsewithout my good intentions will just be here. Then you wind up at ifI do not help pay for this they will go do these really awful things.Then you go to the if I do not do these bad things with them thenthey will go do something even worse. Then you find yourselfsurrounded by thugs and not so nice people at 2 am in the morninggetting them what they want because if you do not do it there is notelling what will happen. So instead of you lifting them up out ofthe personal morass they are in you wind up right in the thick of itjustifying each action as you get pulled further and further in.

The phrase teachable moment is used bythe media and others to really say oh they did something reallystupid which they are not going to call stupid and not castigate theperson who did the stupid thing but pretend there is some sort oflesson involved in the stupid thing that everyone else had alreadywarned before would happen if done. Its like if someone jumped offthe top of a building after being carried up there by some of his'supporters' to somehow survive the jump completely unharmed theneveryone who helped carried him up there started talking aboutteachable moments.

No it is not. The teachable momentswere all the people saying he is going to jump off and jumping offtall buildings is stupid and helping him to get to the top of thebuilding is stupid and pretending like there is some sort of enlightenment from him jumping off the building is stupid and ignoringall the enablers is stupid. The only surprising thing is the idiotsurviving his basic stupidity as nowhere else does it teach usanything we didn't already know.

Its like Progressives and their desire to tax everything and to raise those taxes even more. The evidence shows jacking up taxes never produces the revenues they claim it will and actually hurts tax revenue collection as people just go elsewhere or cut those purchases out of their lifes or reduce the amount of those things they buy. They never seem to learn the lessons that the results of what they do have but keep carrying people up to the roof so they too can jump off.

Morality What it Means to Me

2012-02-01T11:05:00.001-05:00

I am thinking of Morality because I amwatching on Netflix a series known as MI-5 or Spooks where they lie ,steal, murder and betray people as part of their job. They do thingsthat are evil in order to protect the country as a whole but strugglewith it because some of them recognize that their deeds are not good.There is also a struggle with other agencies who go over the linethat the leader of MI-5 has to deal with. It is a dark and bloodyshow were there is not a clearly defined Good or Bad Guy but dark oreven darker choices.

One of the dichotomies I have had todeal with in my life is that while I prefer things to be simple suchas this is good and this is bad with a clearly defined separationbetween those that another part of me also is drawn to the jumbled upcomplexity that life is with it just not being black and white butgrays and other colors in between.

Let me clearly define several of thethings I believe so everyone understands or at least has a chance tounderstand where my position starts. My Morality is coming from myunderlying Christian Perspective that there is a God. This God isoutside of what we consider the Universe. This God is a loving Godand moral God. This God gives us Free Will where we can make choices.Those choices effect other people impacting what they may or not doso Free Will has consequences. This God has an IndividualRelationship with each and every one of us where we can achievepersonal Redemption. Each and every one of us is flawed and willstill be flawed even after we achieve Redemption. Our Salvation isNOT Collective Salvation but a One to One ratio between us and God.

People will say these horrible thingshappen and if there was a God he would act to stop it so because itwas not stopped then that means there is no God or that God is not aloving God but a evil being who delights in suffering. If you believeGod gives you Free Will like I do then God operates through Men forthe most part. If they choose not to act when God nudges them in adirection because they have that Free Will to decide then bad andhorrible things will happen. God doesn't make you do things Godallows you to chose what to do. Some times because all the otherpeople before you chose of their own Free Will to make choices thechoices you have left are awful horrible ones that will give younightmares when you sleep but that's not Gods fault.

On a strictly personal note when mymothers breast cancer reemerged in her lungs I prayed to God to healher often because it wasn't fair that my mother as a good personwould be stricken with this. Her slow motion death as the cancerdevoured her up came close to making me hate God a lot. Her faith ina loving God allowed her to be a much stronger person than I was atthe time. She didn't blame God for the cancer so how could I as herson look at that example of strength and faith and reject it entirelyby hating God or saying he is hateful entity. I came back and addedthis despite knowing how emotional talking about my mom's death makesme.

One of my internet friends can'tunderstand why people voted for this really flawed candidate in aprimary because if they are such Godly people then they are thenbeing hypocrites. So then as Christians we have to judge people tothis perfect standard that if they fail to live up to it we can neverforgive them for being flawed individuals or else we are hypocrites.That is rejecting what the heart of being Christian is in fact and ifwe did that we would indeed be hypocrites. We forgive people forbeing flawed because we are also flawed and because if we do notforgive then we injure ourselves holding on to that. Nowhere does itsay we have to forget what they did or we can't keep an eye out forthat behavior again.

One of the frequent responses I get is"You are trying to say I can't be a good and moral personbecause I don't believe in God." As an Individual you can be agood and moral person but what happens to your children andgrandchildren because your moral code will not necessarily be orremain theirs. Multiply that by 6 billion and it becomes a race fora purely secular society where logically euthanasia , abortion,government deciding what rights apply and do not apply unequally andother vile things are commonplace. The reality is that when a countrydecides it is the determiner of what rights you do or do not haveyour freedom is based on the whims of who controls that country.

Romney in debates 07-08

2012-01-27T23:17:00.001-05:00

Republican Presidential CandidatesDebate at the Ronald Reagan Library and Museum in Simi Valley,California
May 3, 2007

Moderator: Governor Romney, a year ago, it seemed that youcouldn't wait to tell the world about your health-care experiment inMassachusetts. Since then, it's been criticized by conservatives assomething Hillary Clinton could've devised. You hardly mention it onyour Web site. What's changed?
Romney: I love it. It's a fabulous program.
I'm delighted with the fact that we, in our state, worked togetheracross the aisle, Republicans and Democrats, to find a way to gethealth care for all of our citizens that's affordable and that'sportable.
Now, I know there's some people that don't like it, but when itcame time to vote, you know, we won 198-2. The Heritage Foundationworked on it with us. We had people on both sides of the aisle.
Now, I know there's some people who wonder about it. SenatorKennedy, at the signing of the bill -- we were all there together --he said, "You know, if you've got Mitt Romney and Ted Kennedyagreeing to the same bill, it means one thing. One of us didn't readit."
(Laughter)
But I helped write it and I knew it well, and this is a countrythat can get all of our people insured with not a governmenttakeover, without Hillary care, without socialized medicine. Instead,get the market to do its job. Let me people have health care thatthey can afford. Get the market to do its job. Let people have theopportunity to choose policies in the private sector.
We didn't expand government programs. We didn't raise taxes. Therewas no government takeover. The market can work to solve our healthcare needs, and that's the great, exciting news. And 27 other statesare working on health care reform right now. It's a great program, agreat opportunity for the entire country.

Readmore at the American Presidency Project: www.presidency.ucsb.eduhttp://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=74350#ixzz1kaRCbFi8

Moderator: OK. Let's start with an enjoyable down-the-line,OK?
I want each candidate to mention a tax you'd like to cut, inaddition to the Bush tax cuts, keeping them in effect.
Governor?
Romney: I like middle-income Americans to be able to savetheir money and not have to pay any tax at all on interests,dividends or capital gains. And by the way, we're all talkingabout...
Moderator: A zero rate on capital.
Romney: A zero rate on capital gains for middle-incomeAmericans. And by the way, we're all talking about how anxious we areto veto overspending. I was a governor. I've done it hundreds oftimes. I can't wait to get my hands on Washington's budget.

Readmore at the American Presidency Project: www.presidency.ucsb.eduhttp://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=74350#ixzz1kaRepYbt

Republican Presidential CandidatesDebate at the University of South Carolina
May 15, 2007

MR. WALLACE: Governor Romney, during this campaign, youhave been criticized -- and again tonight you've been criticized --for changing your position on some issues. You say that it's a partof learning from experience. Can you point to an area in which yourlearning from experience led you to change to a position that is lesspopular with the Republican base?
MR. ROMNEY: Sure, a number -- quite a few, actually.
And as Senator McCain did, as he mentioned the flag issue -- Ihave issues that take me in the same direction. One is No Child LeftBehind. I've taken a position where, once upon a time, I said Iwanted to eliminate the Department of Education. That was my positionwhen I ran for Senate in 1994. That's very popular with the base.
As I've been a governor and seen the impact that the federalgovernment can have holding down the interest of the teachers' unionsand instead putting the interests of the kids and the parents and theteachers first, I see that the Department of Education can actuallymake a difference. So I supported No Child Left Behind. I still do. Iknow there are a lot in my party that don't like it, but I liketesting in our schools. I think it allows us to get better schools,better teachers; allows us to let our kids have the kind of hope thatthey ought to have.
I think, by the way, the civil rights issue of our time is notwhat's going on on this stage right here, but what's going on in theschools in the inner cities of America, because the kids are notgetting the education they need for the jobs of tomorrow.
And so I'm very proud of the position I've taken. I support thepresident in that regard, and that's where I stand.

Readmore at the American Presidency Project: www.presidency.ucsb.eduhttp://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=74348#ixzz1kaUMWXSE

Republican Presidential CandidatesDebate at Saint Anselm College in Manchester, New Hampshire
June5, 2007

MR.BLITZER:Thank you, Senator, for that.
Governor Romney, there was a recent poll here in New Hampshire.Ten percent said they wouldn't vote for you because you're a Mormon.And last week we saw that picture of that man who refused to shakeyour hand because you are a Mormon. What would you like to say to thevoters out there tonight about your faith, about yourself and aboutGod?
GOV. ROMNEY: Well, President Kennedy some time ago said hewas not a Catholic running for president; he was an American runningfor president. And I'm happy - a proud member of my faith.
You know, I think it's a fair question for people to ask, "Whatdo you believe?" And I think, as you want to understand what Ibelieve, you could recognize that the values that I have are the samevalues you'll find in faiths across this country.
I believe in God, believe in the Bible, believe Jesus Christ is mysavior. I believe that God created man in his image. I believe thatthe freedoms of man derive from inalienable rights that were given tous by God. And I also believe that there are some pundits out therethat are hoping that I'll distance myself from my church so thatthat'll help me politically, and that's not going to happen.(Applause.)

Readmore at the American Presidency Project: www.presidency.ucsb.eduhttp://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=75171#ixzz1kaWks5eq

MR.BLITZER:Thank you, Mayor.
I want Governor Romney to weigh in as well. There's a perception,at least among some, that Republicans are - at least the RepublicanParty - very close to big oil. A lot of Americans are suffering nowfrom the price of gasoline, the high price of gasoline.
What do you say to that - the audience out there who believes thatthere's too much of an alliance, if you will, between the big oilcompanies and Republicans?
GOV. ROMNEY: Well, first of all, Rudy Giuliani is right interms of an Apollo project to get us energy independent, and theeffects of that on global warming are positive. It's a no-regretspolicy. It's a great idea.
Secondly, with regards to big oil, big oil is making a lot ofmoney right now, and I'd like to see them using that money to investin refineries. Don't forget that when companies earn profit, thatmoney is supposed to be reinvested in growth. And our refineries areold. Someone said to me - Matt Simons, an investment banker down inHouston, he said our refineries today are rust with paint holdingthem up. And we need to see these companies, if they're making thatkind of money, reinvest in capital equipment.
But let's not forget, where the money is being made this year isnot just - throughout these years is not just in Exxon and Shell andthe major oil companies, it's in the countries that own this oil.Russia last year took in $500 billion by selling oil. Ahmadinejad,Putin, Chavez - these people are getting rich off of people buyingtoo much oil. And that's why we have to pursue, as a strategicimperative, energy independence for America. And it takes that Apolloproject. It also takes biodiesel, biofuel, ethanol -

Readmore at the American Presidency Project: www.presidency.ucsb.eduhttp://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=75171#ixzz1kaXAoy7I

RepublicanPresidential Candidates Debate at Drake University in Des Monies,Iowa
August 5, 2007

STEPHANOPOULOS:Governor Romney, do you want to cut taxes to fix more bridges?
ROMNEY: There's no question but that the biggest source ofrevenue for this country—if you really want to make some money inthis country, really get some money so we can repair ourinfrastructure and build for the future, the biggest source of thatis a growing American economy. If the economy is growing slowly, whentax revenues hardly move at all, and, boy, you better raise taxes toget more money for all the things you want to do. But if the economyis growing quickly, then we generate all sorts of new revenue. Andthe best way to keep the economy rolling is to keep our taxes down.That is why I proposed that middle-income Americans ought to pay notaxes on their savings. Invest in the future of the economy. Growthhelps us provide the revenue that we need. Our bridges—let me tellyou what we did in our state. We found that we had 500 bridges,roughly, that were deemed structurally deficient. And so we changedhow we focused our money. Instead of spending it to build newprojects—the bridge to nowhere, new trophies for congressmen—weinstead said, "Fix it first." We have to reorient how wespend our money.

Readmore at the American Presidency Project: www.presidency.ucsb.eduhttp://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=75630#ixzz1kaaeqJPN

ROMNEY:There are a lot of features that are very attractive about a fairtax. Getting rid of the IRS is something we'd all love. But the truthis, we're going to have to pay taxes. We are the largest economy inthe world. We've added—during the time Europe added 3 million jobs,we've added about 50 million jobs in this country. And so completelythrowing out our tax system and coming up with an entirely new one issomething we have to do very, very carefully. The president'scommission on taxation—tax reform—looked at this and said: Not agood idea. Some of the reasons...
HUCKABEE: They didn't look at that...
(CROSSTALK)
ROMNEY: Let me—hold on, let me complete. Some of thereasons are the fair tax, for instance, charges a 23 percent tax,plus state sales tax, on a new home, when you purchase a new home.But if you buy an old home, there's no tax. Think what that might doto the construction industry. We need to thoroughly take it apartbefore we make a change of that nature. That's why my view is, getrid of the tax on savings and let middle-income people save theirmoney tax-free.

Readmore at the American Presidency Project: www.presidency.ucsb.eduhttp://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=75630#ixzz1kabJcap3

RepublicanPresidential Candidates Debate at the Shingle Creek Resort inOrlando
October 21, 2007

HUME:Governor Romney, among the so-called top tier candidates, you supportthe ban on gay marriage. What does it say that Fred Thompson, RudyGiuliani, John McCain and Ron Paul all don't?
ROMNEY: Well, they have a different point of view. But I'vebeen in a state that has gay marriage, and I recognize that theconsequences of gay marriage fall far beyond just the relationshipbetween a man and a woman.
They also relate to our kids and the right of religion to bepracticed freely in a society.
So, for instance, I want to make sure that our kids have a mom anda dad. I want to make sure the Catholic Church in our state, that'sbeen banned from doing adoptions because they want the kids to gointo home where there's a mom and a dad, that they can do adoptionsagain.
The status of marriage, if it's allowed among the same sexindividuals in one state is going to spread to the entire nation. Andthat's why it's important to have a national standard for marriage.
And I'm committed to making sure that we reinforce the institutionof marriage in this country by insisting that all states have a rightto have marriage as defined as between a man and a woman; and wedon't have unelected judges, liberals, standing up and saying we'regoing to impose same-sex marriage where it was clearly not in theirstate constitution.
ROMNEY: My state's constitution was written by John Adams.It isn't there. I've looked. And in Iowa as well you've got a courtsaying they have to have same-sex marriage.
The people need to speak on this issue and make sure that marriageis preserved as between a man and a woman.

Readmore at the American Presidency Project: www.presidency.ucsb.eduhttp://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=75914#ixzz1kalgBXpo

GOLER:Governor Romney, we have an e-mailed question from Kendrick ofOakland, California, who says the health care plan you left inMassachusetts, which required people to get their own insurance,amounts to Hillary Care. You say it was the result of a Democraticlegislature.

I want to ask you: If a Democratic Congress placed such a plan onyour desk in the Oval Office, would you sign it? And why was the plangood for Massachusetts and not good for the nation?
ROMNEY: First of all, I'm not going to give the Democraticlegislature credit for the plan that I helped build. So, I want tolet you know I'm very proud of what we did in Massachusetts, and Ithink it's a model that other states can adopt in some respects.
But let me tell you something about our plan. It's different thanHillary Clinton's in a lot of important ways. But one thing that I'mhappy about is that Republicans are talking about health care. Thisisn't a Democrat issue. It's a Republican issue.
ROMNEY: For Democrats, they want to have government take itover. And I don't want to have the guys who did the cleanup atKatrina taking responsibility for health care in this country.
The right answer...
(APPLAUSE)
The right answer is to get people insured, all of our citizensinsured so they don't have to worry about losing their insurance ifthey change jobs or have a preexisting condition.
But Hillary says the federal government's going to tell you whatkind of insurance, and it's all government insurance. And I say no,let th

Readmore at the American Presidency Project: www.presidency.ucsb.eduhttp://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=75914#ixzz1kamuvbV6

RepublicanPresidential Candidates Debate at the Progress Energy Center for theArts in St. Petersburg, Florida
November 28, 2007

Readmore at the American Presidency Project: www.presidency.ucsb.eduhttp://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=76069#ixzz1kawy3vHL

TedFaturos:Hi, I'm Ted Faturos from Manhattan Beach, California.
Mmmmmm, nothing says delicious like cheap corn subsidized by theAmerican taxpayer. For a lot of Americans, however, a bitter taste isleft in their mouth when they learned about how the U.S. taxpayerbankrolls billions of dollars in farm subsidies that mostly go tolarge item business interests.
I'm curious which candidate could label themselves fiscallyresponsiblee, will endorse the elimination of farm subsidies if theyare elected president in 2008.
Cooper: Governor Romney, a lot of folks in Iowa interestedin this answer.
(Laughter)
So I hear.
Romney: Not to mention Kansas, Missouri, North Dakota,South Dakota and so forth. We don't want to find ourselves, withregards to our food supply, in the same kind of position we're inwith regards to our energy supply. And so it's important for us tomake sure that our farmers are able to stay on the farm and raise thecrops that we need to have a secure source of food. And so I believein supports that will allow us to do that.
And the same time, I recognize that we're also investing in newtechnologies to get ourselves energy independent. And I happen tobelieve that some of the best sources for having renewable energycome from the farm. And so we're investing with subsidies in thoseareas to create new technology that otherwise wouldn't be ready forthe market yet. So I support these programs.
And finally, I'd say this. We have, in our nation, about one outof three acres that are planted are for sale overseas.
We send products around the world. We're competing with Europeanand Brazilian and other farmers, and we're competing in a marketplacewhere they are heavily subsidized, at great disadvantage for ourfarmers. And so, if we're going to change our support structure, wewant to make sure that they change their support structure.
And we do this together, as opposed to unilaterally saying: We'regoing to put our farmers in a tough position and have the farmers inthe rest of the world continue to be subsidized.
So, open markets, let our goods go around the world and secure oursource of food.

Readmore at the American Presidency Project: www.presidency.ucsb.eduhttp://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=76069#ixzz1katA5BUA

RepublicanPresidential Candidates Debate in Johnston, Iowa
December 12, 2007

Readmore at the American Presidency Project: www.presidency.ucsb.eduhttp://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=29664#ixzz1kbGpYYGu

ROMNEY:I don't stay awake at night worrying about the taxes that rich peopleare paying, to tell you the truth. I'm concerned about the taxes thatmiddle-class people are paying. They're under a lot of pressure.Gasoline is expensive. Home Heating oil, particularly in thenortheast, is very difficult for folks. Health care costs are goingthrough the roof. Education costs in higher education areoverwhelming. And as a result, we need to reduce the burden onmiddle-income families in this country.

Readmore at the American Presidency Project: www.presidency.ucsb.eduhttp://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=29664#ixzz1kbEe19tp

WASHBURN:Let me come at it this way. Let me come at it this way. What impacton the economy would be acceptable in order to reverse global warmingand greenhouse gas emissions? Governor Romney?
ROMNEY: Well, it's going to help our economy because we'regoing to invest in new technologies to get ourselves off of foreignoil. And as we get ourselves off of foreign oil, we also dramaticallyreduce our co2 emissions. That's good for the environment. It's alsogood for our economy. Because buying $300, $400 billion worth a yearin oil from people who use it against us, that's bad for our economy.It's also bad for the environment. We can do these things in a waythat helps both the environment and the economy and nationalsecurity. That's the beauty of what we're talking about here, whichis, yeah, is global an issue for the world? Absolutely. Is itsomething we can deal with by becoming energy independent and energysecure? We sure can. But at the same time, we call it global warming,not America warming. So, let's not put a burden on us alone and havethe rest of the world skate by without having to participate in thiseffort. It's a global effort but our independence is something we cando unilaterally.

Readmore at the American Presidency Project: www.presidency.ucsb.eduhttp://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=29664#ixzz1kbFURKmU

WASHBURN:If we need to improve our educational system quickly to be morecompetitive in the world, does the federal government need toexercise different influence than it has historically overeducational standards? If so, in what ways, and if not, how do youencourage state to meet national goals to move us forward? GovernorRomney?
ROMNEY: Carolyn, these are 60-second answers, right?
WASHBURN: Yes.
ROMNEY: Okay, let's make sure because time is going prettyquick here. Education is an important topic, and the President wasright to fight for No Child Left Behind, because we allow states nowto test our kids and see how they're doing, particularly in math andEnglish. We've made the same effort in our state, actually before NoChild Left Behind was passed. We test our kids. We have highstandards. We teach them in English, English immersion. We say to besuccessful in America, you've got to speak the language of America.We also put in place incentives for kids to do well. For those thattake the graduation exam, which you have to take to get out of highschool, we say you're going to get, if you score in the top 25% ofthe test, a four-year tuition-free scholarship to a Massachusettsinstitution of higher learning.
WASHBURN: But what about the role of the federalgovernment?
ROMNEY: And the federal government insists on those testsand standards. And it's key. Let me continue. I think we also have tohave higher pay for better teachers. And people who are not goodteachers ought to find a better career. And finally, we need moreparental involvement. And we've tested our kids in Massachusettsalong with all the other kinds in the nation. Fifty states get testedevery year in English and math. In fourth and eighth grade, my eighthgraders came out number one in English, came out number one in math.My fourth graders, number one in English, number one in math. Thefirst time in history one state number one in all four measures.School choice, better pay for better teachers, high standards,scholarships for the best kids, English immersion, these principleswork.

Readmore at the American Presidency Project: www.presidency.ucsb.eduhttp://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=29664#ixzz1kbFyXPLx

RepublicanPresidential Candidates Forum in Milford, New Hampshire
January 6,2008

Wouldyou explain, sir, why your record on taxes is better than your twocompetitors here at the table?

ROMNEY: Happy to. First of all, we raised fees by $240million in our state because we had a whole series of fees thathadn't been raised, in some cases, in decades, so we brought them upto the cost of providing services.
These were not broad-based fees that were required for all peopleto pay, rather for specialized services.
But let's talk about taxes. Lowering taxes grows the economy.Lowering taxes helps build jobs and helps working families, and so Istrongly have been of the view that one of the great lessons forRonald Reagan was that lowering taxes helped built our economy.
Senator McCain was one of two Republicans who voted against theBush tax cuts. I believe the Bush tax cuts helped our economy growand are one of the reasons that we're not in a recession today.
Senator McCain continues to believe -- based upon his comments on"Meet the Press" today -- that that was the right vote totake, and I respect that that's his view. I just happen to disagreewith it. As governor, I fought tirelessly to reduce taxes. We cuttaxes some 19 times in our state, not as many times as I wanted to,but I was able to cut taxes, with the help of the legislature, timeafter time, and we held down spending.
At the same time, Governor Huckabee has a fine record. He says helowered taxes 94 times. I believe him. Net-net, however, the taxburden in Arkansas was raised by $500 million, I believe the figureis from his state. So we have different records when it comes totaxes.
I believe it's critical for our economy going forward that welower taxes again and we do so for the middle class. And so I'veproposed a special savings plan for people in middle incomes.
And that savings plan is this: Any interest income, or dividendincome, or capital gains earned by people earning less than $200,000a year should be taxed at the new rate of zero. Let people save theirmoney for whatever purpose they'd like to save.
I believe that will help stimulate our economy, create theeconomic base for growth of our new jobs, and make it easier formiddle-income folks to make ends meet.
Thank you.

Readmore at the American Presidency Project: www.presidency.ucsb.eduhttp://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=29427#ixzz1kblRnHo7

RepublicanPresidential Candidates Debate in Myrtle Beach, SouthCarolina
January 10, 2008

WALLACE:Thank you, Brit.
Good evening, gentlemen. There are growing concerns that thecountry is headed for a recession. Here in South Carolina, they lostmore than 12,000 manufacturing jobs in just the last year.
Governor Romney, do you believe that we're headed for a recession?And given your record in Massachusetts, which had the third lowestjob growth of any state during the years you were governor, whyshould voters trust you over these other gentlemen to handle aslowdown?
ROMNEY: Well, first, Chris, let's get the record straight.Could we be headed for a recession? Absolutely. Do we have to beheaded for a recession? Absolutely not.
Recessions hurt working families. They hurt people across thiscountry. Our hearts go out to the people who are affected by jobslowdowns and growth slowdowns. And so this is something we're goingto have to address in a very aggressive way.
As to my record in the state of Massachusetts, I'm very proud ofthe fact that after many, many months of declining job growth, I tookover the state and helped turn that around. And in my years asgovernor, we kept adding jobs every single month after we saw thatturnaround.
The pipeline for new jobs coming into our state was in singledigits when I came into office. When I left, it was over 200. Andsome of the biggest employers are still coming into the state. Everymonth since I've left, we keep on adding jobs. So I'm proud of whatwe did there.
What do we have to do at the federal level to keep a recessionfrom occurring?
Number one, we're going to have to make sure that we stop thehousing crisis.
Number two, we're going to have to reduce taxes on middle-incomeAmericans immediately.
Number three, we're going to have to deal with gas prices. We'regoing to have to finally become energy independent and make theinvestments in new technology that will allow us to get there.
And, finally, R&D, investments in science and technology.That's an area where America can continue to lead the world.
It's time for us not just to talk about improving our economy;we're going to have to do the hard work of rebuilding our economy,strengthening it.
And I know that there are some people who think, as Senator McCaindid, he said, you know, some jobs have left Michigan that are nevercoming back. I disagree.
I'm going to fight for every single job, Michigan, South Carolina,every state in this country. We're going to fight for jobs and makesure that our future is bright. We're going to protect the jobs ofAmericans and grow this economy again.

Readmore at the American Presidency Project: www.presidency.ucsb.eduhttp://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=62265#ixzz1kbptVZZ2

CAMERON:Governor Romney, as part of your universal health insurance plan inMassachusetts, you say it was necessary to include coverage forabortion services. Would you make that same decision if Congress wereto suggest that mandatory abortion services would be part of anational health insurance program?
ROMNEY: Carl, the decision to include abortion services inhealth care in Massachusetts was required by the court, not by thelegislature, and certainly not by me as governor.
My term as governor was decidedly pro-life. On every decision Icould make as governor, I came down on the side of life. And that'swhy the Massachusetts Right to Life Association awarded me theirleadership award after my term as governor.
But let me come back to your other question about Ronald Reagan.Look, the only way we're going to win the White House is by appealingto the coalition that brought together the great strength that RonaldReagan brought to America.
What's happened in America is that Washington has moved away fromthe Reagan coalition. The Republican Party, in some cases, has movedaway from the Reagan principles.
But the principles that Ronald Reagan espoused are what will allowus not only to win the White House, but to keep America strong.Ronald Reagan was the ultimate optimist. He was a person who hadconfidence in America and brought back that spirit that we rely uponto be the strongest nation on Earth.
Ronald Reagan said we're going to have such a strong military,we'll out-compete the Soviets, and he did. He said we're going tohave such strong families that the values of Americans will shine asan example of a shining city on a hill for the entire world to see,and he did that.
And he also said we're going to have a strong economy, because herecognized that the only way we can have strong families that havegood health care, and schools, and values, and a strong military isif our economy is powerful.
Knowing how America works is more important than knowing howWashington works. And I've spent my life over the last 30 yearslearning how America works, how our economy is the envy of the entireworld.
And I want to make sure that in this time when our economy is alittle fragile, not sure where we're heading, that we strengthen thateconomy. That's what I know how to do. I've seen jobs come and go;I'll make sure that jobs come to America.

Readmore at the American Presidency Project: www.presidency.ucsb.eduhttp://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=62265#ixzz1kbqvRyXB

RepublicanPresidential Candidates Debate in Boca Raton, Florida
January 24,2008

MR.WILLIAMS:So to our candidates, gentlemen, welcome to you all. Thank you forbeing here, and let's begin. And Governor Romney, I thought we'dbegin with you. The president just today signed off on this economicstimulus plan that would send out 116 million checks to Americanhomes. The plan is somewhat contrary to yours, providing lots ofshort-term stimulus to individuals. Your plan, as you know, focusesas much on the long term as the short term. Are you disappointed thatyour recipe for the economy was not embraced by the president? And asa follow-up, will you now embrace his plan?
ROMNEY: Well, there's a great deal that is effective in hisplan. I just wish it went further. What's effective is, first, he'sgetting money back to consumers. And given the fact that two-thirdsof our economy is a consumer economy, getting money back into thehands of our citizens, a lot of them paying a lot for gasoline, a lotfor heating oil, a lot of people concerned about how to make endsmeet, that makes sense to me. Mine was a little different. It had apermanent tax cut for people at the lowest income tax bracket. I alsohave a savings plan for individuals that allows folks who are makingunder $200,000 a year to save their money tax free, no (interest on?) interest, dividends or capital gains. I guess we can get to thatlater. But his first start to help the consumers is a good start.
I just think we need to go further.
Second, we go to -- to corporate support and helping corporationshave the incentive to buy more capital equipment. That he also does.I do it more aggressively than he does by writing off a larger amountof capital expenditures -- getting companies to, frankly, buy morestuff so that as they do so that other companies will hire peoplebecause if you want to turn an economy around, the key thing is togrow jobs. It's not just to get checks in the hands of consumers;it's consumers buying things that creates jobs. It's companies buyingthings that create jobs.
And then finally, his last leg is with regards to helping the FHAtake on a broader array of -- of -- of homes that are in trouble,homeowners that are in trouble. And that's really very important, andI'm appreciative of the fact that the president took that step. We --we really have across the country a housing crisis, a mortgagecrisis, that seems to have spilled out into the entire economy, and-- and the effect of this, of course, is to put a lot of pain againsta lot of people. And so helping reverse the housing crisis iscritical.
And that's why expanding the FHA loan requirements, or excuse me,if you will, loosening those requirements and expanding the abilityof FHA to help out homeowners would make a big difference. So net-netis something I support, and I look forward to taking it further.

Readmore at the American Presidency Project: www.presidency.ucsb.eduhttp://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=76300#ixzz1kbttIFp3

MR.WILLIAMS:Governor Romney, since we've been on the air tonight, one of theother campaigns has faxed us with a charge about you that you'veheard before, that Governor Romney, quote, "changes positionswith the wind."
One of your own advisers admits the perception among all of thecandidates on stage is that you have changed over time yourpositions, that you haven't paid your dues. The New York Timesyesterday called you the most disliked of the five. Your defense inall that?
ROMNEY: Gosh, that's -- that's tough on their part. But youknow, I'm not terribly worried about their -- about their attacks,frankly. I'm not going to Washington to make friends withpoliticians. I'm going to Washington to change things. So I'm notgoing to worry about that one.
I can tell you that I am -- I'm -- I'm proud of the things thatwe've been able to do in my state. And when people come after me and-- and say, "Hey, where do you stand on this," or "wheredo you stand on that," I can point to a very simple way to findout exactly where I stand, and that is, look at my record asgovernor. Every issue that we're talking about in this race that's ofa domestic nature I dealt with as the governor of Massachusetts.
And so on the issue of -- of abortion, for instance, I came downon the side of life, consistently, as governor, in every way I knewhow I could do that. At the end of my term, I got awarded by theCitizens for Life in Massachusetts the Leadership Award, for myservice in that regard.
In terms of marriage, as the governor, I fought same-sex marriageevery way I could find a way to do that. And I actually went toWashington -- Washington to testify in favor of an amendment topreserve the sanctity of marriage.
I also have a very clear record with regards to taxes. I said Iwas not going to raise taxes, lowered them 19 times, balanced thebudget four times, created surpluses that reestablished a rainy-dayfund of over $2 billion.
I have a sound record also with regards to the Second Amendment.As I indicated, the legislation I signed was legislation worked outbetween two sides, two very different sides who came together to findways to make the Second Amendment work in our state.
So I got a record that's solid. I know that now and then myopponents will try and cause questions to arise in people's minds,but I'm proud of where I stand. And I'm happy to show people myrecord, to show it's been consistent.

Readmore at the American Presidency Project: www.presidency.ucsb.eduhttp://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=76300#ixzz1kc0fKUpl

RepublicanPresidential Candidates Debate in Simi Valley, California
January30, 2008

VANDEHEI:First question from the readers, Governor Romney, is from JonathanRubin (sp) in Fairfax, Virginia. As governor of Massachusetts, asSenator McCain just pointed out, you raised hundreds of millions ofdollars in additional revenue through so-called fees and loopholeclosings, and you passed a health care bill forcing individuals tobuy insurance under threat of a fine.

How do you reconcile that policy with your claim to be theauthentic conservative?
ROMNEY: Well, let's talk about each. I mentioned fees, andI think it's appropriate if the state is providing a service tosomeone -- that's not a requirement to have a car or a driver'slicense, but instead, let's say, we're going to be taking out a oiltank from your backyard because it's leaking into the ground and thestate's going to provide that service, that to charge a feesufficient to do so makes a lot of sense. And so the fees ought to beadjusted from time to time to compose the amount of what the cost ofproviding that service, and if there hasn't been a fee raise in acouple of decades, you probably have some inflation in there youought to adjust for.
But then secondly, with regards to my health care plan, let medescribe what I think is the ultimate conservative approach. In thiscountry you have today about 47 million people that don't have healthinsurance. We went out and tried to find out why they don't. We foundout that about half of them could afford to buy insurance if it werereasonably priced; they could afford to buy it, but they weren'tbuying it. And we asked them why, and they said, well, why should webuy it? If we get sick, we can go to the hospital and get care forfree. And we said, you know what? If somebody could afford insurance,they should either by the insurance or pay their own way.
They don't have to buy insurance if they don't want to, but paytheir own way. But they shouldn't be allowed just to show up at thehospital and say, "Somebody else should pay for me."
And so we said no more free riders. It was like bringing workfareto welfare. We said if you can afford insurance, then either have theinsurance or get a health savings account, pay your own way, but nomore free ride. And that was what the mandate did. It said you've gotto come up with either the insurance or health savings account oralike.
I think it's the conservative approach to make sure that peoplewho can afford care are getting it at their expense, not at theexpense of the taxpayers and government. That I consider to be a steptowards socialism.

Readmore at the American Presidency Project: www.presidency.ucsb.eduhttp://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=76338#ixzz1kc32I6oI

COOPER:And Governor Romney, what did you think of Senator McCain's response?And just to remind you, the original question is, do you side withGovernor Schwarzenegger or with the Bush administration on thisissue?

ROMNEY: Well, I said with states to be able to make theirown regulations with regards to emissions within their own states.
But let's talk about our policies with regards to greenhouse gasesand global warming. I think we all agree that America should becomeenergy independent.
The consequences of us continuing to buy over a billion dollars ofoil a day from people who oftentimes use this money against us --it's bad for our economy, it's bad for our foreign policy, and allthat energy being used is probably bad for our environment. It'sprobably warming our environment, and we want that to stop.
So a unilateral action to get ourselves off of foreign oil makesall the sense in the world. Nuclear power, biodiesel, biofuel, allthe renewables, liquefied coal, where you sequester the carbondioxide -- those things make all the sense in the world. But when youput in place a new cap or a mandate and particularly if you don'thave any safety valve as to how much the cost that cap might be, youwould impose on the American people -- if you do it unilaterally,without involving all the world -- you'd impose on the Americanpeople a huge new effective tax: 20 percent on utilities, 50 cents agallon for gasoline -- that's according to the Energy InformationAgency -- would be imposed on us.
And here's what happens. I've lived in the business world. I'velived in the real economy for 25 years of my life. What happens ifyou do that, if you put a big burden on energy in this country, isthe energy intensive industries say we're going to move our newfacilities from America to China where they don't have thoseagreements, and you end up polluting and putting just as much CO2 inthe air because the big energy users go there. That's why these ideasmake sense, but only on a global basis.
They don't call it America warming. They call it global warming.
That's why you've got to have a president that understands thereal economy.

Readmore at the American Presidency Project: www.presidency.ucsb.eduhttp://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=76338#ixzz1kc39TOEu

COOPER:Let's ask other governor -- let's ask the other governor on thestage. Governor Romney, what do you think about it?

ROMNEY: There's no question but that investment ininfrastructure makes enormous sense for our country. It's good forbusiness. It's good for the economy. And as the governor that watchedthe completion -- well, almost the completion of the Big Dig -- Ithink that was -- I don't know how many governors watched that $15billion project. They do create a lot of good jobs and they help oureconomy; they're great things. But unfortunately, a road projectisn't going to stimulate the economy in the time frame we have rightnow, at the tipping point.
COOPER: Was the Big Dig good, by the way?
ROMNEY: Well, as someone once said -- it leaks badly, ofcourse, so someone has remarked that it's the biggest carwash inAmerica, and most expensive, too. It solved a problem, but it costway too much money to do it, was very badly managed.
But that being said, an economic stimulus plan has to put money inthe hands of consumers and businesses and homeowners now. And thereason we're asking Congress to move within 30 days is we want to getthat out there now so the economy doesn't tip down.
Building a road project, you have to get designs, eminent domain,you get the engineers to approve; it takes years and years and yearsto get a road project. So it's a wonderful idea, but it's not relatedto short-term economic stimulus.

Readmore at the American Presidency Project: www.presidency.ucsb.eduhttp://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=76338#ixzz1kc3T45dZ

The Truth Has No Agenda. What Utter Tripe.

2012-01-23T10:25:00.002-05:00

A Certain former Television show hostlikes to throw a nice sounding catch phrase of "The Truth Has NoAgenda." which sounds really good if you hear it but in realityit's not that simple. We perceive things through the data that getstransmitted through our senses to our brain. Our brain thenprocesses that data and directs the information back to our body. Iam talking scientifically here leaving out things like the humanspirit/soul.

The Truth has no Agenda so if you wroteit out one of these truths and showed it to a person with dyslexiacould they perceive this truth ? No of course they couldn't because ahuman agent would have to take it and translate it to another formfor them to understand. The same case would have to be made forsomeone who was blind or only understood some other language whichthen also takes a human agency to process it and then translate it.

There is also the condition calledSynthasis where data taken through one sense gets translate throughinto another set of senses such as say tasting sound or hearing sightwhich makes it even harder to believe the truth has no agenda. Justleaving all these conditions aside consider what is being said isfrom a human perspective so if someone is telling you Truth thatmeans they do have an Agenda which is Truth.

If my agenda is Truth then what I wantto do is tell you the truth as I perceive it in order to createconditions where you will also tell the truth as you perceive meaningthat Truth has an Agenda which is to create conditions where Truthspreads. So the phrase the Truth has No Agenda is utter tripe inpeoples mouths. More properly it should be phrased as My Agenda isTelling the Truth not the nicer sounding catch phrase that makes alovely sound bite.

Human beings always have agendas evenif it's something like I am going to go get something to eat or I amgoing to get some sleep. Of course if God (yes I believe in a greatcreator who loves us and wishes us to prosper) tells you somethingthen it is a higher order of Truth which still has to be processedthrough our brains and since we are imperfect beings we can still getit wrong telling it to others.

One of my nicer catch phrases comesfrom when one of my Spanish speaking friends kept telling me oh thisword means good guy when it meant something entirely different. Itold him The Truth is Not Your Friend which was meant to state thathe was such a liar that truth couldn't abide with him.

I am digressing from my point in thisblog really which is to say that they get it wrong by using The Truthhas No Agenda. Agendas can be good as long as you are aware of them.

Real World Economics VS Confiscation Fairy Tales

2012-01-14T23:10:00.000-05:00

I have done variations of this beforein previous blogs where I explain in my real world experience whathappens if the ideas of liberal are imposed. You will hear people usethe well they got along perfectly fine when 90 percent of theirincome was being confiscated. I have heard Ben Stein make thisargument on a Fox News show.

In the real world when I actually wasearning an income one of my routines if I was in the State of NorthCarolina at the Ancestral Homestead was to go to a Buffet to eatlunch/dinner. Of course you could say but that's just one place so itdoesn't matter that much just like well if we confiscate most of yourincome you still have plenty left over.

This ignores the reality as when I setout I would stop by the convenience store to get fuel ( Moneycollected by taxes on that fuel for the State and Federal) Since Iwas at the Convenience Store I would also buy a drink (state Taxes)and some sort of snack (state Taxes) before I would continue on myway. This activity also helps pay the people who work at the Store,the people who make the drink and the food that goes to stock thestore and the fuel company that supplies the Fuel.

As I am going to a Buffet I need someway to slow down my eating from my years of scarfing down food to getback to work I would also stop by a Book Store to get something toread. This means I buy one or two books. This activity supports theAuthors who write the books, publishers who publish the books, thebook store who has the books, the cashiers who work at the book storeand the taxes the state collects from this activity.

I eat at the Buffet meaning that theyneed people to cook the food I am eating and someone to wash thedishes I use. My being there also means my waitress gets a tip fromme when I get ready to leave increasing her income through tips andwhen I pay my bill at the cashier that helps to support therestaurant. The people who supply the materials for the Buffet arealso being supported by my Patronage.

Then I am heading back to the AncestralHomestead after my meal so perhaps I stop at the Grocery Store to buyitems for the next couple of days which means I am helping pay forthe people who work there and the people who help keep that storestocked up with goods.

So for those IDIOTS who say decreasingwhat people have available to spend makes no real difference arecompletely wrong as I have just described what not being able to takethat weekly Sunday Trip eliminates. I am not helping to keep thatConvenience Store open ,or that Book Store , Or That Restaurant, orThat Grocery Store and all the connections those Establishments helpto keep open. This also removes the Taxes my trip provides to keepthe Rapacious Government Entities operating.

If I am wealthy then my money has evenmore impact when my behavior has to change due to bright mindedidiots who think that taking more of mine is going to help them fundgovernment better. I move my money somewhere else or I insulate it byputting it into something where it can't be effected. I don't buythat new car I want meaning that car dealership which would havebenefited from me spending money there loses t hat income. I don'ttake that trip so the hotel I was going to stay at loses that income.That lost trip means those places I might have visited to buyservices or goods from lose the income that I would have spent there.

Real world trumps idealistic fairytales that the Idiots who think We can just take more money fromthese people without them changing their behavior

On Mitt Romney

2012-01-13T22:47:00.003-05:00

I have been told that the real reason I have not jumped on the supporting Mitt (aka Mittens) Romney bandwagon is because I hate him. That is a rather odd claim as I have not expressed a personal animosity towards the man despite my humorous jabs directed his way. I have never personally met the man or any of his family so I do not know where this invisible to me at least hate would spring from.

It can't be because he is a Member of the Church of Latter Day Saints because at one point I was attending services at one of the churches. I was also talking with two of the bike riding members of that branch of faith with them being invited into the place I was living at. So if at one point I had serious intentions of joining the church then using logic I can not hate the faith.

Perhaps if I was filled with envy for his enormous wealth that could explain this claim for hatred on my part. That explanation does not track either as I have no wellspring of envy for people who have a lot more wealth than I do which these days is most everyone. I would not say no if someone wanted to give me some of that wealth as long as it wasn't handled through legalized government theft but I have none of that blind envy that inflicts other people with hatred.

So it isn't because I hate the man or his faith or his wealth which means the Hate claim is false, inaccurate, scurrilous lies and all the other word variations of people making claims that are not based in reality.

Moving on to other claims such as the You have blinders on to how great the candidate is and if they were just gone you would understand why Mitt (aka Mittens ) Romney is so great to defeat the current President. I find this more offensive than the hate claim because it is tied to the idea that my views are not based on some sort of standard in reality while the opposing view ( How Great Mitt (aka Mittens) Romney Is) are.

I am assured numbers don't like lie or anything and all these polls and what not show at this moment that the guy I have blinders on about is the best possible choice this time to battle President Barack Obama. After all this non binding caucus in Iowa was a tie and the primary in New Hampshire was a decisive victory so it is foolish to like wait for any of these other 48 states to have a say in who the nominee is

I am sort of wondering why the argument is I am the guy who is disconnected from reality when you lay out just 2 states have had their say but it's already CLEAR who the guy should be. The reality is that polls are snapshots in the moment and a compelling narrative can shift those numbers dramatically making them meaningless.

I am also assured that Mitt (aka Mittens) Romney is running a 50 state campaign with lots of money and an active organization ready to go. Of course this same clear decisive involved organization is caught flatfooted when Bain Capital is brought up in the Primary. Now I am sure that since this is the first time the guy has run for President and it has never been brought up before it is not an indication of anything.

The above sentence is written entirely in a sarcastic manner as Bain Capital was brought up in the Primary by multiple Republican Opponents in the previous Republican Primary against Romney.

Politics is Perception where you and everyone else is trying to shape that Perception so you move forward or you are defeated. Saying I have all this organization just to be blindsided by something that happened the last time you ran around the same time it happened last time shifts perception in a bad way against you.

Lastly is the this is the most important election ever ever really we mean it this time so you need to support this person or else we are all doomed. All elections are important which is why I want the right guy or gal because the lesser of evils method of voting is what leads to us being in the position where the previous statement gets used and is probably true.

One of Mitt's supporters from Congress kept using the Head versus Heart theme over and over and over while doing an interview with Edward Morrissey implying that’s what you have to do in order to support the person you decide to pick. It is really a false choice because if a politician doesn't at least touch your heart a tiny bit there’s no connection which means people not paying attention can't be drawn in. If people not paying attention can't be drawn in then there's no one working the pavement and convincing other people that this is the guy/gal that needs to be supported.

Onward and Upward Action Comics V2 #1

2011-09-19T11:23:00.001-04:00

This is the reintroduction of Superman in the New DC universe starting out Six Months after he makes his first appearance in Metropolis heralding the emergence of Powered beings to the world at large. This is not the polished boyscout respecter of all the laws and working within the system to support the system.

This is the rough edged rough sort of justice kind of Superman who grabs corrupt individuals and jumps off buildings holding them demanding they confess. This Superman is an outlaw running from the police operating like a Scarlet Pimpernel or Robin Hood.. This Superman wears a rough cut costume with combat boots , blue jeans , a tee shirt with an S on it and a flowing Cape.

I am not bothered by what Morrison is doing here but I think it is somewhat ridiculous to think any kind of confession gotten through intimidation or force will stand up in a court even though the scandal ensuing from the revelations of criminal activities might force them out of business. This Superman is going way back to his roots of the 39's Superman of being a in your face kind of guy using force and being on the outs with law.

I'm am struggling with this review because I do not see anything really new in this new Edgier Man of Steel fighting the Powers that be with all their corruption and such because it is not new to me. I didn't get to see this new Clark long enough to make any real judgments about what he is like despite he is working for some place other than the Daily Planet.

The Familiar characters are in here of Lois Lane Reporter from the Daily Planet , Jimmy Olsen of the Daily Planet who is Clark's room mate and his friend for 6 months and Lex Luthor whose position in this new world is not clear except he sometimes works as a Consultant for the Military.

This issue was not horrible at all despite peoples outcries about it. I like the art and most of the action going on and I sort of like what Luthor does here but it all falls apart when you consider some of what happens would cause all sorts of hell from what Superman does at the beginning of the issue and what Luthor does at the end of the issue.

Not a Tragedy But An Attack

2011-09-11T17:16:00.001-04:00

I was going to be nice and avoid doing a blog today but screw being nice for people who say we deserve this or this is really our fault or cheering on the crowds cheering in those countries where the so called Religion of Peace holds sway.

This was not a tragedy but a long term thought out attack made before George W. Bush became President and the second attempt at one target called the World Trade Center which was attacked in February 26, 1993 with a Truck Bomb that was suppose to topple the North Tower.

So for those dumb arses who fail to understand reality or are partisan attack dogs the Plan to fly planes into buildings was not because of Bush but because American is the symbol for Western Civilization. The bullshit spouted by deluded rationalizing fools about grand conspiracies and such is just that.

It wasn't Christians or Orthodox Jews or Satanists or 7th Day Adventists who took flight school training , hijacked the planes and flew them into targets but Islamic Muslims. Perhaps the excuse should be they did it because the Crusades removed them from the countries their ancestors had brutally conquered.

Remember you are Islamphobic if you point out the religion these attackers were and that we need to make certain not to rush to judgment by the elitist fingerwaggers who abandoned that non rush to judgment after the incident in Norway where the shooter was quickly proclaimed a Right Wing Christian.

This is beyond Politics but where we either recognize reality or succumb to delusion. People watched the events unfold on that day ten years ago and felt sick by what they saw, People died brutal horrible deaths we were helpless to prevent whether or not they were in the planes hijacked, working at their jobs in the Pentagon, working at one of the Towers , working as a First Responder or out in the street.

Their ghosts live on in 9-11 calls , messages to loved ones from the planes and tape shot at the scenes but some people would prefer us to forget them because it happened Ten Years ago and that’s a long long time. These reasons vary from it makes them feel bad, it wrecks the attempt to mute the reality, it contradicts the new story being told in textbooks where they leave out certain details and the stupid hasn't happened it might create a backlash against Muslims.

Remember the People who died and say prayers for their family and friends and coworkers but don't pretend this was like a hurricane or a tornado which are indeed tragedies that happen. You owe the people who died that brutal honest assessment of facts so it doesn't happen again.

My Latin is Horrible but Veneratio Silenti etc per Verum quod Veneratio which is suppose to be Honor the Dead with Truth and Respect.

I Cry Racist So You Will Be Silent

2011-09-05T19:34:00.000-04:00

Lets be honest and admit racism exists buts let also be honest and not pretend those voices who are raised the loudest to cry Racism are doing it just for benevolent intentions. After all if you are accused of racism with no evidence at all still the burden of proof to prove you are not racist lies on you. Remember the same people saying certain people are innocent until proven guilty have no problem with saying you are guilty with no proof and all your proof will be dismissed scornfully.

You didn't get a job because the person hiring was racist. You didn't get a promotion because the person in charge of promotions is racist. You didn't get a good education because the school district was racist. You didn't meet the standards for hiring for a job because the standards were made by a racist. You got a bunch of girls pregnant but its not your fault because of the racist morality. You got arrested for shooting someone which is clearly the fault of the racist cops and the racist guy who made you shoot him. You raped a woman but she is the one who is racist because she called the cops on you. Your buddy is daring to learn how to speak clearly and is getting an education which means he has become a traitor and is siding with the racists. They want to cut a government program not because it is a failure but because they are racists. They want Constitutional Limits to apply to The Government which is clearly a sign of their racism. This is the mindset of the Liberation Theology people.

What's that?

Liberation Theology is based on the Eternal Victim and Victimizer where never the twain will switch no matter how many years pass or what one or the other sides does. After all if you are a victim then people will feel sympathy for your plight and go out of their way to accommodate your desires and wishes. If you are a victimizer then no one will ever feel anything positive for you unless you surrender and give away everything to the victim but you will still always be a victimizer.

It is one of the reasons why people who believe in Affirmative Action don't consider it racist because a victim can not be racist no matter what. Since Black People were the victims of slavery then it follows that quotas determining how many guaranteed Blacks get scholarships is not fundamentally unfair but Justice being enacted. This logic applies to women who were oppressed by White Men and so on. Coincidentally it does not apply to Jews despite the horrible tragedies throughout history that have occurred because the mythical creature known as a Palestinian exists who is the victim.

The Cry of Racism is a useful tool in an Arsenal of tricks developed by Progressives which allows them to not defend their ideas but silence any opposition. After all it is easier to make your political enemies have to defend themselves from a charge they can't disprove 100 percent ever. So real racism which is deplorable becomes diminished with all the other charges that are not actually racism.

The Cry of Racism also becomes an extortion tool in getting businesses to surrender to what the Raciers want. Raciers is a term coined by Tony Katz for the people who use the charge of Racism for personal gain. "If you don't give me this I will show up outside your door with a crowd of people and the Media will report on what I do giving you a black eye."

Building Utopia

2011-09-04T00:52:00.001-04:00

Unlike some people I believe a utopia is possible as long as you clearly do not define it as the version of Utopia evil empires try to build. That version will always fail because it depends on making everyone else agree with the leaders of that Empire perfectly.

Step One: These are numbered but it doesn't really matter. To build Utopia requires cheap energy that is easy to access easy to use and operates consistently. Utopia is not humanity living in natural caves just using muscle powered devices and non-synthesized materials. To get to the energies of the future (antimatter or whatever else it might be ) you have to use ALL the energy producing products of the present.

Step Two: To build Utopia requires the free flow of peoples beliefs and thoughts without the stigma of hatred that has so marked the last couple of decades of Political Correctness. Honesty if it is allowed to exist creates a society that advances not stagnates and dies. I know people who were devastated that the Soviet Union fell because communism was suppose to create "utopia" but the leaders of that society lied constantly and demanded with intimidation and violence only certain thoughts and beliefs be expressed.

Step Three: To Build Utopia requires the recognition that people are just people no matter the artificial positions societies create for them. These artificial barriers where certain people are regarded as above everyone else allows attitudes that these artificial subsets of people do not matter. If people become convinced that these subsets are less than human or even monsters then justification for actions that are horrible become easy. Look at Andre Carson who claimed Tea Party people just want to really lynch black people. No one in the audience demanded he supply any evidence for these claims because there has been a ever evolving pattern where Tea Party people are portrayed as less than human.

Step Four: To build Utopia requires the realization that freedom if allowed to operate does not generate equal outcomes for people. Individuals will generate different outcomes with identical resources and circumstances because they are different. Al Sharpton has said he does not think that is good enough and demands equal outcomes which is not what King wanted.

And there are the 4 steps to Utopia

Anime What I am Watching

2011-09-02T23:39:00.001-04:00

Ao No Exorcist or Blue Exorcist

Ok I like this series so far a lot because its not just another silly cartoon series despite the sometime comedic tones. It is up to 20 episodes right now and I haven't checked to see how many they are making. I am on episode 17 I think.

One of the things that is different about Anime from Japan is that they have no problem ending series if the story calls for it. If it is popular they will end a series and start another story line sometimes with portions of the cast in the story or with no one from the original story line at all except as references made obliquely.

From the Wiki Page The Basic Plot line of the story:

The story revolves around Rin Okumura, a teenager possessing abnormal strength and endurance who was raised by Father Shiro Fujimoto along his younger twin brother Yukio. Soon after Yukio departs to study at the prestigious True Cross Academy, Rin learns that both he and his brother are sons of Satan, the strongest of all demons. Witnessing Shiro dying to protect him, Rin ends up doing what his guardian asked him to never do, draw the demon-slaying blade Kurikara that restrains his demonic powers, from its scabbard. From that moment on, Rin not only gains permanent demonic features like fangs, pointed ears and a tail, but also the power to ignite himself into blue flames that can destroy anything it touches.

On Shiro's funeral, Rin has an encounter with Mephisto Pheles, who agrees to his wish to become an Exorcist like his guardian to take revenge on Satan. He enrolls at the True Cross Academy, which is actually the Japanese branch of an international organization dedicated to protect the human realm, Assiah, from demons and other creatures from the demon realm, Gehenna. Rin takes part on the special Exorcist course only known by a few and much to his surprise, he finds that his brother Yukio is already a veteran Exorcist and will be one of his teachers.

From the Wki Page Rin Okumura:

The fifteen-year-old protagonist of the story, Rin is the son of Satan born from a human woman and is the inheritor of Satan's powers. His powers were sealed at birth into the demon-slaying blade Kurikara, or Koumaken, by Shiro Fujimoto, allowing him to live a normal human life for about 15 years. Rin became aware of his true identity after Kurikara could no longer seal the blue flames he inherited from Satan, setting off a chain of events that led to the death of his guardian, Father and Exorcist Fujimoto Shiro, at the hands of Satan, who attempted to drag Rin back to the demon realm. Exorcist Mephisto Pheles confronted Rin after Shiro's funeral with several exorcists, giving Rin the option to kill them all or die. Rin instead demanded to become an exorcist, an idea that amused Mephisto. Rin was then enrolled personally by Mephisto into the True Cross Academy Exorcist School, where he has since been pursuing his goal to become a Paladin and to defeat Satan. He is currently an Exwire and attempting to gain the title of Meister as a "Knight".

Blue Dragon Uncut

I started watching this recently after going to library to see if a new issues of Shonen Jump had come out. One of the advertising inside the magazine was for this series so I decided to check it out. I am up to episode Nine at the moment. It has the feel of a lesser version of the original Dragon Ball to me and after I looked it up on Bing I found that the creator of Dragon Ball Akira Toriyama

helped design the characters for the anime. This is not necessarily a bad thing as I still have a fondness for the series Dragon Ball.

Anyone who has seen the uncut versions of Dragon Ball realizes that this anime also contains adult elements to the story lines that companies like Funimation will make sure to scrub before playing anywhere.

Unfortunately one of the annoying thing about Dragon Ball was the long scenes with nothing really happening as episode after episode plays which hasn't happen so far in this but I am dreading the possibility. I am waiting to see if I become disenchanted with this series as it has happened before.

Cardfight! Vanguard is a series I have talked about before and it is now up to episode 34. The thing I really liked about this series that is still going on is Aichi Sendō is still learning how to play the game so he can screw up and lose which happens unlike other card game series. It still feels like an instructional video for building the CCG decks though but has gotten better.

The Mystic Archives of Dantalian

This series creeps me out with beginning and ending sequences especially the ending sequence. The main character Hugh Anthony Disward inherits both his grandfather's book collection and something called the Archives of Dantalian which the small girl who is living in his grandfather's home. It turns out there are these secret dangerous books that exist and the girl is the access point to fighting the dangerous creations these books can make.

I have only watched 2 episodes of the total 8 episodes out there and I like I said the entrance and exit of the series makes me feel creeped out. I find a series about books intriguing though and might pick it back up later to see if I can get over the creepiness. a Fair warning is that this series contains a lot of bloodshed and death and destruction so it's not really for the faint of heart.

Making a Good Comic Book Movie

2011-09-02T22:19:00.001-04:00

With all the notable failures or almost successes out there I thought it would be worth a look at what I think makes or breaks a movie. Others probably have a different view especially people in the industry.

Step One: Have a clear idea what the character is about so you can design the story around that. Most comic book movies fall apart because of all the contradictions that plague a character as the story unfolds. If your comic character is a genius detective do not have him fooled by a trick a 3 year old child could see through.

Step Two: Have a clear idea what the villain or villains is going to be about and focus on making them a credible threat not something good old Aunt May Parker could whack with her cane and take out. Have a consistent idea what the villain is going to be about.

Step Three: Do not depend on the special effects to make the story good. If the story is bad all the explosions and dead bodies in the world will not save the movie. Otherwise the Star Wars Prequels would be viewed as better than the much older and less technologically advance Star Wars The Empire Strike Backs.

Step Four: Hire actors who will play the characters appropriately not as if they are just bored to be there. George Clooney as Batman acts more like bored playboy Bruce Wayne even in costume. If your actors do not understand what the characters are about explain it to them. If they still do not get it then your movie will probably wind up in the best of The Raspberries.

Step Five: Have a good script with step one and step two involved to create a credible story. It does not have to be a story without fantastic elements but if the characters do not make sense in what they do then people will reject the story meaning you are left with the quality of the actors and the special effects

Step Six: Be Consistent through out the entire movie. If character X has never been able to do something before build up to them learning how to do this not just pull it out at the end because the script writer has painted himself/herself into a corner.

Step Seven: Do not just put people into the story for no purpose except for them to be there. Make all the characters matter not just the Hero and Villain. Oh Look its Bane for a minute and half before he gets beaten.

Step Eight: Slavish loyalty to what the comic book does is bad so adopt the material to the medium it is in. Comic books do not contain sound or the reality of motion that the motion picture does so use those effectively.

Step Nine: Do not expect Critics to like any comic book movie so if you are depending on them to make your picture number one you are doomed. Green Lantern got slammed because the critics refused to lower themselves to read any "comics" and they didn't 'understand" the story.

Step Ten: Write the story for the biggest audience possible. Some movies fall apart because an audience goes into a movie without any of the back story known to them and they are perplexed as to what is going on. Clarify the actions using the story.

Step Ten A: Do not however write as if your audience is stupid even if some of them certainly act that way. .

The New DC Universe Spoilers Ahead

2011-09-01T19:40:00.001-04:00

After the events of Flashpoint 1 - 5 the Collective DC Universe received a reset where things have changed and we are not quite sure what these changes are. In the book Justice League we start off Five Years ago on a rooftop where the Gotham Police force is chasing down two figures on rooftops. One is Batman and he is not well liked at all by the Forces of Law and Order.

Honestly I really loved the art style in this introduction to the History of the NEW DC 52 Universe but the dialogue was not the best and I like Geoff as a writer a lot. Subconsciously I have set a high bar in my head for both Jim Lee as an Artist and Geoff Johns as a writer and only one of them hit that bar.

The point of this Relaunch is to get new people into reading comics again with all the other competition for their time and looking at this as the starting point I would say they haven't yet sold that to a new audience.

I have to give this first issue a low low B Minus in grading because it did not do either of the conflicting two jobs it needed to do in my view. One it did not lure new readers into a gosh this is great so I am going to buy comics despite how pretty the art is. Two it did not tell an interesting enough story for a long time reader to say Hey this is interesting despite doing scenes where characters meet each other for the "first" time.

Here is a breakdown of what the people are as best as I can determine not using my superior knowledge as a comic geek but pretending to be someone who knows nothing about the Characters.

What do we learn here is Batman is a mystery to most everyone else and people do not think he is real. He accepts that people are afraid of the new just emerged Costumed People with powers and uses that fear to help him. He is always paying attention to what is going on and prefers to have plans in place but is good at improvising. People assume if he is even real that he has powers.

What we learn about Green Lantern ( Hal Jordan ) is he is a Space Cop for the Guardians known as a Green Lantern and that there are sectors that each has their own assigned Green Lantern. GL is cocky and has had problems with the air force where he operates from. The reason he is even in Gotham is because he was alerted to an Unauthorized Extraterrestrial.

What we learn about Superman is that he is an Extraterrestrial who is the first of the Costumed Heroes to come out in Public and he isn't well liked at all. This Superman hits first and likes the fighting.

Then we have Football Star Victor Stone who wins the big game but his father doesn't show up again despite promising to do so. Without his father there he can't sign with any of the talent scouts who want him. His dad is a scientist who is trying to figure out super powers work and Victor doesn't know anything about it.

Now here is the story breakdown and any parts I leave out or dialogue I do not convey accurately is entirely my own fault.

Batman is chasing some figure across rooftops with the Gotham Police force giving chase to them both. They are willing to shoot at both of them. Green Lantern smacks the Being with a Green Fire engine just as it has grabbed Batman ready to lay some smack down. The cops shoot at Green Lantern which he blocks with some ring creations. The Being transforms and shoots fire at the firing Copters sending them crashing down. Green Lantern saves the copters and puts all the fires out with ring creations as he and Batman go into the sewers.

Green Lantern goes into a gabfest about who he represents and then wonders what Batman's powers are with Batman's responses being monosyllabic. If you are a Green Lantern fan the next bit will probably offend you as Green Lantern gets so upset after hearing no to the super powers he throws out he realizes Batman has no super powers when Batman steals his ring off his finger.

The unknown alien is placing devices in Gotham that even Green Lantern's ring which has the knowledge of The Guardians can scan. The Unknown Alien commits suicide trying to take out Green Lantern and Batman out screaming a name as it did so. Green Lantern says lets go see if this Superman who is also an ET knows anything where he scoops Batman up into a Green Glowing Fighter Jet and they head to where the ring says Superman is flying over the Football Field where Victor Stone just won another football game.

Green Lantern goes in to confront Superman with an arrogant cocky attitude which ends in him being punched back outside the building with his ring constructs vanishing. Superman then turns his attention to Batman wondering just what he can do.

The Blame Game

2011-09-01T17:47:00.000-04:00

I find it perfectly appropriate to point out whose fault it is if you are going to do it by a consistent set of standards which people aren't. If you blame George Walker Bush for the state of the economy then it is perfectly acceptable to blame Barack Hussein Obama f or the state of the economy. Notice what I said when I say a consistent set of standards as I know for certain the President is not responsible for the economy but the Legislative Branch is. Of course if you assign the proper blame that means Democrats who controlled the Congress are responsible for the shitty economy right now for 4 years.

The President is the Executive Branch and has the power to veto Bills which means he can say No but that means saying no to entire bill not just the pieces he thinks are bad. Again if you want to blame the President if he is a Republican then you also have to blame the President if he is a Democrat. You can't let him run around and say it is Bad Luck and claim any credibility.

I have friends who tell me constantly that it doesn't matter who gets the credit and I can understand their reasoning because getting things done is important. However the fact is that if you let people claim credit for things they actively or clandestinely try to sabotage then when it succeeds to the public eyes it is the guy's least deserving of credit getting that public relations victory. If that something fails then those same people will assign blame to both the ideas behind the project and the people actively working to institute it.

One of the major problems is that some people get a free pass when they play the Blame Game and their fundamental assumptions to make that assigned Blame are accepted without thinking. You counter act that by not letting false blame or those assumptions to go unchallenged. You also take credit for your ideas or the ideas someone else proposes that you support. It takes boldness to do that and there are not many bold politicians out there except on a certain side and they are only bold because they are not held to the same standard.

Nowhere did I use the word fair in this blog because fair is an illusion and if you try to apply an illusion to something it is doomed to fail because to accept that illusion is to fall into delusion. Blame like Law needs to be applied in a self consistent manner or it becomes meaningless and whimsical. So if you want to join in on The Blame Game Welcome but I am watching you..

The Sillyness of The Congressional Black Congress

2011-08-31T21:38:00.001-04:00

I have little respect for any member of the Democrat Black Caucus because they have become ridiculous caricatures of people who actually fought for things like equal rights. If one of them is caught not paying their taxes it is because of racism that it is made a big deal not because Democrats whine and cry constantly about Corrupt Individuals avoiding taxation.

If members get caught sending scholarships to their relatives instead of some more deserving individual the response is you are Racist and there was nothing illegal when I did it so shut up. When you start asking what value there is in all these duplicated programs you are racist because you don't want poor black children to have lunches.

When you start suggesting perhaps we could do something that works instead of continuing the failed policies that are not educating the children you are deliberating trying to sabotage the education possibilities of black children.

If you dare to suggest that Congress has Constitutional Limits on it and they need to cut spending it becomes you want to bring back lynching of black people The Congressional Black Caucus has gotten just as lazy and irrelevant as any other mouth piece for Progressive Causes depending on their Clarion Calls of You are/It is Racist to keep people in line instead of having actual arguments to convince people.

Notice every cause has to be linked to the Civil Rights of the 60's because they have no real arguments to convince people and they can justify mob behavior by saying we are trying to bring Rights to people. Never mind most of their causes they ardently support hurt the communities they say they are defending. The Congressional Black Caucus support Green Jobs , Public Sector Unions, Single Payer Health Care , Carbon Trade Boards and so on with the list which jacks up costs, destroys jobs and wrecks the Private Sector where real jobs can be created

This entire Blog is Racist because I have pointed out the reality of what the Black Caucus is because Truth is Racist apparently.

Oh No It's The Zionists Fault

2011-08-30T16:49:00.001-04:00

The reason why I will never vote for Ron Paul for President is because on foreign policy he is a disaster . When you accept the reasoning that we were attacked because we were involved in the Middle East you are saying that if we were not in the Middle East no one from Al Queda would be trying to destroy us. This is like saying the woman walking on the sidewalk deserves to be raped because she was tempting her rapists by being on the sidewalk. Or she deserves to be raped because her brother got into a fight with a man who attacked him. This is accepting the fundamental argument that the woman deserves to be raped which is nonsense as no one deserves to be raped. If you reject that false fundamental underpinning of the argument then the argument goes away.

The reasons we are involved in the Middle East is because of our Ally Israel, nation states plotting our destruction and resources. This idea we are supporting Dictators because we really really want to is nonsense we are giving them bribe money to not cause trouble which is in our national interests. This nonsensical idea that we give all nations the same degree of support or lack of support is folly. We give our Allies our strongest support and our Enemies the least amount of support. We don't just say the hell with all of them because somehow it is better to wait until the whole world is on fire before we decide to do anything.

Look at the situation in Egypt where we finally demanded and by we I mean the Administration did it that Mubarak step down to turn the power over to the people. The 'Experts' said do not worry about the power of the Muslim Brotherhood because they are only a small portion of the population. A small highly organized well funded ruthless organization dedicated to creating a world wide Caliphate who have decades to plan out what they intend to do. No Need to worry about those kind of people at all when you should be really worrying about those Right Wing Christian outfits.

After all we have zero examples of highly motivated well funded ruthless people taking over any countries in history at all whose goal is to wipe out the Jewish People as the scapegoats for all the peoples problems. Thank goodness for that and even if it does happen it is clearly the fault of those Zionists with their talk of a Jewish Nation where the traditions of the Jewish people are allowed to flourish. And the fault of any nation who dares to support that Jewish Nation from the people trying to completely destroy it.

On a side note to the people in Gaza Stop being the Arabs worlds class victim for the justification of violence. They do not give a shit about you except as an excuse just like the it is the Zionist’s fault or the woman's fault is an excuse. They will never allow you to flourish because it contradicts their interests to keep you poor and downtrodden to use as cannon fodder or propaganda.

Yes Maxine The Tea Party is your Enemy

2011-08-29T14:37:00.000-04:00

I have avoided this topic because I had stopped blogging and other people did a better job of smacking the Big Government Unlimited Charge Card Democrat Hack Maxine Waters around. However the basic point is true that I have repeated in various chat rooms is that the idea of hell and her other remarks that she is going to send us there has already happened. She and her ilk have spent years convincing enough people that they are entitled to other peoples prosperity and permanent government hand outs that we are in Financial Purgatory already.

Big Government Hacks like Maxine Waters need people to be poor to keep her in office and no one in the Tea Party anywhere wants someone who is willing to work hard to be poor like Waters wants to claim. Its because of her all those people don't have jobs as regulations keep them from being made and wealth keeps being confiscated to spend on making new government entitlements to enslave the population.

We want you to lose your job Maxine because we are your political enemies not to use violence or threats of violence to get our way like the people who support you are willing to do.. We are not Anti Government but Anti Walmart Style Government where everything is under one roof. We do not care what millionaires and billionaires spend their money on as long as it is legal despite all your efforts to pit us against each other so you can maintain your clutches on power.

Maxine we do not even care that you are black because despite yours and others claims its not about racism on our side even though it is to often true it is racism on your side but because your fundamental believes in how great Big Government Progressive is that doesn't work.

We are not anti regulations but small common sense regulation type people unlike you Maxine who want to regulate the smallest aspects of everyone’s lives with your government backed power. We like clean water and clean air but not to the point that if we listened to you we would have to remove all the humans breathing and using water to keep it to these ridiculous job destroying ideas in place.

We like solar power, wind power , geothermal power, hydroelectric power and so but don't pretend all those other sources of energy like gas, oil , nuclear and coal can be done away with to satisfy a set of people who seem to love the misery and poverty that comes with not developing all sources of energy.

True Hell for you Maxine would be for you and your big government hack pals to lose your power and control over peoples lives. True Hell would be for your ideas and policies to be seen as the shams they are by the people you have made slaves to Big Government Handouts. True Hell for you Maxine would be for people to realize how unimportant and meaningless you are for their freedom and successes.

Remembering Not Just The Bad

2011-08-29T14:34:00.000-04:00

As I age I am struck by what sticks and what doesn't stick in my memory. I can rattle off the scary things that have happened to me and the ex girlfriends stories easily enough but all the real good memories I have I have to reach deeper and struggle for. I am not an optimist by nature even if I do have a lively sense of humour that lets me laugh at myself when I descend into pretentious arsehattery.

I think its like pain versus pleasure if you compare it to touching a hot stove or an annoying toothache versus eating vanilla ice cream on a hot day. The pain is sharper and easier to recall at least to me. I know there are people out there who are opposite and recall all the pleasant stuff easier than I do even if I do find them annoying. I also know there are people who are like me that manage to work out ways to reverse the natural trend and focus on the pleasant too.

It takes an effort to maintain that attitude of seeing the good things that happen and keep a focus on that. Do we remember every compliment or every complaint more easily? We can dismiss the compliments because we can justify it by saying they want something or they are just being nice or what ever other excuse to dismiss something good. However the complaints are harder to do away with because it fits with what we are thinking about ourselves sometimes.

No one person' entire life can be summed up in entirely negative or positive terms not even the worst of the worst but our tendency is to see just the bad especially when it is really bad. I am not saying we have to jump up and down in praise of histories 'monsters' but they were all men or women human and frail just like any of us. It is when we lose our perspective that evil things done in the name of good are justified and some of the good things that happen because evil things took place are lost.

The Laws of Plenty and Scarcity

2011-08-29T14:30:00.000-04:00

There’s a really good story from Analog Magazine called Manna from Lee Correy aka real name G. Harry Stine that was later published as a novel in 1983 where economics is used to lead to a war .The Commonwealth is a new nation founded a mere 50 years where Common sense is used in how they apply the laws. They operate not from a Scarcity perspective but a Plenty perspective. Each citizen is armed and is willing to defend themselves. They use the energy sources they have effectively. They use laws and regulations sparingly. The people are just people and are treated as such not like royalty. If trains work best in an area they run trains if vehicles work better they use vehicles. If a low tech solution works better than something high tech they use low tech. They use their resources effectively not just to satisfy a few energy Luddites.

I do not agree with everything in the story but still the over all framework is good. You put responsible people in and hold them accountable by not creating situations where whimsy rules like during the Franklin Delano Roosevelt days. People think he was this strong leader with a consistent plan that ran throughout his administration but the truth is it was not. Remember this is the Administration that thought the problem could be solved by a mass destruction of crops and livestock.

A Nation raised on a Scarcity mindset does not prosper long term. Look at the world that would exist if people had said this is the best we can do with these resources that must be protected because if we use them too much they will all disappear. That blocks the expansion and evolution of the tech industry meaning high memory electronic and computer devices do not become cheaper and better. Without that communication stays slower and less world wide and it all locks up.

Scarcity thinking paralyzes innovation because the focus is never on how to improve but just on conserving the current resources. Scarcity thinking leads to the automobile not becoming something even the poorest individuals can acquire which means jobs stay in a much smaller circle and travel is just the province of the wealthy.

If you live in an area with a lot of water then using the water to power your society makes sense. If you live in an area where the sun shines all the time Solar power makes sense. If you live in an area with a lot of coal using coal power makes sense. If you live in an area with a lot of natural gas using natural gas makes sense. Why do we let people who do not make sense control the debate ?

Honesty is the Best Policy Long Term

2011-08-27T11:57:00.003-04:00

One of those lovely catch phrases people know but do not really think about is "You can't cheat an honest man." which is patently absurd. An honest man is easy pray for those willing to subvert truth for their own goals whether it be in the name of ' good' or 'ill'. The liar has the advantage in the short term because there are things he can do that the honest man won't to stack the deck his way.

However in the long term the honest man wins out because his path is welded to truth meaning he doesn't have to keep track of what lies goes where so his energy is focused and directed towards whatever goal he is seeking. The honest man will say what he thinks is true and not just what he thinks people want to hear which again is a long term benefit that can be a short term detriment.

The liar will always be striving to make the path of Deception more acceptable by convincing people the short term gains can be maintained long term so they will deceive themselves into believing it.

Bernie Madoff didn't start off to be a crook but he applied the liars short term philosophy to his business practices because he did not want to be perceived as a failure. Then he had to maintain his dishonest practices because if he stopped all the lies he had created would unravel and destroy him. If instead he had used the honesty principles right from the start he would not be sitting in jail right now for a long long period of time.

This blog I am writing now is not a political blog because this fundamental difference between honesty and lying is something that just infects a single group but is widespread all over the world. However I feel compelled to point a few things out for my Progressive friends. If you say the Progressive Income Tax code is unfair but wave your fingers in panic at the rich who pay the overwhelming majority of it while the bottom half pay nothing then you are lying to yourself.

If you scream about loopholes and such but then ignore the loop holes benefiting the outfits you support you are lying to yourself. If you worry about big business but big union is not a cause for concern you are lying to yourself. If you spend years trying to keep anyone from being executed because just a tiny fraction have been found not guilty but abortion is something you support without hesitation you are lying to yourself.

Truthfully Honesty is hard in the short term but far easier in the long term while lying seems easier to start with but then you become a slave to maintaining the lies.

Their Violence Is it Caused by Max Blumenthal's Lies?

2011-08-26T03:34:00.006-04:00

Max Blumenthal in the universal scheme of things doesn't matter but his words might be taken as being true when he speaks on radio to organizations that are not pro western , not pro israel , not pro christian and not pro freedom about what other people say. He is lying to them but if bad things happen it is perfectly acceptable to apply this new single standard his ilk so loves. That standard is that if someone inflicts violence on other people and they listened or may have listened to you Max Blumenthal You are responsible for any blood spilled. It is on your hands dripping down.

Remember Max Blumenthal embraced this standard when he lied about James O'Keefe in his personal blog for Salon and every bit of his evidence was shown to be trashy lies. So since he lied yet again when he was talking about a 'minor' Republican such as Herman Cain.

On a side note why is Herman Cain a minor Republican and could it indicate a racial obsession of Max Blumenthal that People of Color who are not Democrats are lesser people somehow and not worthy of anything more than the dismissive phrase minor?

So when Max Blumenthal was talking about Herman Cain he said that he wanted to ban all mosques being built and that he would require loyalty oaths for American Citizenry if he became President. Of course the irony is that his audience listening in sees no problem with banning Churches and Synagogues being built in local communities if the people living there object strongly enough.

Now what will happen if this audience who doesn't know Max Blumenthal has a trouble with the truth goes out in a angry mood and that anger builds and builds up so much that they decide they need to teach those Christians to not be such Islamphobics and a church gets burned to the ground with those clearly deserving Christians still locked inside. It is clearly Blumenthal's fault using the Progressive Standard that has been set.

Worse yet what if these people get angry and decide that it is all those black peoples fault because Herman Cain is black you know and a group of Progressive Black people get beaten up or even killed because they couldn't find Herman Cain. How Horrible that would be and it is all Max Blumenthal's fault for such a horrible thing happening. We do not know if horrible things might happen but Clearly they could happen so this reckless behavior by Max Blumenthal must be curtailed.

Remember this is the New Standard the Left has embraced and while I might feel slightly uncomfortable saying this is my own standard I have no problem with making The Progressives live under it. After all in the era of the New Tone someone clearly inciting such violence against People of Color does not deserve any sympathy or using the tiniest framework of not being responsible for what other people do that is violent.

Come on It's Fun! Or The Real Reason you killed Jimmy

2011-08-25T15:02:00.003-04:00

We all have people in our lives whose view of the world is different than ours which means their idea of whats fun for them automatically makes it fun for everyone else despite what reality says about that line of reasoning. So when they drag you out to do what they think is fun and you are not having this fun its perfectly acceptable to imagine punching giant holes in your 'friend' as long as you really don't do it even though a jury of your peers would rule it justified homicide.

I have some sense of self awareness so I know that what I like to do is not for everyone else and is not fun for everyone else. I am not arrogant enough to say I know better and that people would just have fun if they did what I do long enough with an open mind. Everyone who doesn't have fun is obviously being a spoilsport and trying to ruin it for everyone else.

It is like the people who have exceptional memories when they interact with people with not so exceptional memories and they do not quite understand how it is not possible for everyone to be like they are.

Of course if someone falls short of your standards that you assume are the starting level for any discussion then that leads to a sense of superiority over these other people. After all they are pretending not to have fun because they know you are better than they are so to avoid being crushed they pretend they are not having fun when really they would if they just got over their basic inferiority complex.

Look there are things that are scary that are interesting to me to possibly do but I would not call them fun. Some examples that spring to mind Parachuting out of a plane , Running with the Bulls, Skiing down a tall mountain or Scuba Diving While in a Shark Cage. If I could drag some of my friends along so they can share the experience doing all this that would be good but I would not automatically assume it would be fun for them. That way lies madness.

With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility

2011-08-24T11:34:00.003-04:00

Theres a line from the Comic Books used by Peter Parker after his Uncle Ben Parker is slain by the robber Peter made no effort to stop when he was running by much earlier of "With Great Power comes Great Responsibility." Of course this is used to torture poor Peter Parker over the years as he assumes the weight of the world on his shoulders where if he does not act as Spider Man all the time it is his fault if something bad happens.

It is a great dramatic hook for plot lines but looking at it seriously there is also a responsibility to yourself and your family and your friends that has to be taken into account and not just saving faceless strangers to do " Good" Part of being responsible is realizing that there are times when you do nothing because thats the "right" thing to do. Doing nothing is a lot harder than doing something especially when people are watching you and decrying your lack of action as a sign of your inherent meanness or whatever.

In todays world if Peter Parker had dared to try to stop the robber the police would have arrested him for interfering with an officer and the robber could sue for pain and injury inflicted by Parker for laying hands on him.

To use another fictional character of The Doctor the wandering Time Traveler in his T.A.R.D.I.S. from the planet Galifrey who flits from place to place having adventures he has a time machone meaning he can move forward and backward in time. In Fact his whole race of people have the ability to do the same but due to story reasons they seldom if ever meddle in time.

Using the with Great Power comes great responsibility line should The Doctor fix all the horrible tragedies that happen throughout time until he gets it all right and perfect? He doesn't do it and in the recent series they have shown several episodes of the consequences no matter how good the intentions are of what meddling in time does.

Modifying the Peter Parker catch phrase to be more accurate "With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility and Great Consequences"

Cosmic Life

2011-08-23T10:42:00.002-04:00

I have never believed despite what some people might say that we are the only quasi intelligent life forms in this massive universe. I say quasi because people still vote for certain dunderheads whose records should prove beyond a shadow of a doubt how much they suck at their jobs and they get reelected.

Some of my more interpreting strictly religious associates declare loudly that these so called other races of life can't exist because God created Man in his own image which means talking Space Bugs can't exist because they would not be created in the Image of God. Thats nonsense as you can look at man and say what makes him special. Well He has a mind that is conscious of its own existence and a spirit that can override the demands of the physical body. Nothing I see that indicates that God hasn't created other beings with minds capable of self awareness.

Next comes the objection that even if there is other intelligent life out there the distances that spans the planets is so vast and deep that it is impossible even if we locate each other that those distances can be breached. In the space of a hundred years we have went from having to wait months to travel or contact other people all the way across the world to a days time of travel and seconds delay in global communication.

Then you get the whole well if they are out there why don't we know about it like in the movies. Well if I was a space alien with a grasp of basic science and my information source was media and lying politicians I damn sure would make all visits of the clandestine nature not some over the top production.

Of course the real problem with interstellar travel is for it to be more than just a flash in the pan there has to be some sort of motive. Despite the nice reworked monologue that Picard says even Star Fleet had less benign reasons for their ships traveling to and from. It is not just to explore but find new races/civilizations to join them with new ways to look at things which means different kinds of technologies or philosophies or whatever.
"Space... The final frontier... These are the voyages of the Starship Enterprise. Its continuing mission: To explore strange new worlds... To seek out new life; new civilisations... To boldly go where no one has gone before!"

So to sum up the basic points Yes there is Intelligent life out there that is self aware and possessing souls which can bridge the gap of the stars and has reasons to do so but might not be willing to have a great big publicity stunt to announce when they come and go.

Entropy and Government Programs

2011-08-22T10:16:00.004-04:00

To believe the brilliance of people like Thom Hartmann or the individuals in the current government that somehow a government organization makes the money they take from taxpayers multiply in effectiveness you have to ignore science. That is perfectly fine but you can't ignore science in one aspect and then declare the people who say you are wrong are anti science.

As one definition of entrophy states Inevitable and steady deterioration of a system or society which means it is impossible for a Government Program to produce more than it consumes in actual real terms.

Now I can hear some of those people screaming and yelling at me but what about this or that which happened because of this or that the Government was involved with but mistaking the byproducts of a process someone finds a new use for as an example of how the process is making more than it consumes is folly.

For an example look at the original process where they take a barrel of crude oil ( What's in a Barrel of Oil ) and process it to create Gasoline. If you listened to Hartmann and put the government in charge of processing that 42 Gallon drum of Crude Oil when they got done with it there would be 70 gallons of the various by products with 35 gallons of Gasoline instead of the normal 19.2 gallons of Gasoline.

For another example just look at Bernie Madoff where all the people saw their investments rise in a steady climb which is entirely unnatural but if you can believe in what Thom Hartmann and the Current Administration says can happen it is entirely possible for such things to be possible. The reality is that some people will lose money in the system or a lot of people will lose money in a system as it is connected to the real world not this illusionary world Thom Hartmann and others live in apparently. Some people will make money when things fail because they are betting on entropy winning.

Science says Thom Hartmann and the Current Administration are wrong in the claims that the 100% can be multiplied by a certain percentage to create 171% of use not just me.

Crime Scene Investigation

2011-07-05T20:43:00.002-04:00

Real Life isn't like the Television shows where a dedicated investigator can find all sorts of evidence to convict a suspect. I think a lot of people have become spoiled by such things so that when a case that doesn't have clear cut distinctions happens defense attorneys get an unfair advantage by talking about evidence.

Someone brought up the Duke Lacrosse Case but in that circumstance the evidence such as D.N.A. , cameras , receipts and other things were pointing towards the opposite of what the D.A. was claiming happened. The D.N.A was of other people not the three accused. The Reciept showed one of the accused was in a store along with the Cameras as well.

You can look at the O. J. Simpson debacle for how horrible a trial can go where someone who was a reasonable person could see he killed two people and got away with it in the criminal court. In the Civil case he was convicted of all charges.

What is Reasonable Doubt ? I see it as Could this have happened a different way to a reasonable person with what we know from the trial. The Evil Elf chick decided her kid was holding her back from having a life of her own so she killed her and then set up lies that evolved over time to cool the suspicions of her parents.

We know the lies are real beyond a shadow of a doubt. We know the Evil Elf Chick was out partying as if she didn't have a care in the world after her child was dead. We know she told a different set of lies depending on the individual that she kept track of.

Lets see the things that are not proven but based on the fact the Evil Elf chick is a known liar can be doubted. Her father and brother molested her which if you believe the defense was the reason she is so screwed up. So if this is true why in the world would she let her child everyone says she loved stay with that evil parent ? It doesn't make sense.

It also doesn't make sense that if it was this horrible accident that the father of the Evil Elf would make it look like murder or go through this elaborate charade over time of colluding with the Evil Elf who he supposedly molested.

I wasn't one of these jurors but I have this feeling that at least a small portion of the verdict delivered is because a portion of them see the world through that perception TV has helped generated of Crime Scene Investigation evidence being the end all of things.

The sad thing is that a little girl died and got treated worse than the pets that are buried in the yard. Wheres the Justice for her I wonder ?

This is said in a snarky manner The only bright spot is that the Progressives have a bright new Star for their bench when they need to do spin so the Evil Elf Chick has a career path.

The Search for Truth

2011-07-04T19:07:00.002-04:00

Someone once asked me why I didn't believe "the Science" of Global Warming in a snarky kind of way implying that I didn't believe in Science. I told them there was nothing scientific about the way "Global Warming" was being presented and then pointed out the record of a lot of the 'scientists' who have been wrong consistently in their predictions of doom and disaster.

I don't glorify Science as this Icon for Truth because scientists are just as prone to being self deceptive as any other human being. In fact Science is prone to being more self deceptive as the basis is that all the data being processed is at least taken in an honest manner. If you have people like Mann or Hansen who have been proven to be wrong and are hostile to people correcting them on data errors How can you trust anything they say?

Finding Truth depends on being somewhat skeptical of all the information you process through until you reach a conclusion. Then you test that conclusion by getting someone else to go through the same information to see if they reach the same conclusion. This doesn't mean the conclusion is the Truth but a truth that someone else can come through later and disprove or prove.

Look at the world of science for examples where a theory is accepted as a truth because there is no way to advance beyond that view until new people come along and find new ways to find information or think about it differently. Then that new theory eventually becomes accepted as a truth until someone else comes along and topples that.

Science is not consensus built where all the scientists get together and compromise on what the truth is despite what Al Gore might think. In fact 99.9 percent of the scientists who believe one thing can be wrong and that 0.1 percent can be right as has been proven throughout the history of Science.

Science is theory until someone builds something that can be run or not run based off that theory such as a Plane that flies. If the plane crashes or doesn't take off at all and the people with the theory refuse to reexamine the data and are hostile to anyone else looking at the data Are you going to run over and volunteer to ride in that plane ?

Reading Flaws

2011-06-24T23:07:00.002-04:00

I no longer have the patience I once did to plow through a book no matter how much it might not interest me to read it all. I should really expand that to to include I don't have the patience to do that any more for a lot of things from TV to movies to Music and so on. So there really is only a little amount of time to draw me in to scenes happening before I lose my interest. This is not really fair but the heck with fair. Each moment I am forcing myself to read something I am not into is time I could be spending doing something else that does interest me.

Of course I have had the experience where books I hated that I went back and reread that were actually enjoyable to read. I find the subjective and objective experiences interesting to look at and compare. After all a product can be put together well following all the rules of grammar and story telling that still leaves you cold but a more flawed by an objective standard item can yank you in and according to the subjective experience is better.

It Can be applied to a larger universe after all as someone can say factually I enjoy this more than this while someone else factually can also say I enjoy this but not that while contradicting each other. I didn't want to start waxing philosophical about the nature of the universe through a subjective lens but the conversation is drifting that way.

I will probably come back to this in a couple days because it is fun to ponder on for me at least.

The New Revamp of DCnU

2011-06-22T17:40:00.002-04:00

If you were paying attention to the world of comics by now you have heard the news that DC has decided to do a massive change in their fictional Universe of comic book heroes and villains. Unfortunately this has happened before starting with The Crisis on Infinite Universe a 12 issue series where whole universes were wiped out because the management felt all the variations were confusing for new fans.

It was a really good story by itself but in the process it screwed up The Legion of Super Heroes whose existence depended on the now wiped out out Superboy, The Justice Society whose existence depended on being in a different universe where major heroes like Superman and Batman started out in the 1930s and Infinity Inc who were the children and grandchildren of elements of the Justice Society.

They failed to do a restart properly on all the books coming out and gradually the chaos that happened lead to several more attempts to do the same sort of thing which failed. Eventually the story line 52 which was a year long event reset the system creating 52 universes where story lines could be played out.

Now I am uncertain if what they intend to do is erase that 52 universes Story line in this revamp which comes out of the storyline Flashpoint but at least they are being a lot smarter about reseting all the books this time at the same time instead of piece mealing it out. I am concerned however that they are going to say certain stories did play out and others didn't but its not going to be propagated to everyone so you have contradictions playing out from book to book which leads to another reboot/revamp in a few more years.

I am willing to give them a chance to see what they do but already this new vision has eliminated my favorite team and the really excellent history that has played out the last few years of the Justice Society 'apparently'.

Feeling Lost

2011-06-22T05:09:00.002-04:00

I am envious of those people who seem to know what they want to do in life and relentlessly pursue those goals until they achieve it. I am also envious of those people who stumble into the circumstances that then click for them and they discover thats the goal for them. What is my purpose is something that they have found and it gives them satisfaction.

I have never had that clear focus or that degree of luck in my life as my first goal was defeated by my waistline which refused to budge so I could join the Navy. The second was to go to the College that was willing to accept me which I passed on. So Instead I went to work in Construction as a laborer and a gofer. It was always meant to be a temporary job until I found that road that beckoned me to where my real purpose lay. This was at 17.

That job lasted for several years until it crashed against the ego of the companies owner who got mad at me for doing what I was told which lead to my firing. I puttered around for a while trying a couple of different things that really didn't lead anywhere until I went back to work once again in construction with a different company. This was at 21.

During this period I suffered and bled getting a serious infection that led to double pneumonia which then led to a lung shutting down due to the after effects of that. The tubes that were stuck in me to drain off the pus were ineffective which meant lung surgery to remove that covering that was squeezing my lung to death. This was at 23.

I recovered slowly and worked in the office instead doing dull things like time sheets and paperwork. This was my slow transition period from becoming more than just a mere minion and getting actual skills. Then we started traveling which I enjoyed and also hated. You would meet new people and just when you start becoming pals and such it is time to move on again.

It was in Kentucky that several things combined. My Mother had been diagnosed with Breast cancer which was a source of strain. I discovered that a person that I should have been able to trust was betraying me. I also discovered that my hard work, effort and advise was cast aside and someone else was getting all the money for doing nothing. Then I collapsed and had to be taken to the hospital where I was diagnosed to be suffering from a severe diverticulitis flare up. This was at the age of 26.

I started not to care from that point on about work. It wasn't that I was neglecting my job but that desire to be excellent was gone. I mean what was the point to bust your ass trying as hard as you could to do things when some other bastard was doing not much and getting far more money than you for that not much.

There were these lull points where nothing would be going on and I would have to live off my saved money and scramble around doing other things to make ends meet. I turned down the chance to get a Big Truck Drivers license to become a delivery driver for a construction rental outfit. This was at age 29.

Dark Days as my mother's cancer reemerged but this time in her lungs. Work became this great weight on my chest and my heart and in my mind. I made friends with people online as she slowly lost her struggle with the Cancer. The news was given at work when she died in January 1999. I was devastated and after dealing with the funeral and all I left to go visit some of these online people I had become friends with. I was just 32.

The company I had been working for had been mismanaged as people in secondary positions of authority mismanaged it with infighting and bad job picks so they declared bankruptcy and the company wound down. I was either 34 or 35 at that point. Ironically just before they closed their doors I had found a slight reemergence of interest in what I was doing.

Eventually I found a new job in Construction working for another outfit. More traveling and living in different states but my health became shaky and my mental state began to resent deeply the job and the people I had to deal with. My carpenter skills had expanded a lot and I was proud of my skills because they were something I had worked hard at. Of course then the company we were doing all the work for that required me using those skills changed management and completely changed the interiors of the stores we were building. I was at the age of 37.

Work slowed down a lot and my health got even worse which made my desire to be at work shrink even less. I think if I had been happier or felt better respected at work I could have dealt with it but eventually enough was enough and I took the hardest step ever of stepping away from construction. Of course then the economy crashed meaning my timing sucked as usual.

Then my health crashed completely meaning I wound up going to the Emergency Room. My battle with my diverticulitis flare ups had reached a point where my method of not eating for a period of time to clear out my system wasn't enough. Almost they had to do emergency surgery on my intestines to remove sections but the antibiotics worked to deal with the infection.

So now I have had surgery and a portion of my guts have been removed and I am working with my doctor to try to get my blood pressure lowered and my borderline case of diabetes under control but I still feel lost. I like portions of Construction work but the whole industry is a mess currently with a lot of the people I know working in it are just barely getting by. What I really want is to know where I belong at and not just this barely getting by while feeling lost and unhappy and miserable.

Other People seem to have overcome these doubts and fears and hesitations I am constantly struggling with to move on with their lives but I am still drifting.

The Human Condition

2011-06-10T11:14:00.002-04:00

Honestly sometimes I do not know what to make of my fellow human beings when they can take identical information and come to the total opposite conclusion than what I think someone who is not motivated by purely political ideology would do. They act more like Human Ostriches than Curious human beings sticking their heads in the sands to avoid the real danger they may have to talk about the foibles of a fellow human being.

Remember how many people gleefully reported the wardrobe budget for the last Presidential Runs Vice President? That was a real news story but a sitting Congressman claiming his accounts were hacked is not a real news story. See the Human Condition is that we pick sides to be the villains and the heroes in our heads and it becomes perfectly acceptable to fudge a bit for the people considered heroes. The Villains must be carefully watched and their every move must be given a sinister undertone even when they may be just Riding a Bus around.

To go to a fictional example in The Justice League Unlimited episode "Clash" Captain Marvel who does not have the history Superman does with Lex Luthor takes the view that perhaps the man has had a genuine Redemptive moment. Eventually it leads to a Clash between Superman and Captain Marvel as they trash the city Luthor built for the poor. Superman is proven wrong in his suspicions and Marvel quits the League after given a heart felt lecture to the Founding Members. Luthor used Superman's Suspicious nature to set the whole thing up to make himself look good and The League look bad.

Look part of the Human Condition is that if our Bad Behavior is not put in check for what ever reason then there is zero reason that this identical or similar bad behavior will not occur again. The stories started to come out after Dominique Strauss-Kahn was charged with rape of him doing similar things back in France but the reason no one came forward is because he was a powerful man who could do a lot of good. There was also the he was a rich powerful man so why would he do something so stupid musings. Gee could it be because no one put him in check when he first started down this road of using his wealth and position in The Socialists Party because of all the future good he could do?

On A Sidenote Why do these so called Sophisticated Cultures embrace behavior that dehumanizes other human beings just like a lot of so called primitive cultures do? At Least the Cannibals in the primitive cultures are far more honest in their views and you know you are on the menu.

You do not have to like the people you think of villains but if you claim to be a journalist then you need to get the stories accurate as possible and not trim the bits that do not suit your personal narrative. It just makes you look like a highly partisan activist who will actively lie or stick your head in the sand when it suits your purposes.

Part of the Better Bit of the Human Condition is when we look beyond our own narratives no matter how they might apparently sparkle to speak the Truth even when it hurts our personal causes and not try to make unpleasant truths mean less than what they are.

Everyone Does It.

2011-06-08T09:04:00.005-04:00

So Now we get to see the Defense that Everyone lies about Sex Trotted out once more as a feeble defense of an Irresponsible Politician whose oath of marriage didn't really mean that much to him. Dear Cenk Ungyar telling everyone who listens to your show or who can be shown that specific clip that you routinely lie to the women you are dating generally means you just admitted you are a untrustworthy bastard who deserves years of loneliness.

Now I can picture some liberal looking at me and shaking their head saying " You are not just sophisticated enough to understand that sex is meaningless in the Modern world with your medieval mindset." I do not want a 'sophisticated' view that promotes dishonesty as the default setting for humanity instead of honesty. Lying is easy in the instance but grows harder and harder to maintain while honesty might hurt in the instance but is easy to maintain. If you reward lying or ignore it then by default Honesty becomes less prevalent.

A Moral Society is necessary for a Constitutional Republic to function properly because you need to trust the people you send to office. What the everyone does it statement does is say that you can not trust these people because lying is their default mode and it is your fault they do dishonest things because everyone knew before hand they were a bunch of liars.

By The Way Cenk since you admitted you are a serial liar why should we trust anything you say as being honest ? I mean after all you will lie to women you are letting in your home and laying in bed asleep with.

The Miracle of New Media

2011-06-06T23:12:00.003-04:00

In The Schemes of The Universe I would say the Rise and Fall of the Darling of The Progressives Progressive New York Liberal Congressmen Anthony Weiner doesn't matter but however to say it is not an important story would be a lie. The 'intellectuals' in the Press would love for this story to just go away because it keeps them from talking about more important things like that Sarah Palin and her completely accurate remarks about Paul Revere that shows how much they don't know about Actual US History that wasn't written by Communist Howard Zinn.

Twenty Years ago The Old Dinosaur Press would not have allowed this story to be an issue because they controlled the information stream that determined what was news and was not news. A Newly married Congressman sending out inappropriate photos to women he did not know except in a very casual matter and one of the photos accidentally getting out into public view before swiftly being removed and claims of someone else doing it after all do not sound like a news story. I mean after all its a Democrat so that story would have been choked and killed with only a few people even mentioning it.

Ten Years ago the same story would have gotten more play but as a lot of the people weren't interested in fighting all the battles but only the "important' ones the story might have been on talk radio and the Internet for a while but there would have been no coming out and admitting the truth by the Congressman.

Today through the brave actions of a few people who were willing to take the Scorn and Hate of the Old Dinosaur Media and the New Progressive Protectors of their people like Weiner to ask hard questions and reveal stories that are Important everything that they were reporting were confirmed by Anthony Weiner's Confession that everything that was being said by these Few Brave People was Truth . He was not hacked and he had sent out the picture that he then lied about.. He also admitted he had sent out a lot of pictures even more revealing to other women. He took Full Responsibility which was a meaningless remark because he didn't resign.

I celebrate this Victory not just of Andrew Breitbart and the fine people he has assembled to work on his various sites but the rising of the Citizen Journalist and the doom of The 'professional' journalist.

The Strange View Of A Fake Republican

2011-05-25T07:49:00.003-04:00

Theres this guy that shows up at Larry O'Connor's and Meredith Dake's Internet Radio show The Stage Right show who went off on this very strange tirade about God and how he was the ultimate evil Abortionist if he even existed because he allows miscarriages to happen and if he didn't stop them from happening he was doing Abortions. Seriously this is what he said in the chat room with a complete and total honesty as what he believed.

The Fake Republican ( I call him that because he claims to be one but supports every idea that springs forth from the Progressive Liberal Hacks Side) aka Steve Everrett is arguing that because The Creator does not save every child that miscarries in the womb he is choosing to allow them to die. This argument is akin to saying because most everyone who falls off a tall building dies The Creator is choosing to push them off the buildings to watch them go splat. Neither situation represents reality as it is but a hyper distorted view of the world more akin to the opening scene in the Old Hercules syndicated TV series.

The problem is not what just one guy believes but that this guy spits out a lot of the (heavily and repeatedly discredited) talking points that Progressive Liberal Hacks use in their version of arguing so this view of what the Creator is could spring from the same sources. I just find it disturbing that this view exists at all when put into the context of our Creator being a Loving and Merciful God as defined through the Christian Faith.

This is hard to write about because while I can understand intellectually why a cynical Statist would try to paint this image my soul rebels from doing so. Making the argument that God choses not to save every unborn child defines The Creator as a capricious Satanic Figure of Evil really and truly which is why my soul rebels from understanding it.

You can argue philosophically about why The Creator allows Evil to exist in the universe and why Bad things happen to really Good people all day long and I welcome that kind of thinking and arguing. You can argue why or why not you think a Creator exists at all cheerfully and I also welcome that kind of discussion. However to suggest that The Creator is a Mad Abortionist snuffing out life capriciously is not an honest discussion but something that a Warped mind suggests to denigrate peoples faiths not to explore it and comprehend it..

My God is a God of Love who gave his son a mortal life and gave him a choice just like he gives us all choices. His son Jesus Christ could have not gone to the Cross but chose to do so to bridge the gap between the Creator and Man to take on all the Sins of Man and Forgive them for us all. God loves us all individually even the most wretched and awful of people with all of his Being which is a constant and does not change.

It's not fair is a mortals cry because we want to ignore the individual relationship with the Creator to impose a collective standard. Thus you can avoid being judged responsible for your own actions but instead try the but you let these other guys in and they did the same sort of things so to be Fair you have to let me in too. The Creator is not fair in that sort of way but unlike mortals who can see only a meager slice can look at all that you are and judge you accordingly.

Wealth Creation

2011-05-16T22:37:00.002-04:00

Wealth Creation is simple but like a lot of simple things become complex when you try to boil it down. You do something or make something that people want or need and between you you come to some sort of agreement of what that is worth which generates wealth. Wealth does not come from a Government Program, a Government Agency or a Government Employee no matter how many times people who coincidently manage Government Programs, work for Government Agencies or are Government Employees tell you it does.

New ideas of Wealth Creation also can have some negative effects for people dependent or involved in older means of wealth creation. I am sure the makers of buggies and whips were not delighted at all when the automobile became commercially available and affordable for the average person. See Wealth Creation expanded when the automobiles became cheap enough for new people to decide to own one which again is suppose to be impossible if you listen to certain talking heads.

The automobile lead to people needing places to fuel their vehicle which lead to building service stations which lead to people needing places to stop when traveling to get a meal which lead to fast food places which lead to people being able to travel more meaning new places to buy souvenirs which all creates new Wealth as it goes along. It wasn't the Federal Government that did this. In fact if that was being done today the Government would be blocking all this new wealth creation as much as possible.

In fact the Government Programs, a Government Agencies and Government Employees engage Wealth Destruction these days which they are capable of unlike Wealth Creation. The new sources of Wealth Creation from the Internet , Computers and Communication Devices are not the result of the Benevolent Government Employees reaching down to help the little people but those evil for Profit Outfits creating Wealth.

The Shifting Standard

2011-05-11T23:28:00.000-04:00

I heard this Chick and Yes I am Deliberately calling her a chick because I do not feel like taking time out to go look up her name take out the standardized Progressive Answer to answer a question. There is something deathly wrong when we try to impose a standard that then we excuse certain groups of people from meeting.

I don't care about Common or what ever he is as I am not interested in Rap but it is fascinated to hear his interview stance on interracial marriage be twisted to somehow be a positive view on the issue when a few years ago All Hell Broke lose when a (white)Justice said to an interracial couple how hard it is for people of different colors getting married and that he just couldn't marry them but he would get another Judge to do it. This is about Standards not Race or Gender or whatever else there is that a PLH would find to moan about.

Do you gain trust or lose trust when someone is all over the place depending on who the person is ? A Sane person loses trust and the more that happens the less people will be willing to go along with the person with the shifting standard.

And there is a clear difference between Rules and Standards because Rules are created for specific circumstances where something happened or might happen and Standards are Guide lines to behavior and Performance.

Darth Vader ~ "I am altering the terms of our Deal. Pray I do not alter them further."

Nero Wolfe in TV and Novel Forms

2011-05-10T18:34:00.002-04:00

Rex Stout was an interesting guy who created a unique fictional Detective Duo of Nero Wolfe and Archie Goodwin who first appeared in Fer- De-Lance in 1934.

Archie Goodwin was an excellent Detective who was equally good with his wits and his fists who could have easily been the star of some other series but in this he is the guy working for a genius who has a set routine and doesn't really like to work except to pay the bills. Archie has an adversarial relationship with most of the authority figures in the books where he wisecracks off to them. Goodwin is the prod and the information gatherer and the expert on women for Nero Wolfe.

Nero Wolfe is an actual genius who doesn't go out of his brownstone which is also a character really in the story. He is a large man who grows his orchids which he obsesses over, is a gourmand who can cook magnificent meals , a patriotic legal immigrant and a lover of words which shows up in the the library and the mention of various books in the stories. He is while not afraid of women uneasy in their company due to their unpredictable natures and the times women have led him into trouble in his past. Wolfe has a rigid schedule he follows that is only abandoned in the gravest of circumstances which his clients have to accept. He doesn't like to leave the Brownstone or travel in mechanical transportation and if he must insists on Archie Goodwin or Saul Panzer driving him.

I can only talk about the A & E series of Nero Wolfe which started with the Pilot movie The Golden Spiders. It was an excellent adaption of the books translated into the alternate highly visual and audio form of Television that for a lot of translations goes really horrible wrong. In all Honesty I own both the first and second seasons on DVD and highly recommend everyone buy them.

Maury Chaykin as the Brilliant but eccentric Nero Wolfe and Timothy Hutton as the man of action Archie Goodwin do a brilliant job of conveying the characters displayed in the written form into the medium of Television. The series takes an unusual step of each episode of having the same actors playing different characters so in one episode you could have Kari Matchett as Lily Rowan long time Companion to Archie Goodwin and one of the few women Nero Wolfe respects and likes to her playing Carla Lovchen Wolfe's Adopted Daughter.

There are only 21 episodes in total but they are damn good episodes to watch. A & E canceled the series due to the production costs involved in the show and the shifting to reality TV which is much cheaper to produce. So in a real way Dog The Bounty Hunter killed a Television Show that did something very rare the successful translation of the Novel to the Small TV Screen.

This Rant made possible by My Corporate Sponsor Doofensmirtz Evil Incorporated.

2011-05-09T22:01:00.001-04:00

This Rant brought to you by My Corporate Sponsor Doofensmirtz Evil Incorporated.

Lets consider everything our good friends on the left have done and look at the effects.

The banking law which is named after Franke and Dodd the two progressive melody makers who make you sing the blues after they get finished has killed free checking for the poor and middle class meaning a fee will be charged every month of ten dollars meaning an extra 120 dollars gone every year from everyone who once had a free checking account.

The blocking of off shore drilling by the Administration that a Federal Judge had to twice tell them was illegal so instead they just stopped issuing new permits which has lead to gas rising by a dollar which means taking an average of 10 gallons of gas a week will lead to an extra 10 bucks times 52 weeks which means 520 dollars gone from the poor and middle classes pockets.

The EPA threatening Energy supplying outfits with new and costly standards and regulations for science that is questionable is pushing up basic energy costs so lets just say 20 dollars a more a month for energy bills which is 240 dollars more gone from the poor and middle classes pockets.

The cost of food rises when they demand we turn food into fuel and then you add in the additional cost of fuel rising and energy rising and then the extra burdens due to the new Health Care Control Law so Food has risen sharply. This is just a rough estimate based off the increase in my own grocery bills where once it cost 60 dollars to buy enough to last a week it is now 75 dollars so an extra 15 dollars a week which is an additional 780 dollars a year that is also gone.

So basically just by looking at those 4 things that is an additional 1660 dollars gone from someone living on the poorer side of the spectrum without factoring any extras in a stripped down version of life. So someone explain to me how the Democrat Party is the party of the working man when everything they do either makes people dependent on government Largess or means people are treading water unable to properly save or invest in a bright and better future?

Jonah Hex

2011-04-27T06:26:00.002-04:00

Jonah Hex

If I was going to pick one word to describe this movie it would be disjointed. Its like you took several images that make up a puzzle then someone tossed out the pieces that connect the images together. It is very sad that whoever put this together either wasn't listened to or got over ruled by some studio head or whatever because there are glimmers of what this movie might have been that shine through. In a way that makes it even worse because the utter dreck of those bad pieces are made even more glaring and obvious at those moments.

The bits that shine that could have made this movie really good are the weird western horror aspect where Hex is a man who spent too much time on the other side of the walls that separate life and death and now can talk to the dead if he touches them as he brings them back to life sorta kinda. Only grave dirt can keep the re-animated souls from bursting into flames. If They had just stayed with this sort of feeling throughout the movie as Hex tries to find his Nemesis and it all plays out this would have been a kick arse movie.

Now for the bad horrendous bits and there are a lot of them. The lead female quasi love interest played by Megan Fox is a whore that is fond of Jonah Hex. A man who is one of her customers has fallen in love with her and is willing to leave his wife and kids and run away with her but she runs him off with her derringer before Hex shows up and has sex with her and leaves again. Cut to action scenes with Hex then back to Megan Fox where the creepy man now says he owns her and she belongs to him and they have a fight scene where he has her derringer and she eventually stabs him with a knife.

Cut to action scenes where the villain sends his best henchman to find something Hex cares about and then cut back to Megan Fox where she is writing a touching letter that she can't wait around any more for him then she gets beaten up and taken as a hostage. Cut Scene where the big confrontation is about to take place where Hex is about to shot his nemesis in the head right up until Megan Fox is produced and he surrenders.

Then there is the weapons from the weird custom guns Hex gets and uses making it seem more like a badly written episode of Wild Wild West to the super science Weapon that the Military put into separate pieces because they were so noble and didn't want to use such a powerful weapon until the big bad Nemesis got all the pieces together and started using it.

Then there is the nemesis who was an evil white Southern Military leader who took to butchering women and children so much they called him a poorly reworded Terrorist. It is bad enough that the writers ignored the comic book history where it was an Indian Tribe who scarred Hex with a burning hot Tomahawk but then to keep on throwing in the bad stereotypes.

There is the evil RICH white Southern Politician with his rolling Palatial Mansion who is aiding the Big Bad by giving classified information allowing the Big Bad to assemble the super weapon.

There is the black weapon smith who makes Hex's Wild Wild West type weapons who conveniently throws in the obligatory "I know you aren't like all them other white people in the South." to Hex. The weapon smith who is heading off to see the big 4 of July Parade to see President Grant speak with his two children.

The Big Bad is the guy who burned Hex's Wife and Child to death in front of his eyes because Hex killed his son and branded Hex with a Branding Iron. The Big Bad fakes his own death to assemble his men privately to gather up resources and then put together Super Weapon to destroy the Union government. We know he is evil because He Is Southern and kills puppies and destroys hospitals with the puppies inside along with the people including women and children and gold fish. He would be a Republican but at the time all those really evil people were Democrats so no party affiliation is mentioned. Did I mention he was Southern and was in the Confederacy which makes him double evil probably.

The Animated DC Showcase Jonah Hex was so much better than this live action movie so if you have a choice between the two see that instead. If they had eliminated the female character, eliminated all the really bad stereotypes, eliminated the super weapons & wild wild west type guns and made the Big Bad a touch more sympathetic and human instead of a cardboard cut out this movie would make it to a B Plus like the Animated Short is to me. It is sadly a D grade movie that you might watch at 2 Am in the morning when you can't really sleep.

Our Level of Involvement

2011-04-25T22:00:00.001-04:00

Our Level of Involvement

How cold and cruel I am someone said to me once when I came out and directly stated what will happen if we try to pretend the world outside our borders doesn't exist. The Problem is that I was being too honest about the policies people want to support or say they support. I could try to pretend everything is going to work out great if we do nothing until the dust settles and then act but that would be a lie.

Not acting is still taking an action with consequences but it is easier to say my doing nothing is less harmful than doing something and a severely negative thing happens. It is not really true though because while proving a negative is nearly impossible directly you can take the shape and sum of the lack of actions to indirectly frame the reference point of that negative action.

This blog is the result of listening to the two guests today on Tony Katz's radio show where the second guest's remark of we have to let them settle this once and for all without interference and deal with the aftermath made me write in the chat room that sort of thing leads to a lot of Dead People.

I understand the temptation to believe that meddling will make things worse because you can always point to the things that happen but how many people died in the Countries like Russia , Germany , Japan , Vietnam , Italy and so forth because we didn't want to do anything and so looked the other way because it was more convenient in the short term to do so.

In The L. E Modesitt book The Ecolitian Enigma sums it up really well which I will except here in the various bits I think make the argument better than I can. This is entirely the intellectual property of the writer and his publishers and I take zero credit for it so please do not sue me.

"It's the whole business of being an Ecolitan-the Prime calls it the Ecolitan Enigma. I told you that before, the interaction of power and ethics." Sylvia waited.

"It's like a puzzle. If we wait until what we do is obvious and justified, then far more people are hurt, but we can claim justification. Or we can do what needs to be done as soon as possible." He pursed his lips. "And then we're arbitrary and enigmatic . . . puzzling . . . and always called overbearing and high-handed.I suppose it really ought to be called the Ecolitan Dilemma, but the Ecolitan Enigma sounds better. And isn't that the way people do it anyway, picking whatever sounds better?"

"There theoretically might be something less . : . catastrophic. There's only one problem. We don't have those kinds of resources. We don't have a fleet at hand. Or landing battalions, or whatever." He paused and took a deep breath. "Besides, I have a moral problem with that. Our hypothetical fleet-and the people in it-is innocent. We're supposed to get lots of our people killed after the Fuards have already killed millions? As I see it, I have a choice. I can wait until Artos is in Fuard hands, and until the Empire and Accord are at full war, and until millions more die on planoformed worlds. Then, any action I take will be justified. Or, I can take immediate action to prevent a war and be condemned for being immoral and precipitous because any action I take has to be targeted and catastrophic."

He looked at Sylvia. "Now . . .I've been raised in a system that believes that early action that saves the innocent is more moral than later, more justified action that results in more deaths. And sometimes, we're wrong. And if I'm wrong now, a lot of people will die. So, first, do you think I'm wrong about the cause of the problem?"
"Before we open the conference to questions from the media, as Prime Ecolitan, I have a brief statement to make."

The whitehaired Prime surveyed the unseen faxcasters and reporters and who
knew who else, then cleared his throat and spoke directly, without notes, without hesitation.

"This conference is not being held to allow those responsible to point fingers elsewhere. Nor is it held to allow a parade of excuses. Nor is it being held to justify actions. The plain fact is that as Prime Ecolitan of the Ecolitan Institute of Accord, I directed that certain actions be taken to forestall what I determined could lead to Galactiewide war. At the time I took those actions, tens of millions of individuals across the human Galaxy had died or were dying from what I determined was the onset of biological warfare undertaken by the Conglomerate. I did not delegate, nor did I debate. I acted to stop what I believed and still believe would have been an even greater human tragedy. And yes, I also acted to preserve the Coordinate.

"Whether the circumstances would have led to a larger war no one will ever know. Because those
circumstances have been drastically changed, no one can know. I determined that actions were
necessary, and I am responsible for those actions. Some Ecolitans have died, and others were critically injured. The entire command structure of the Fuardian military and roughly ten million individuals in the Conglomerate have perished as a result of my decisions and actions. It was my decision, and I stand on that decision."

The silence was absolute-but not for long. "Prime Ecolitan, how can you possibly justify any action that caused the death of ten million civilians, no matter what the provocation?"
Pittsways eyes went to the unseen questioner. "I am not trying to justify that action. I made the decision on the basis of the information I had. It is my responsibility. This is not the forum for debating justifications or morality. But in the interests of laying that issue to rest, I will answer the question-once.
When people invoke morality in these issues, they haven't the faintest idea what they really mean. The most moral action would have been to take out the entire Fuardian High Command ten years ago, before twenty million people died across a hundred systems. Such an action would scarcely be considered moral. When people talk about morality in interstellar politics, what they really mean is justification. It may be justified that I ordered an action that killed ten million civilians because twenty million had already been killed. Justification is not morality. The only moral aspect is that the action I ordered prevented millions more deaths and a Galactic war." The Prime bowed slightly. "The remainder of the conference is devoted to factual questions. Next?" Nathaniel nodded.

"Are you saying you do not have to justify your high-handed actions?"
"No. I am saying that any action which creates deaths can be debated endlessly as to its justifications. Justification is always after the fact, and, in that sense, is largely irrelevant. I gave the orders. Some people lived who would not have, and others died. For both the living and the dead, I am responsible. Next?"

Nathaniel laughed, harshly. "That's not the question. Guilt isn't rational. I have to believe I took the only moral course open at the time, but I'll always feel guilty, probably always ask and search to figure out what else might have been possible. That's guilt. Morality. . . I still don't have a moral problem. Oh . . . there will be plenty of people who will claim that what the Institute did is immoral. After all, ten million innocents did die on Tinhorn, and were all those thousands of soldiers and technicians on Tempte really responsible for the Conglomerates actions? Weren't they just doing their job?" His tone was sardonic.

"You are bitter."

"When people scream morality, they don't understand morality. The Prime had it right-they're confusing If the Empire and the Federated Hegemony thought they could destroy the Coordinate without retaliation right now, they would, and they'd call it moral. That's not morality, it's fear. They're afraid that they'll be called on their actions before they complete whatever new
genocide they might contemplate in the future."

"From what I've seen . . . you're probably right."

"Yet we've never acted first. We have acted before others would, but there have still been plenty of bodies." He swallowed, then continued. "When you talk about morality, and when justice is applied as it with justification, and they refuse to see that. retribution, what you really do is give people or governments a choice. They can choose to be moral, or they can choose not to be, and cake the risk of retribution or possibly getting away with it. When someone or something, like the Institute, even hints that it won't wait for the immoral action to be completed, everyone cries foul . . . unless the immoral actions are already on so vast a scale that they can't be ignored. In practice, everyone ignores the problem until they can't keep ignoring it. Then, and only then, do they invoke morality."

End Excerpts

I am not suggesting that we send in the military in every circumstance but we should always consider the moral component along with our interests. The solution to World War One was one of the contributing factors to the elements that lead to World War Two because those winning nations were more interesting in punishing Germany for their actions. Could the tragic circumstances been changed if someone stood up and said this isn't right? Of Course but they could also have been made worse because it is speculation.

Sticking our heads in the sand when certain people say these are my plans and these are my goals but pretending they didn't say that or they didn't really mean it that way is taking the course of no action. Then when the body count rises high enough those same people who stuck their heads in the sand and demanded no one do anything rise up and demand retribution and ponder why no one saw it coming until it was far too late.

Is it hard to decide who to help and how much help they get and who lives or dies because we acted or didn't act? Damn right it is but it is suppose to be.
Is it easier to just say well thats a different culture and is it really any of our concern? Yes it is but that doesn't make it right.

Can we save everyone? No we can't because we are not God but saving as many people as possible is the moral thing to do.

Will we save people who later on become horrible monsters who kill people? Yes but killing the child before he/she becomes the monster makes us even more monstrous.

Will we have to support tyrants and dictators because they make areas more stable? Yes but reluctantly not eagerly.

Should we be trying to help the people in those lands of dictators and tyrants who yearn to be truly free? Always.

The struggle for liberty is a messy business not neat and tidy so there will be blood shed and innocent people will die and a lot of times the results wont be as good as we expected. A lot of time it will descend back to tyrants and dictators but just surrendering to the idea that only tyrants and dictators will work ensures that Grand Real Republics never exist at all. Sometimes it wont be worth it but those other times where nations like our Own come into Being will change things for centuries.

Poisoning The Well

2011-04-18T19:10:00.003-04:00

There is a Term called Poisoning the well that comes from the battle field where an armed force would set out and wreck the water supply by dumping a bunch of dead or dying people or animals into the water supply as they moved through. This was done so their enemies would not be able to get fresh water with no thought about the long term effects this could have.

We have had the verbal version of Poisoning The Well going on a long time where certain groups have tried to Poison Ideas and Groups of People as this deadly water. They have tried to set The Poor against The Rich, The Middle Class Against The Rich, Women Against Men, Blacks Against Whites , Hispanics Against Whites , Homosexuals against the Straights , Democrats against Republicans , Liberals Against Conservatives , Everyone against The Christians and so on.

The Problem is that this strategy works in the short term but eventually you contaminate your own water supply where all you have is a bunch of people running around full of rage who are going to react violently to what they perceive as Poisoned Water being offered to them. Then it gets messy and since you have created this element of irrational fear in the people offering facts and evidence will not sway them. After all the Well from which these ideas and groups are poisonous.

There is this fellow DJ that pops up in Conservative Chat Rooms who all he does is talk trash that I call a LPH or Liberal Progressive Hack who is being paid to show up and Poison The Well. He hates all the shows and everyone who disagrees with him is a Liar and all he does is moan and complain when he isn't being a total hypocrite. He is poisoning The Well in several ways.

One is the fact in these chat rooms you can't block individuals so you see his gibberish. This ruins your enjoyment from hanging out with people you like and have legitimate substantial arguments with. If he can wreck the fun and enjoyment you have then he wins.

Another one is that his blather will not be stopped even if you crush every single argument he makes with facts and evidence and links because he will just rotate back to one of the MMFA talking points and reset meaning much like Bill Murray in Groundhog day you will wind up back at the start of the day no matter what you do..

Three his blather diverts your attention from what the people are saying meaning you miss things you might have learned something from or inspired a string of thoughts that leads to a great discussion. He acts as a distraction.

Four The fake outrage that somehow misses all the horrible things the side he supports does to focus in one individual that is suppose to be condemn for saying something he took offense to. It's fake outrage because there is no rage at the LPH's who do a lot worse things on video cameras with their faces clearly seen and the audio clearly audible.

There are a lot of DJ's out there throwing nasty trash in the hypothetical wells to poison Debate and the exchange of ideas and philosophies and having fun while doing it. They win when they wreck it for the rest of us because they make us so miserable or so frustrated or so angry that we go away or become silent. People like Andrew Brietbart make them drink from the Wells they poison until they either die , quit trashing the wells or go away.

Yes MMFA instead of a Well of ideas I really meant a real well full of water that you are throwing nasty trash in .. And Obviously Andrew Brrrietbarrrt is making your people drink from the real poisoned well until they die for real. I just hope you don't tell Arrianna Huffington this because she has a hard time understanding the difference between real and metaphoric concepts.

It's Bloody Obvious But Not To Them

2011-04-12T12:34:00.004-04:00

We have all had that sensation where someone points something out and we go "Damn It! Why Didn't I think of that? Its so obvious." Its Because our brains are wired a certain way so while we might start out with unlimited paths to go down they narrow rather abruptly to a few select choices that we can see. Because we no longer are considering the other options that may be before us they do not exist for us subjectively but for another person those options are something they can consider as relevant.

Consider it like a series of paths where you start walking along taking various directions until eventually you decide this is taking too long for me to get where I wanted to go but I don't see a way to get through any faster. Someone else who is slightly above you and can see the path you are on better than you can yells down if you just back up a couple of steps and go to the right theres an opening that will get you where you want to go a lot faster. Once you see the opening it is obvious it is there but before it didn't register on your brain.

One of the reasons I get so Angry at The Global Warming Crowd is because they betray the basic idea of what scientific theory is. Its where you come up with a Theory then test your conclusions then get someone to take all your data and test the conclusions again and again. The Goal is to find out where the Theory Breaks down and why it breaks down at those points to either improve the Theory, modify it to explain the Break Down Points or Reject the Theory. The Problem is that Scientists are just like everyone else where they grow enamored with the Conclusions they reach so the obvious gets rejected as irrelevant or unimportant.

Does a Fish notice the Water he is in? Well of course he does you would say you stupid idiot with your dumb question. I don't think the fish is aware of the water he is in because it is a part of his his reality that doesn't need to be examined. The Water is there so why pay attention to the existence of water.

It is only when the fish is removed from the water that he becomes aware of it's absence and tries to return to it. It is the absence of the water that makes the fish aware of the water much like people who have always had freedom are not aware of the freedom they have until it is removed. People who have lived in Tyrannies are well aware of how fragile and precious freedom is because it is something they have been without.

It is obvious to them while it is not obvious to someone like a Michael Moore because he has never done without Freedom. The People who have lived in realms where Moore's seizure of wealth is a reality reject it because it does Zero to empower the individual people but empowers a Ruling Class to decide who is worthy to get what.

The Hard Core Environmentalist's Illusion is a Paradise where Man Lives in tune with nature and all is perfectly balanced but the cold Obvious reality is crapping in a cold outside box which stinks and has flies in it. Its being frozen in winter trying to stay warm while trying to make sure you have enough water to drink. It's watching a portion of your children being struck down with illness and being crippled or even dying. Its Dirty water and insects during summer while trying to make sure the crops aren't all wiped out by storms or stolen. It's the elderly dying in their 40-60s while looking decades older than they should. The reality is hunger and sickness and pain and misery writ large where something as simple as filtration plant and plumbing would improve the quality of life so much.

The reason I have no patience for such fools is because their push turns us all into North Korea where what I describe above is the reality for most except the chosen Ruling Class and Their Military while Free Markets and Freedom create a Vibrant growing country of South Korea where people live longer and children grow up healthy.

Remember History

2011-04-11T14:15:00.003-04:00

It was less than 10 years ago that Republicans Controlled The House, The Senate, and The White House where they squandered the opportunity to make things like the Tax Cuts Permanent because it was too hard each year to engage in that battle which could always be done next year when they had more people so It would be easier to win.

A Lot of Promises were made that weren't kept because it was supposedly too hard to deliver and the Republicans might have had to fight both their Democrat Colleagues and the media to do so. People saw it as a betrayal as The Republicans began to act just like the Democrats in the ways of spending and regulating.

They all live in a bubble formed by being in close contact with people they spend a lot of time with and The Washington Media so it by nature creates a us versus them mentality. Normal people become uneducated and ill informed because that's what their good friends the Democrats and The Media says. These common folk don't have fancy degrees from prestigious universities or run big unions or control a large corporation so what do they know ?

If Republicans play it "safe" as defined by their opposition they lose because the Opposition will predefine everything they do as Evil or Corrupt or ineffective. You do not win battles by always being on the Defense as shown by the losses of the 2006 -2008. You do not win battles by listening to talking head pundits on the radio , tv or print media.

You win battles by being able to redefine the battlefields towards your advantage. You do not charge uphills where your enemy has already set up positions and entrenched themselves but you can't spend all your time retreating because the conditions on every battle field are not perfect.

The Republicans did not take control of The House due to the efforts of The Establishment but because outside people never before actively involved in politics got up and got involved. The whining from the Republicans thrown out of Office in Primaries proves that they didn't learn anything from this.

The Whining from the Talking heads and The Republicans in the Senate about how diverse organizations called Tea Parties cost them the Senate also proves that there is still a fundamental disconnect between operating as genuine Public Servants and cloaked Elitists Pretending they care about the people who elected them.

There were promises made just like there were a couple of years ago that The House Leadership has already broken like the 100 billion in cuts which became a meager 61 and then a minor 30. So Already they have reduced what they were willing to fight for by 2/3's of their promise. Remember the same excuse was used to not deal with the Battles in the early 2000's that there were more important battles that would be easier to win.

I am afraid that Republicans will not Remember History and repeat the same mistakes of the past that lead to Democrats holding The House , Senate and The White House and pushing spending to the level of Trillions not just billions as the New Norm. We can't let up pushing them to the Right instead of going to the left like they have been.

Cynical But I wish I wasn't

2011-04-04T18:16:00.002-04:00

My Brother considers all politicians the same egotistical arrogant and only interested in the acccumulation of power and control over everyone's lives. I try to be less cynical about it but its hard to do because for the most part when you see the leadership yakking away versus their actual actions there is such a disparity that it makes my cynicism grow not decrease.

When I listen to the talking heads on TV talking about oh there needs to be compromises to get things done and move things in the right direction I expect the people who voted in these guys to cut Government are about to get screwed.

There are really only three positions you can hold

One is growing Government aka the Big Government Model where more and more power gets concentrated in Governments hand/

Two is the Status Quo where you are not actively increasing Government but since it is growing already you are not stopping it either which is Big Government by default but you can claim Oh Im not for that.

Three is limited Government where the power that has been concentrated in the Governments hands gets returned back to the people and Government starts doing the very limited jobs it should be doing like National Defense and a certain Limited Infrastructure maintenance.

We have far too many of the people who fall in the first 2 camps and far too few in the third camp in office. One of the reasons I am cynical is because a lot of people promise they will be in the third position but then get co-opted by the first camp.

One of the big problems with being in the third camp is you do not want to stay in office but get in and get back out to the land Of Normal. So the very people we need in office will always get out and we have to hope the next person that gets into office will have a similar mindset.

This is unlike the people in the first 2 camps who will rerun until they either drop dead in office or get arrested and thrown out of office because power is their goal.

I want good decent people to run for office but the system has been set up to put in Professional Politicians instead of those normal folks who have to operate in the real world. The media and the Professional Politicians and the talking heads set out to actively destroy or contaminate any body not of the "right set" from winning elections because if normal people can do their job and improve things then why do we need these guys who stay in office 20 years or more.

I understand how systems work and how organically they grow. The Political system has had decades of Big Government types influencing and writing the rules for the system which means it is even more difficult to get the third type of people into office because they are a threat to the system as a whole.

Being Cynical these days is exhausting me because it is tiring to always expect the worst. It is even harder when you see the good people you put your hope in start to slip from that third camp to the second or even first.

Hospitals Part One

2011-03-28T22:11:00.003-04:00

There are several problems with being in the Hospital that I am not certain can really be fixed.

One problem is the sense of isolation you start to feel especially in the late hours of the night and morning as you are laying in your bed. It doesn't matter how many people come and visit or stay all the time even with those people you start to get that sense of being separated and apart from the world at large. There are no real distractions you can do to keep this from happening eventually

Isolation leads to brooding about your recovery which can lead to depression which slows your mental recovery and physical recovery.

One problem is the inability to achieve a state of rest. The Hospital is the worst place to achieve any sort of natural state of healing sleep because their job is to monitor your condition. Every time you drift off to sleep someone pops up to check something or walks in your room to look in on you or comes to give you medicine or comes to ask if you need something. And You also have all the lights and sounds of the machinery and the dripping of the IVS and the other people in other rooms going on as well to make sleep an even more distant proposition.

I am not knocking the people who work there because I have had largely great experiences at the hospital aside from the whole almost dying thing.

One problem is the sense of helplessness. You are hooked up to machines and your physical condition is shaky and your energy reserves are drained so even a relatively simple thing like moving an inch or two in bed is a herculean task. It makes it hard to see that you are getting better once that sets in.

Those are Three problems I identified that I see no easy quick fix to. If Anyone has any brilliant ideas that come to you I would welcome the input.

My Condition : Diverticultis

2011-03-14T22:24:00.002-04:00

Diverticulitis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Diverticulitis
Classification and external resources
Large bowel (sigmoid colon) showing multiple diverticula. The diverticula appear on either side of the longitudinal muscle bundle (taenium).
ICD-10	K 57.
ICD-9	562
DiseasesDB	3876
MedlinePlus	000257
eMedicine	med/578
MeSH	D004238

Diverticulitis is a common digestive disease particularly found in the large intestine. Diverticulitis develops from diverticulosis, which involves the formation of pouches (diverticula) on the outside of the colon. Diverticulitis results if one of these diverticula becomes inflamed.

Signs and symptoms

Patients often present with the classic triad of left lower quadrant pain, fever, and leukocytosis (an elevation of the white cell count in blood tests). Patients may also complain of nausea or diarrhea; others may be constipated.

Less commonly, an individual with diverticulitis may present with right-sided abdominal pain. This may be due to the less prevalent right-sided diverticula or a very redundant sigmoid colon.

Diverticulitis

The most common symptom of diverticulitis is abdominal pain. The most common sign is tenderness around the left side of the lower abdomen. If infection is the cause, then nausea, vomiting, feeling hot while having no fever, cramping, and constipation may occur as well. The severity of symptoms depends on the extent of the infection and complications. Diverticulitis worsens throughout the day, as it starts as small pains and slowly turns into vomiting and sharp pains.

Diverticulosis

Most people with diverticulosis do not have any discomfort or symptoms; however, symptoms may include mild cramps, bloating, and constipation. Other diseases such as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and stomach ulcers cause similar problems, so these symptoms do not always mean a person has diverticulosis.

Causes

The development of colonic diverticulum is thought to be a result of raised intraluminal colonic pressures. The sigmoid colon (Section 4) has the smallest diameter of any portion of the colon, and therefore the portion which would be expected to have the highest intraluminal pressure. The claim that a lack of dietary fiber, particularly non-soluble fiber (also known in older parlance as "roughage") predisposes individuals to diverticular disease is supported within the medical literature.^[1]^[2]

Diet

Peanuts and seeds were, in the past, thought by many health care professionals to possibly aggravate diverticulitis.^[3] However, recent studies have found no evidence that suggests the avoidance of nuts and seeds prevents the progression of diverticulosis to an acute case of diverticulitis.^[4]^[5]

Popcorn, nuts and corn were also not recommended in the past for diverticulitis patients. Recent research has shown that not only do they not appear to be aggravating the diverticulitis, but that a higher intake of nuts and corn could in fact help to avoid diverticulitis in male adults.^[6]

Diagnosis

People with the above symptoms are commonly studied with a computed tomography, or CT scan.^[7] The CT scan is very accurate (98%) in diagnosing diverticulitis. In order to extract the most information possible about the patient's condition, thin section (5mm) transverse images are obtained through the entire abdomen and pelvis after the patient has been administered oral and intravascular contrast. Images reveal localized thickening and hyperemia (increased blood flow) involving a segment of the colon wall, with inflammatory changes extending into the fatty tissues surrounding the colon. The diagnosis of acute diverticulitis is made confidently when the involved segment contains diverticulae.^[8] CT may also identify patients with more complicated diverticulitis, such as those with an associated abscess. It may even allow for radiologically guided drainage of an associated abscess, sparing a patient from immediate surgical intervention.

Other studies, such as barium enema and colonoscopy are contraindicated in the acute phase of diverticulitis due to the risk of perforation.

Differential diagnosis

The differential diagnosis includes colon cancer, inflammatory bowel disease, ischemic colitis, and irritable bowel syndrome, as well as a number of urological and gynecological processes. Some patients report bleeding from the rectum.

Treatment

An initial episode of acute diverticulitis is usually treated with bowel rest (i.e., nothing by mouth), IV fluid resuscitation, and broad-spectrum antibiotics which cover anaerobic bacteria and gram-negative rods. However, recurring acute attacks or complications, such as peritonitis, abscess, or fistula may require surgery, either immediately or on an elective basis.

Upon discharge patients may be placed on a low residue diet.^[9] This low-fiber diet gives the colon adequate time to heal without needing to be overworked. Later, patients are placed on a high-fiber diet.

In some cases surgery may be required to remove the area of the colon with the diverticula. Patients suffering their first attack of diverticulitis are typically not encouraged to undergo the surgery, unless the case is severe. Patients suffering repeated episodes may benefit from the surgery. In such cases the risks of complications from the diverticulitis outweigh the risks of complications from surgery.

Most cases of simple, uncomplicated diverticulitis respond to conservative therapy with bowel rest and antibiotics.^[10]

Surgery

Diverticulitis surgery may be elective or may be a medical emergency. Whether the elective surgery should be performed is decided based on external factors such as the stage of the disease, the age of the patient and his or her general medical condition, as well as the severity and frequency of attacks or if the symptoms persisted after a first acute episode. In most cases, the decision to perform elective surgery is taken when the risks of the surgery are smaller than the ones resulted from the complication of the condition. Elective surgery may be performed at least six weeks after recovery from acute diverticulitis.^[11]

Emergency surgery is necessary for people whose intestine has ruptured; intestinal rupture always results in infection of the abdominal cavity.^[12] During a diverticulitis surgery, the ruptured section is removed and a colostomy is performed. This means that the surgeon will create an opening between the large intestine and the surface of the skin. The colostomy is closed in about 10 or 12 weeks in a subsequent surgery in which the cut ends of the intestine are rejoined.

The first surgical approach consists in the resection and primary anastomosis. This first stage of surgery is performed on patients with a well vascularized, nonedematous and tension-free bowel. The proximal margin should be an area of pliable colon without hypertrophy or inflammation. The distal margin should extend to the upper third of the rectum where the taenia coalesces. Not all of the diverticula-bearing colon must be removed, since diverticula proximal to the descending or sigmoid colon are unlikely to result in further symptoms.^[13]

Diverticulitis surgery can be done in two ways: through a primary bowel resection or through a bowel resection with colostomy. Both bowel resections may be done in the traditional way or by laparoscopic surgery.^[14] The traditional bowel resection is made using an open surgical approach, called colectomy. During a colectomy, the patient is placed under general anesthesia in order to make sure that the patient will not feel any pain and he or she will be completely asleep during the procedure. A surgeon performing a colectomy will make a lower midline incision in the abdomen or a lateral lower transverse incision. The diseased section of the large intestine is removed and then the two healthy ends are sewn or stapled back together. A colostomy may be performed when the bowel has to be relieved of its normal digestive work as it heals. A colostomy implies creating a temporary opening of the colon on the skin surface and the end of the colon is passed through the abdominal wall and a removable bag is attached to it. The waste will be collected in the bag.^[15]

However, most of the surgeons prefer performing the bowel resection laparoscopically mainly because the postoperative pain is reduced and the patient's recovery is faster. The laparoscopic surgery is a minimally invasive procedure in which three to four smaller incisions are made in the abdomen or navel.

All colon surgery involves only three maneuvers that may vary in complexity depending on the region of the bowel and the nature of the disease which are the retraction of the colon, the division of the attachments to the colon and the dissection of the mesentery.^[16] After the resection of the colon, the surgeon normally divides the attachments to the liver and the small intestine. After the mesenteric vessels are dissected, the colon is divided with special surgical staplers that close off the bowel while cutting between the staple lines.

Primary Bowel Resection

The primary bowel resection is the standard procedure diverticulitis. It consists in the removal of the diseased or ruptured part of the intestine which is then reconnected to healthy segments of the colon. This is called anastomosis. Depending on the patient's general medical condition, the procedure may be done traditionally, via a colectomy or laparoscopically, which requires smaller incisions and a faster recovery.^[17]

Bowel Resection with Colostomy

When excessive inflammation of the colon renders primary bowel resection too risky, bowel resection with colostomy remains an option. Also known as the Hartmann's operation,this is a more complicated surgery typically reserved for life-threatening cases.

The bowel resection with colostomy implies a temporary colostomy which is followed by a second operation which has the purpose to reverse the colostomy. The surgeon makes an opening in the abdominal wall (a colostomy) which helps clearing the infection and inflammation. The colon is brought out through the opening and all waste is collected into an external bag.^[18]

The colostomy is usually temporary but it may be permanent depending on the severity of the case. Most of the time, several months later after the inflammation has healed, the patient undergoes another major surgery during which the surgeon rejoins the colon and rectum and reverses the colostomy.

Complications

In complicated diverticulitis, bacteria may subsequently infect the outside of the colon if an inflamed diverticulum bursts open. If the infection spreads to the lining of the abdominal cavity, (peritoneum), this can cause a potentially fatal peritonitis. Sometimes inflamed diverticula can cause narrowing of the bowel, leading to an obstruction. Also, the affected part of the colon could adhere to the bladder or other organ in the pelvic cavity, causing a fistula, or abnormal connection between an organ and adjacent structure or organ, in this case the colon and an adjacent organ.

Epidemiology

Diverticulitis most often affects middle-aged and elderly persons, though it can strike younger patients as well.^[19] Central obesity may be associated with diverticulitis in younger patients, with some being as young as 20 years old.^[20]

In Western countries, diverticular disease most commonly involves the sigmoid colon - section 4 - (95% of patients). The prevalence of diverticular disease has increased from an estimated 10% in the 1920s to between 35 and 50% by the late 1960s. 65% of those currently 85 years of age and older can be expected to have some form of diverticular disease of the colon. Less than 5% of those aged 40 years and younger may also be affected by diverticular disease.

Left-sided diverticular disease (involving the sigmoid colon) is most common in the West, while right-sided diverticular disease is more prevalent in Asia and Africa. Among patients with diverticulosis, 10–25% patients will go on to develop diverticulitis within their lifetimes.

Understanding in the Head but Not the Heart

2011-03-13T22:24:00.002-04:00

One of the things I have gotten accused of in the past is being cold and uncaring about peoples suffering. Coincidentally this was when I was explaining how come companies move away from States or even Countries who develop a hostility to business. I think it is really easy to say when you aren't in their position that they should be willing to give more because they already have too much.

These people seem to think because I didn't automatically side with their viewpoint that all I had was a mental understanding of the situation and not an emotional empathy for the people who were suffering. Of course they had no empathy for the owners of these theoretical businesses and didn't even bother to think about their view point at all.

One of the most frustrating things is sometimes raw emotionalism clouds your reason. However telling someone they are being too emotional is counter productive because if they are that is going to make them even more emotional and if they are not being emotional it is going to aggravate them as a dismissive technique.

I remember when I got run off the road by an 18 Wheeler and rolled down a hill when the Police Officer was questioning me he got snippy because he didn't like my tone in answering his questions. He had a surface intellectual understanding of what I just been through but no emotional connection to the actual events.

I fall on both sides of this because I think empathy combined with intellectual understanding is a good thing and also a bad thing.

A Case in point is this horrific gang rape of an 11 year old where her attackers families are trying to find a way to blame her so they don't have to consider their own kin monsters. You might want to understand intellectually why they are doing something like this but not emotionally. They do not want to feel the horror this small child has went through because then they would have to hate themselves for blaming her and hate their family members who did this. All I feel is disgust at these people and the soulless monsters in the New Black Panther Party who are trying to use this to promote racial hatred.

Please Go Live in A Bubble

2011-03-12T21:33:00.002-05:00

I didn't want to get into this because I thought just this once that even the most partisan hacks would not seize this opportunity to do what they like to do. I mean of course using a natural disaster to once again try to achieve their own ends. Let me tell you that these people seem to think live is without risk or it should be and that we all should just go back to living in caves with nature providing our temperature control.

I say to them if they want to go live in that Bubble Ball where nothing could ever hurt them Go Ahead. I am not going to join you and am instead going to enjoy my air condition when it gets hot outside and my heat when it gets cold. I am going to enjoy my treated water that isn't just like natures is full of crap and vegetation and other things. I am going to enjoy my freezer and refrigerator that stores food so it doesn't spoil. I am going to enjoy my microwave that cooks foods fast and my stove that cooks things slow. I am going to enjoy my energy provided by a Nuclear Reactor.

There was a generation in the 60s that used the culture war to conflate nuclear bombs with nuclear reactors which killed the creation of 100's of beautiful "clean" energy providers through fear and misinformation. Their spiritual successors started back again when the Japanese Plants and Reactors of an older design survived a 8.9 Earthquake a tsunami and series of aftershocks within the 6 to 5 range but started having problems. Remember a 8.9 earthquake would collapse the all natural caves they want us to go back in and it was man taking what nature has to offer and using it in clever ways that built the buildings that survived such things.

It just irritates me to no end that the same sort of crowd that jumps up and down talking about how I and others who don't believe that man is primarily responsible for the planet warming and cooling are science deniers act like scared little children of Nuclear energy. I just want to play the South Park episode where the people are fleeing "Global Warming" right behind every single one of them when they start babbling about things Man isn't suppose to meddle in.

Hearings? Whats that?

2011-03-11T20:58:00.002-05:00

I guess Representative Ellison didn't get the Memo that His Party was in power for 4 years so he could have held those kind of hearings he seems to think King should really hold but it wasn't really important enough to do so when that was happening. See the point is that Political Correctness through Democrats and people like C.A.I.R. are intentionally trying to conflate the issue so no one mentions people who practice Islam the way almost all the Sharia controlled Countries do.

After all if someone holds hearings and shows the people in America who happen to practice Islam that all these people C.A.I.R. and Democrats say hate them are just as concerned about their safety as anyone else and that they don't need C.A.I.R. or Democrat both organizations lose power. Truth strips them of the ability to inspire fear and without fear no Possibility of Sharia exists.

I think it is interesting that what we always hear is the name McVeigh tossed around. I guess I missed all the notices during the trial that showed he plotted his crimes due to his religious beliefs. Oh Wait that's because what he did was not due to any deeply held religious beliefs. It is a distraction technique that Progressives , C.A.I.R. and other Pro Sharia organizations like to use when you start to press them with names and dates of Islamic Attacks. Paraphrasing Howard Zinn Facts and Dates do not matter but the narrative of the story you are trying to tell does..

You will also hear it is the poverty that makes these Islamic Attacks possible but looking at the backs grounds of the people in the UK, USA , and other countries the people who have planned, carried out or attempted to carry out attacks were middle class to upper class with educations.

I would make this case that Sharia in fact causes poverty because it imposes harsh restrictions on society where knowledge is not something cherished but something contained. After all the more knowledge you have the greater the chance you might start questioning Islam which is strictly forbidden.

So if Poverty is the real reason people blow themselves up and Sharia blocks the creation of all but a select few achieving wealth through knowledge because knowledge leads to questioning which leads to disobeying Islam which forbids questioning Islam then you can not eliminate Poverty without removing Sharia.

Sharia also strips half of the population from the wealth and knowledge creation because Women are rendered a caged creature that can't improve themselves or their society either.

A final word to the people who seem to think bending theirs heads to satisfy outfits like C.A.I.R. will improve anything at all. CAIR and the other Islamic outfits goals are to Protect Muslims and Create Sharia Law Compliant areas and nothing else. It doesn't matter to the members of their leadership what you do before if at any point you oppose their goals they will call you Islama0phobic and that you are Inspiring Hatred towards Muslims.

A final Final Word because I love how the Media likes to throw out the words worried about a Backlash against Islamic people every time some attack happens that can't be easily dismissed. The only violent backlash that has been highly visible and in multiple countries is when Islamic people Riot and Kill people over a fake story, a cartoon or someone writing books about Mohammad/Islam. There is zero worry about the backlash against Christians by Islamic people by these same Media people or the frantic stories about churches being burned or Christians being slaughtered.

Oratory in History By J. Calvin Coolidge

2011-03-10T21:25:00.002-05:00

Oratory in History
By J. Calvin Coolidge
Black River Academy Commencement, 5/1895

To further estimate the degree in which oratory has influenced the history of the world, would be a difficult task, but the history of every country and of every age turns with miracles wrought by this necromantic form. Oratory, as every schoolboy knows, was the master spirit of both great nations of antiquity, Greece and Rome, and plays an important part in modern nations.

It was not the fleets of Attica, though mighty, nor the valor of her troops, though unconquerable, that directed her destinies; but the words and gestures of the men who had the genius and skill to move, to concentrate, and to direct; the energies and passions of a whole people as though they were but one person. Even when Greece was in the last stages of decay, when she was oppressed by the galling tyranny of Philip, the Athenian populace, roused by the burning words of Demosthenes, started up with one accord and one cry to march on Philip; and the Macedonian monarch himself said of the orator who had baffled him, "Had I been there, he would have persuaded me to take up arms against myself. Such was the effect of oratory in Athens, a state weakened as it was by oppression and its life blood almost gone in long continued wars.

When the commons of Rome were ground down to the dirt beneath the load of debts which they owed to their patrician creditors, it was the agonizing appeals of one old man in rags, pale and famished, who told the citizens he had fought in eight and twenty battles, and yet had been imprisoned for a debt which he had been compelled to contract but could not pay, that caused a change of laws and a restoration to liberty of those who had been enslaved by their creditors. It was not alone the fate of Lucretia, but the eloquence of Brutus that drove the Tarquin from Rome, overthrew the throne, and established the Roman Republic. Aye! "Rome, that sat on her seven hills and from her throne of beauty ruled the world" received her freedom by the power of oratory. We are told that such was the force of Cicero's oratory, that it not only confounded the audacious Cataline, and silenced the eloquent Hortentious, not only deprived Curio of all power of recollection, when he rose to oppose that great master of enchanting rhetoric, but made even Caesar tremble, change his determined purpose and acquit the man he had resolved to condemn. It was not till the two champions of ancient liberty, Demosthenes and Cicero, were silenced that the triumph of Despotism in Greece and Rome was complete.

In the Dark Ages, the earnest tones of a simple private man; who has left to posterity only his baptismal name with the modest surname of Hermit, that aroused the people to engage in the Crusades; drove back the victorious crescent, overthrew feudalism, freed the serfs, delivered the towns from the oppression of the Barons, and changed the moral face of all Europe. Two centuries later, the voice of a solitary monk shook the Vatican, and emancipated half of Europe from the dominion of Papal Rome. In later times, the achievements of oratory have been hardly less potent. What mighty changes have been wrought in England's political system within the last fifty years by the indomitable energy of such orators as Vincent, Cobden, Bright, and scores of others, who traversed the kingdom, advocating the repeal of the Corn Laws and other measures which were once deemed Utopian and hopeless! During the French Revolution, it was the voice of Mirabeau, hurling defiance at the king, that inspired the Tiers-Etat with courage. When he cried out to the astonished emissary of Louis: "Slave, go tell your master that we are here by the will of the people, and that we will depart only at the point of the bayonet," the words sounded like a thunder clap to all Europe, and from that moment the bondage of the nation was broken and the fate of despotism sealed.

Who can say what the history of Europe or even of the world would have been, had the British Parliament never been shaken by the powerful eloquence of Fox, Camden, or Grattan; or had Miribeau, Louvert, and Danton never hurled their fiery bolts from the French tribune? No one will say that in our own struggle for independence the majestic eloquence of Chatham, the profound reasoning of Burke, the burning satire and irony of Barre did not have influence on our fortunes in America. They tended to diminish the confidence of the British ministry in their hopes to hold us in subjection. There was not a man who did not struggle more boldly for liberty when those exhilarating sounds, uttered in the two houses of Parliament, reached him across the seas.

In the history of our own country, the triumphs of oratory have been hardly less marked than those of the Old World. In the night of tyranny, the eloquence of the country first blazed up, like the lighted signal fires of a distracted border to startle and enlighten the community. Everywhere as the news of some fresh invasion of our liberties and rights was bourne on the wings of the wind, men ran together and called upon some earnest citizen to address them. When, in 1761, James Otis, in a Boston popular assembly, denounced the British Writs of Assistance, in words like Marc Anthony, who said, "I come not, friends, to steal away your hearts, . . . I only speak right on; I tell you that which you yourselves do know"; his hearers were hurried away resistlessly on the torrents of his impressive speech. When he concluded, every man of the vast audience went away resolved to take up arms against the injustice.

In the first American Congress, convened at Philadelphia, Patrick Henry arose, and drew such a picture of the horrors of servitude and the charms of freedom that his hearers became activated as one soul, and the universal shout was "Liberty or Death." The single speech of this one illustrious man gave an impulse which probably decided the fate of America. During the present century, the effects of oratory are no less obvious. As it was the eloquence of Hamilton, spoken and written, which in no small degree established our political system; - so it was the eloquence of Webster, with his clarion voice and mighty words, that mainly defended and saved it. As the great orator of Massachusetts, the champion of the Federal Constitution, closed his memorable reply to Hayne, profound silence reigned in the crowded Senate Chamber. When again, over thirty years later, Nullification once more raised its front, and stood forth armed for a long and desperate conflict, it was the ignited logic of this same Defender of the Constitution, and the echo of his burning, enthusiastic appeals for: "Liberty and Union, now and forever, one and inseparable" which roused the people to resistance, and, with the eloquence of Garrison and Philips, broke the fetters of the slave, then remaining the most formidable obstacle to the complete union of North and South.

The effects of sacred oratory on the history of the world would fill volumes. We will only recall the manner of John the Baptist, Paul, Peter, and Chrysostom, the golden mouthed; and in modern times, the names of such pulpit orators as Whitfield, Hall, Chalmers, Latimer, Knox, Edwards, Beecher, and Brookes. It would be hardly too much to say, that since the dawn of civilization, the triumphs of the tongue have rivaled, if not surpassed, those of the sword. Although some of the most fiery themes of eloquence may have passed away with the occasions of tyranny, outrage, and oppression that created them, though the age of Philippics has happily gone; yet so long as wickedness and misery, injustice and wretchedness prevail on the earth, so long as the millennium is still distant and Utopia a dream, the voice of the orator will still be needed to warn, to denounce, to terrify, and to overwhelm.

Adolph Hitler Speech 01-30-1937

2011-03-09T23:12:00.003-05:00

This speech is an English translation of an Adolph Hitler Speech on the Anniversary of Coming to Power

INTRODUCTION

This session of the Reichstag takes place on a date which is full of significance for the German people. Four years have passed since the beginning of that great internal revolution which in the meantime has been giving a new aspect to German life. This is the period of four years which I asked the German people to grant me for the purpose of putting my work to the test and submitting it to their judgment. Hence at the present moment nothing could be more opportune than for me to render you an account of all the successes that have been achieved and the progress that has been made during these four years, for the welfare of the German people. But within the limits of the short statement I have to make it would be entirely impossible to enumerate all the remarkable results that have been reached during a time which may be looked upon as probably the most astounding epoch in the life of our people. That task belongs rather to the press and the propaganda. Moreover, during the course of the present year there will be an Exposition here in Berlin which is being organized for the purpose of giving a more comprehensive and detailed picture of the works that have been completed, the results that have been obtained and the projects on which work has been begun, all of which can be explained better in this way than I could do it within the limits of an address that is to last for two hours. Therefore I shall utilize the opportunity afforded me by this historic meeting of the Reichstag to cast a glance back over the past four years and call attention to some of the new knowledge that we have gained, some of the experiences which we have been through, and the consequences that have resulted thereof--in so far as these have general validity. It is important that we should understand them clearly, not only for our own sake but also for that of the generations to come.

Having done this, I shall pass on to explain our attitude toward those problems and tasks whose importance for us and for the world around us must be appreciated before it will be possible to live in better relations with one another. Finally I should like to describe as briefly as possible the projects which I have before my mind for our work in the near future and indeed in the distant future also.

RETROSPECTIVE: THE LAST FOUR YEARS AND
THE MEANING OF THE NAZI REVOLUTION

At the time when I used to go here and there throughout the country, simply as a public speaker, people from the bourgeois classes used to ask me why we believed that a revolution would be necessary, instead of working within the framework of the established political order and with the collaboration of the parties already in existence, for the purpose of improving those conditions which we considered unsound and injurious. Why must be have a new party, and especially why a new revolution?

The answer which I then gave may be stated under the following headings:

(1) The elements of confusion and dissolution which are making themselves felt in German life, in the concept of life itself and the will to national self-preservation, cannot be eradicated by a mere change of government. More than enough of those changes have already taken place without bringing about any essential betterment of the distress that exists in Germany. All these Cabinet reconstructions brought some positive advantage only to the actors who took part in the play; but the results were almost always quite negative as far as the interests of the people were concerned. As time has gone on the thought and practical life of our people have been led astray into ways that are unnatural to them and injurious. One of the causes which brought about this condition of affairs must be attributed to the fact that the structure of our State and our methods of government were foreign to our own national character, our historical development and our national needs.

The parliamentary-democratic system is inseparable from the other symptoms of the time. A critical situation cannot be remedied by collaborating with the causes of it but by a radical extermination of these causes. Hence under such conditions the political struggle must necessarily take the form of a revolution.

(2) It is out of the question to think that such a revolutionary reconstruction could be carried out by those who are the custodians and the more or less responsible representatives of the old regime, or by the political organizations founded under the old form of the Constitution. Nor would it be possible to bring this about by collaborating with these institutions, but only by establishing a new movement which will fight against them for the purpose of carrying through a radical reformation in political, cultural and economic life. And this fight will have to be undertaken even at the sacrifice of life and blood, if that should be necessary.

In this connection it is worthy of remark that when the average political party wins a parliamentary victory no essential change takes place in the historical course which the people are following or in the outer aspect of public life; whereas a genuine revolution that arises from a profound ideological insight will always lead to a transformation which is strikingly impressive and is manifest to the outside world.

Surely nobody will doubt the fact that during the last four years a revolution of the most momentous character has passed like a storm over Germany. Who could compare this new Germany with that which existed on the 30th of January four years ago, when I took my oath of loyalty before the venerable President of the Reich?

I am speaking of a National Socialist Revolution; but this revolutionary process in Germany had a particular character of its own, which may have been the reason why the outside world and so many of our fellow-countrymen failed to understand the profound nature of the transformation that took place. I do not deny that this peculiar feature, which has been for us the most outstanding characteristic of the lines along which the National Socialist Revolution took place--a feature which we can be specially proud of--has hindered rather than helped to make this unique historic event understood abroad and among some of our own people. For the National Socialist Revolution was in itself a revolution in the revolutionary tradition.

What I mean is this: Throughout thousands of years the conviction grew up and prevailed, not so much in the German mind as in the minds of the contemporary world, that bloodshed and the extermination of those hitherto in power--together with the destruction of public and private institutions and property--were essential characteristics of every true revolution. Mankind in general has grown accustomed to accept revolutions with all these consequences somehow or other as if they were legal happenings. I do not mean that people endorse all this tumultuous destruction of life and property; but they certainly accept it as the necessary accompaniment of events which, because of this very reason, are called revolutions.

Herein lies the difference between the National Socialist Revolution and other revolutions, with the exception of the Fascist Revolution in Italy. The National Socialist Revolution was almost entirely a bloodless proceeding. When the party took over power in Germany, after overthrowing the very formidable obstacles that had stood in its way, it did so without causing any damage whatsoever to property. I can say with a certain amount of pride that this was the first revolution in which not even a window-pane was broken.

Don't misunderstand me however. If this revolution was bloodless that was not because we were not manly enough to look at blood.

I was a soldier for more than four years in a war where more blood was shed than ever before throughout human history. I never lost my nerve, no matter what the situation was and no matter what sights I had to face. The same holds good for my party colleagues. But we did not consider it as part of the program of the National Socialist Revolution to destroy human life or material goods, but rather to build up a new and better life. And it is the greatest source of pride to us that we have been able to carry through this revolution, which is certainly the greatest revolution ever experienced in the history of our people, with a minimum of loss and sacrifice. Only in those cases where the murderous lust of the Bolsheviks, even after the 30th of January 1933, led them to think that by the use of brute force they could prevent the success and realization of the National Socialist ideal--only then did we answer violence with violence, and naturally we did it promptly. Certain other individuals of a naturally undisciplined temperament, and who had no political consciousness whatsoever, had to be taken into protective custody; but, generally speaking, these individuals were given their freedom after a short period. Beyond this there was a small number who took part in politics only for the purpose of establishing an alibi for their criminal activities, which were proved by the numerous sentences to prison and penal servitude that had been passed upon them previously. We prevented such individuals from pursuing their destructive careers, inasmuch as we set them to do some useful work, probably for the first time in their lives.

I do not know if there ever has been a resolution which was of such a profound character as the National Socialist Revolution and which at the same time allowed innumerable persons who had been prominent in political circles under the former regime to follow their respective callings in private life peacefully and without causing them any worry. Not only that, but even many among our bitterest enemies, some of whom had occupied the highest positions in the government, were allowed to enjoy their regular emoluments and pensions.

That is what we did. But this policy did not always help our reputation abroad. Just a few months ago we had an experience with some very honourable British world-citizens who considered themselves obliged to address a protest to me because I had some criminal protégés of the Moscow regime interned in a German concentration camp. Perhaps it is because I am not very well informed on current affairs that I have not heard whether those honorable gentlemen have ever expressed their indignation at the various acts of sanguinary violence which these Moscow criminals committed in Germany, or whether they ever expressed themselves against the slogan: "Strike down and kill the Fascist wherever you meet him", or whether, for example, they have taken the occasion of recent happenings in Spain to express their indignation against slaughtering and violating and burning to death thousands upon thousands of men, women and children. If the revolution in Germany had taken place according to the democratic model in Spain these strange apostles of non-intervention abroad would probably find that there was nothing which they need to worry about. People closely acquainted with the state of affairs in Spain have assured us that if we place the number of persons who have been slaughtered in this bestial way at 170,000, the figure will probably be too low rather than too high. Measured by the achievements of the noble democratic revolutionaries in Spain, the quota of human beings allotted for slaughter to the National Socialist Revolution would have been about 400,000 or 500,000; because our population is about three times larger than that of Spain. That we did not carry out this mass-slaughter is apparently looked on as a piece of negligence on our part. We see that the democratic world-citizens are by no means gracious in their criticism of this leniency.

We certainly had the power in our hands to do what has been done in Spain. And probably we had better nerves than the murderer who steals upon his victim unawares, shunning the open fight, and who is capable only of murdering defenseless [sic] hostages. We have been soldiers and we never flinched in the face of battle throughout that most gruesome war of all times. Our hearts and, I may also add, our sound common sense saved us from committing any acts like those which have been done in Spain.

Taking it all in all, fewer lives were sacrificed in the National Socialist Revolution than the number of National Socialist followers who were murdered in Germany by our Bolshevik opponents in the year 1932 alone, when there was no revolution.

This absence of bloodshed and destruction was made possible solely because we had adopted a principle which not only guided our conduct in the past but which we shall also never forget in the future. This principle was that the purpose of a revolution, or of any general change in the condition of public affairs, cannot be to produce chaos but only to replace what is bad by substituting something better. In such cases, however, something better must be ready at hand. On the 30th of January four years ago, when the venerable President of the Reich sent for me and entrusted me with the task of forming a new Cabinet, we had already come through a strenuous struggle in our efforts to obtain supreme political control over the State. All the means employed in carrying on that struggle were strictly within the law as it then stood and the protagonists in the fight were the National Socialists. Before the new State could be actually established and promulgated, the idea of it and the model for its organization had already existed within the framework of our party. All the fundamental principles on which the new Reich was to be constructed were the principles and ideas already embodied in the National Socialist Party.

As a result of the constitutional struggle to win over our German fellow-countrymen to our side the party had established its predominance in the Reichstag and for a whole year before it actually assumed power it already had the right to demand this power for itself, even according to the principles of the parliamentary-democratic system. But it was essential for the National Socialist Revolution that this party should put forward demands which of themselves would involve a real revolutionary change in the principles and institutions of government hitherto in force.

When certain individuals who were blind to the actual state of affairs thought that they could refuse to submit to the practical application of the principles of the movement which had been entrusted with the government of the Reich, then, but not until then, the party used an iron hand to make these illegal disturbers of the peace bend their stubborn necks before the laws of the new National Socialist Reich and Government.

With this act the National Socialist Revolution came to an end. For as soon as the party had taken over power, and this new condition of affairs was consolidated, I looked upon it as a matter of course that the Revolution should be transformed into an evolution.

The new development which now set in, however, meant that there had to be a new orientation not merely of our ideas but also in regard to the practical policy which we had to carry out. Even today certain individuals who have fallen in the march of events refuse to adapt themselves to this change. They cannot understand it because it is beyond their mental horizon or outside the sphere of their egotistic interests. Our National Socialist teaching has undoubtedly a revolutionizing effect in many spheres of life and has interfered and acted under the revolutionary impulse.

TOTALITARIANISM AND INDIVIDUALISM:
THE IMPORTANCE OF RACE

The main plank in the National Socialist program is to abolish the liberalistic concept of the individual and the Marxist concept of humanity and to substitute therefore the folk community, rooted in the soil and bound together by the bond of its common blood. A very simple statement; but it involves a principle that has tremendous consequences.

This is probably the first time and this is the first country in which people are being taught to realize that, of all the tasks which we have to face, the noblest and most sacred for mankind is that each racial species must preserve the purity of the blood which God has given it.

And thus it happens that for the first time it is now possible for men to use their God-given faculties of perception and insight in the understanding of those problems which are of more momentous importance for the preservation of human existence than all the victories that may be won on the battlefield or the successes that may be obtained through economic efforts. The greatest revolution which National Socialism has brought about is that it has rent asunder the veil which hid from us the knowledge that all human failures and mistakes are due to the conditions of the time and therefore can be remedied, but that there is one error which cannot be remedied once men have made it, namely the failure to recognize the importance of conserving the blood and the race free from intermixture and thereby the racial aspect and character which are God's gift and God's handiwork. It is not for men to discuss the question of why Providence created different races, but rather to recognize the fact that it punishes those who disregard its work of creation.

Unspeakable suffering and misery have come upon mankind because they lost this instinct which was grounded in a profound intuition; and this loss was caused by a wrong and lopsided education of the intellect. Among our people there are millions and millions of persons living today for whom this law has become clear and intelligible. What individual seers and the still unspoiled natures of our forefathers saw by direct perception has now become a subject of scientific research in Germany. And I can prophesy here that, just as the knowledge that the earth moves around the sun led to a revolutionary alternation in the general world-picture, so the blood-and-race doctrine of the National Socialist Movement will bring about a revolutionary change in our knowledge and therewith a radical reconstruction of the picture which human history gives us of the past and will also change the course of that history in the future.

And this will not lead to an estrangement between the nations; but, on the contrary, it will bring about for the first time a real understanding of one another. At the same time, however, it will prevent the Jewish people from intruding themselves among all the other nations as elements of internal disruption, under the mask of honest world-citizens, and thus gaining power over these nations.

We feel convinced that the consequences of this really revolutionizing vision of truth will bring about a radical transformation in German life. For the first time in our history, The German people have found the way to a higher unity than they ever had before; and that is due to the compelling attraction of this inner feeling. Innumerable prejudices have been broken down, many barriers have been overthrown as unreasonable, evil traditions have been wiped out and antiquated symbols shown to be meaningless. From that chaos of disunion which had been caused by tribal, dynastic, philosophical, religious and political strife, the German nation has arisen and has unfurled the banner of a reunion which symbolically announces, not a political triumph, but the triumph of the racial principle. For the past four-and-a-half years German legislation has upheld and enforced this idea. Just as on January 30th 1933, a state of affairs already in existence was legalized by the fact that I was entrusted with the chancellorship, whereby the party whose supremacy in Germany had then become unquestionable was not authorized to take over the government of the Reich and mould the future destiny of Germany; so this German legislation that has been in force for the past four years was only the legal sanction which gave jurisdiction and binding force to an idea that had already been clearly formulated and promulgated by the party.

When the German community, based on the racial blood-bond, became realized in the German State we all felt that this would remain one of the finest moments to be remembered during our lives. Like a blast of springtime it passed over Germany four years ago. The fighting forces of our movement who for many years had defended the banner of the Hooked Cross against the superior forces of the enemy, and had carried it steadily forward for a long fourteen years, now planted it firmly in the soil of the new Reich.

THE NAZI SOCIAL REVOLUTION:
ELIMINATING CLASS DIFFERENCES

Within a few weeks the political debris and the social prejudices which had been accumulating through a thousand years of German history were removed and cleared away.

May we not speak of a revolution when the chaotic conditions brought about by parliamentary-democracy disappear in less than three months and a regime of order and discipline takes their place, and a new energy springs forth from a firmly welded unity and a comprehensive authoritative power such as Germany never before had?

So great was the Revolution that its intellectual foundations are not even yet understood but are superficially criticized by our contemporaries. They talk of democracies and dictatorships; but they fail to grasp the fact that in this country a radical transformation has taken place and has produced results which are democratic in the highest sense of the word, if democracy has any meaning at all.

With infallible certainty we are steering toward an order of things in which a process of selection will become active in the political leadership of the nation, as it exists throughout the whole of life in general. By this process of selection, which will follow the laws of Nature and the dictates of human reason, those among our people who show the greatest natural ability will be appointed to positions in the political leadership of the nation. In making this selection no consideration will be given to birth or ancestry, name or wealth, but only to the question of whether or not the candidate has a natural vocation for those higher positions of leadership. That was a fine principle which the great Corsican enunciated when he said that each one of his soldiers carried a marshal's baton in the haversack. In this country that principle will have its political counterpart. Is there a nobler or more excellent kind of Socialism and is there a truer form of Democracy than this National Socialism which is so organized that through it each one among the millions of German boys is given the possibility of finding his way to the highest office in the nation, should it please Providence to come to his aid.

And that is no theory. In the present National Socialist Germany it is a reality that is considered by us all as a matter of course. I myself, to whom the people have given their trust and who have been called to be their leader, come from the people. All the millions of German workers know that it is not a foreign dilettante or an international revolutionary apostle who is at the head of the Reich, but a German who has come from their own ranks.

And numerous people whose families belong to the peasantry and working classes are now filling prominent positions in this National Socialist State. Some of them actually hold the highest offices in the leadership of the nation, as Cabinet Ministers, Reichsstatthalter and Gauleiter. But National Socialism always bears in mind the interests of the people as a whole and not the interests of one class or another.

The National Socialist Revolution has not aimed at turning a privileged class into a class which will have no rights in the future. Its aim has been to grant equal rights to those social strata that hitherto were denied such rights. We have not ruined millions of citizens by degrading them to the level of enslaved workers. Our aim has been to educate slaves to be German citizens. One thing will certainly be quite clear to every German; and this is that revolutions as acts of terror can only be of short duration. If revolutions are not able to produce something new they will end up by devouring the whole of the national patrimony which existed before them. From the assumption of power as an act of force the beneficial work of peace must be promptly developed. But those who abolish classes for the purpose of putting new classes in their place sow the seeds of new revolutions. The bourgeois citizen who has the ruling power in his hands today will become a proletarian if he is banished to Siberia tomorrow and condemned to enforced labor there. He will then yearn for his day of deliverance, just as did the proletarian of former times, who now thinks that his turn has come to play the despot. Therefore the National Socialist Revolution never aimed at bringing in one class of the German people and turning out another. One the contrary, our objective has been to make it possible for the whole German people to work, not only in the economic but also in the political field, and to guarantee this possibility by organizing the various classes into one national unit.

The National Socialist Movement, however, limits its sphere of internal activity to those individuals who belong to one people and it refuses to allow the members of a foreign race to wield an influence over our political, intellectual, or cultural life. And we refuse to accord to the members of a foreign race any predominant position in our national economic system.

In this folk-community, which is based on the bond of blood, and in the results which National Socialism has obtained by making the idea of this community understood among the public, lies the most profound reason for the marvelous success of our Revolution.

Confronted with this new and vigorous ideal, all idols and relics of the past which had been upheld by dynastic interests, tribal affiliations and even party interests, now began to lose their glamour. That is why the whole party system of former times completely collapsed in a few weeks, without giving rise to the feeling that something had been lost. They were superseded by a better ideal. A new movement took their place. A re-organization of our people into a national unit that includes all those whose labour is productive simply pushed aside the old organizations of employers and employees. The symbolic emblems of the recent past, which was a period of disintegration and disability, were banished, not--as in 1918 or 1919--through a resolution voted by a committee appointed to invent a new symbol for the Reich, as if the choice were to depend on the results of a prize competition. But all these old emblems were now displaced by that flag which symbolized the militant period of the National Socialist Movement and which was borne by us on the day of Germany's resurgence. Since that day it has become the consecrated symbol of his national resurgence on land and sea and in the air.

There could be no more eloquent proof of how profoundly the German people have understood the significance of this change and new development than the manner in which the nation sanctioned our regime at the polls on so many occasions during the years that followed. So, of all those who like to point again and again to the democratic form of government as the institution which is based on the universal will of the people, in contrast to dictatorships, nobody has a better right to speak in the name of the people than I have.

Among the results of this phase of the German Revolution I may enumerate the following: --

(1) Since that time there is only one trustee of supreme power among the German people and that trustee is the whole people itself.

(2) The will of the people finds its expression in the Party, which is the political organization of the people.

(3) Therefore there is only one legislative body.

(4) There is only one executive authority.

Anybody who compares this state of affairs with the condition of Germany before January 1933 will realize what a tremendous transformation is indicated by these few short statements.

But this transformation is only a result that has followed from carrying a fundamental axiom of the National Socialist doctrine into practical effect. This axiom is that the only reasonable meaning and purpose of all human thought and conduct cannot be to create or to maintain structures, organizations or functions made by men, but only to preserve and develop the innate character of the people itself; for Providence has given us this character as the groundwork of all our constructive efforts. Through the successful issue of the National Socialist Movement the people as such was placed above any organization, construction or function, as the sole element that is always there and will permanently abide.

The meaning and purpose which Providence had in mind when it created the different races cannot be investigated by us, human beings, and no theory about it can be laid down. But the meaning and purpose of human organizations and of all human activities can be measured by asking what value they are for the maintenance of the race or people, which is the one existing element that must abide. The people--the race--is the primary thing. Party, State, Army, the national economic structure, Justice etc, all these are only secondary and accidental. They are only the means to the end and the end is the preservation of this nation. These public institutions are right and useful according to the measure in which their energies are directed towards this task. If they are incapable of fulfilling it, then their existence is harmful and they must either be reformed or removed and replaced by something better.

It is absolutely necessary that this principle should be practically recognized; for that is the only way in which men can be saved from becoming the victims of a devitalized set of dogmas in a matter where dogmas are entirely out of place, and from drawing dogmatic conclusions from the consideration of ways and means, when the final purpose itself is the only valid dogma.

LAW: THE IMPORTANCE OF RACE

All of you, gentlemen and members of the German Reichstag, understand the meaning of what I have just said. But on this occasion I am speaking to the whole German people and therefore I should like to bring forward a few examples which show how important these principles were proved to be when they were put into practice.

There are many people for whom this is the only way of explaining why we talk of a Nationalist Socialist Revolution, though no blood was shed and no property wrecked.

For a long time our ideas of law and justice had been developing in a way that led to a state of general confusion. This was partly due to the fact that we adopted ideas which were foreign to our national character and also partly because the German mind itself did not have any clear notion of what public justice meant. This confusion was evidenced more strikingly by the lack of inner clarity as to the function of law and justice.

There are two extreme poles which are characteristic of this mental lack:

(1) The opinion that the law as such is its own justification and hence cannot be made the subject of any critical analysis as to its utility, either in regard to its general principles or its relation to particular problems. According to this notion, the law would remain even though the world should disappear.

(2) The opinion that it is the main function of law to protect and safeguard the life and property of the individual.

Between these two extreme poles the idea of defending the larger interests of the community was introduced very timidly and under the cloak of an appeal to reasons of state.

In contradistinction to all this, the National Socialist Revolution has laid down a definite and unambiguous principle on which the whole system of legislation, jurisprudence and administration of justice must be founded.

It is the task of justice to collaborate in supporting and protecting the people as a whole against those individuals who, because they lack a social conscience, try to shirk the obligations to which all the members of the community are subject, or directly act against the interests of the community itself.

In the new German legal system which will be in force from now onwards the nation is placed above persons and property.

The principle expressed in that brief statement and everything it implies has led to the greatest reform ever introduced in our German legal structure. The first decisive action taken in accordance with the fundamental principle I have spoken of was the setting up not only of one legislator but also of one executive. The second measure is not yet ready but will be announced to the nation within a few weeks.

In the German penal code, which has been drawn up with this wide general perspective in view, German justice will be placed for the first time on a basis which ensures that for all time to come its duty will be to serve in maintaining the German race.

ECONOMICS

Although the chaos which we found before us in the various branches of public life was very great indeed, the state of dissolution into which German economic life had fallen was still greater. And this was the feature of the German collapse that impressed itself most strikingly on the minds of the broad masses of the people. The conditions that then actually existed have still remained in their memories and in the memory of the German people as a whole. As outstanding examples of this catastrophe we found these two phenomena:

(1) More than six million unemployed.

(2) An agricultural population that was manifestly doomed to dissolution.

The area covered by the German agricultural farms that were on the point of being sold up by forced auction was as large as the whole of Thuringia (more than 8,000 square miles).

In the natural course of events the falling off in production on the one side and the decrease in purchasing power, on the other, must necessarily bring about the disruption and annihilation of the great mass of the middle class also. How seriously this side of the German distress was then felt might subsequently be measured by the fact that I had to ask for full owners for the period of four years especially for the purpose of reducing unemployment and putting a stop to the dissolution of the German agricultural population.

I may further state that in 1933 the National Socialists did not interfere with any activities which were being carried out by others and which at the same time promised success. The Party was called to take over the government of the country at a moment when the possibilities of redeeming the situation in any other way had been exhausted and particularly when repeated attempts to overcome the economic crisis had failed.

After four years from that date I now face the German people and you, gentlemen and members of the Reichstag, to give an account of what has been accomplished. On this occasion I do not think you will withhold your sanction from what the National Socialist Government has done and you will agree that I have fulfilled the promises I made four years ago.

It was not an easy undertaking. I am not giving away any secrets when I tell you that at that time the so-called economic experts were convinced that the economic crisis could not be overcome. In the face of this staggering situation which, as I have said, appeared hopeless to the minds of the experts, I still believed in the possibility of a German revival and particularly in the possibility of an economic recovery. My belief was grounded on two considerations:

(1) I have always had sympathy for those excited people who invariably talk of the collapse of the nation whenever they find themselves confronted with a difficult situation. What do they mean by a collapse? The German people were already in existence before they made any definite appearance in history as it is known to us. Now, leaving out entirely what their pre-historic experiences may have been, it is certain that during the past two thousand years of history, through which that portion of mankind which we call the German People has passed, unspeakable miseries and catastrophes must have befallen them more than once. Famines, wars and pestilences have overwhelmed our people and wreaked terrible havoc among them. It must give rise to unlimited faith in the vital resources of a nation when we recall the fact that only a few centuries ago our German people, with a population of more than eighteen millions, were reduced by the Thirty Years War to less than four millions. Let us also remember that this once flourishing land was pillaged, dismembered and devastated, that its cities were burned down, its hamlets and villages laid waste, that its fields were left uncultivated and barren. Some ten years afterwards our people began again to increase in number. The cities were rebuilt and began to be filled with a new life. The fields were ploughed once more. Songs were heard along the countryside, in concord with the rhythm of that work which brought new life and livelihood to the people.

Let us look back over the development, or at least that part of it known to us, through which our people have passed since those dim historic ages down to the present time. We shall then recognize how puny is all the fuss that these weakling footlers make who immediately begin to talk about the collapse of the economic structure--and hence of human existence--the first moment a piece of printed paper loses its face value somewhere in the world. Germany and the German people have mastered many a grave catastrophe. Of course, we must admit that the right men were always needed to formulate the necessary measures and enforce them without paying any attention to those negative persons who always think that they know more than others. A bevy of parliamentarian weaklings are certainly not the kind of men to lead a nation out of the slough of distress and despair. I firmly believed and was solemnly convinced that the economic catastrophe would be mastered in Germany as soon as the people could be got to believe in their own immortality as a people and as soon as they realized that the aim and purpose of all economic effort is to save and maintain the life of the nation.

(2) I was not an economist, which means that I have never been a theorist during my whole life.

But unfortunately I have observed that the worst theorists are always busy in those quarters where theory has no place at all and where practical life counts for everything. It goes without saying that in the economic sphere and with the passing of time experience has given rise to the employment of certain definite principles and also definite methods of work which have been proved to be productive of good results. But all methods and principles are subject to the time element. To make hard-and-fast dogmas out of practical methods would deprive the human faculties and working power of that elasticity which alone enables them to face changing demands by changing the means of meeting them accordingly and thus mastering them. There were many persons among us who busied themselves, with that perseverance which is characteristic of the Germans, in an effort to formulate dogmas from economic methods and then raise that dogmatic system to a branch of our university curriculum, under the title of national economy. According to the pronouncements issued by these national economists, Germany was irrevocably lost. It is a characteristic of all dogmatists that they vigorously reject any new dogma. In other words, they criticise any new piece of knowledge that may be put forward and reject it as mere theory. For the last eighteen [sic] years we have been witnessing a rare spectacle. Our economic dogmatists have been proved wrong in almost every branch of practical life and yet they repudiate those who have actually overcome the economic crisis, as propagators of false theories and damn them accordingly.

You all know the story of the doctor who told a patient that he could live only for another six months. Ten years afterwards the patient met the physician; but the only surprise which the latter expressed at the recovery of the patient was to state that the treatment which the second doctor gave the patient was entirely wrong.

The German economic policy which National Socialism introduced in 1933 is based on some fundamental considerations. In the relations between economics and the people, the people alone is the only unchangeable element. Economic activity in itself is no dogma and never can be such.

There is no economic theory or opinion which can claim to be considered as sacrosanct. The will to place the economic system at the service of the people, and capital at the service of economics, is the only thing that is of decisive importance here.

We know that National Socialism vigorously combats the opinion which holds that the economic structure exists for the benefit of capital and that the people are to be looked upon as subject to the economic system. We were therefore determined from the very beginning to exterminate the false notion that the economic system could exist and operate entirely freely and entirely outside of any control or supervision on the part of the State. Today there can no longer be such a thing as an independent economic system. That is to say, the economic system can no longer be left to itself exclusively. And this is so, not only because it is unallowable from the political point of view but also because, in the purely economic sphere itself, the consequences would be disastrous.

It is out of the question that millions of individuals should be allowed to work just as they like and merely to meet their own needs; but it is just as impossible to allow the entire system of economics to function according to the notions held exclusively in economic circles and thus made to serve egotistic interests. Then there is the further consideration that these economic circles are not in a position to bear the responsibility for their own failures. In its modern phase of the development, the economic system concentrates enormous masses of workers in certain special branches and in definite local areas. New inventions or a slump in the market may destroy whole branches of industry at one blow.

The industrialist may close his factory gates. He may even try to find a new field for his personal activities. In most cases he will not be ruined so easily. Moreover, the industrialists who have to suffer in such contingencies are only a small number if individuals. But on the other side there are hundreds of thousands of workers, with their wives and children. Who is to defend their interests and care for them? The whole community of the people? Indeed, it is its duty to do so. Therefore the whole community cannot be made to bear the burden of economic disasters without according it the right of influencing and controlling economic life and thus avoiding catastrophes.

In the years 1932/33, when the German economic system seemed definitely ruined, I recognized even more clearly than ever before that the salvation of our people was not a financial problem. It was exclusively a problem of how industrial labour could best be employed on the one side and, on the other, how our agricultural resources could be utilized.

This is first and foremost a problem of organization. Phrases, such as the freedom of the economic system, for example, are no help. What we have to do is use all available means at hand to make production possible and open up fields of activity for our working energies. If this can be successfully done by the economic leaders themselves, that is to say by the industrialists, then we are content.

But if they fail the folk-community, which in this case means the State, is obliged to step in for the purpose of seeing that the working energies of the nation are employed in such a way that what they produce will be of use to the nation, and the State will have to devise the necessary measures to assure this. In this respect the State may do everything; but one thing it cannot do---and this was the actual state of affairs we had to face---is to allow 12.000 million working hours to be lost year after year.

For the folk-community does not exist on the fictitious value of money but on the results of productive labor, which is what gives money its value.

This production, and not a bank or gold reserve, is the first cover for a currency. And if I increase production I increase the real income of my fellow-citizens. And if I reduce production I reduce that income, no matter what wages are paid out.

Members of the Reichstag: Within the past four years we have increased German production to an extraordinary degree in all branches. And the whole German nation benefits by this increase. For it there is a demand today for very many million tons of coal more than formerly, this is not for the purpose of superheating the houses of a few millionaires to a couple of thousand degrees, but rather because millions of our German countrymen are thus enabled to purchase more coal for themselves with their increased income.

By giving employment to millions of German workers who had hitherto been idle, the National Socialist Revolution has brought about such a gigantic increase in German production. That rise in our total national income guarantees the market value of the goods produced. And only in such cases where we could not increase this production, owing to certain conditions that were beyond our control, there have been shortages from time to time; but these bear no proportion whatsoever to the general success of the National Socialist struggle.

The four-year plan is the most striking manifestation of the systematic way in which our economic life is being conducted. In particular this plan will provide permanent employment in the internal circulation of our economic life for those masses of German labour that are now being released from the armament industry.

One sign of the gigantic economic development which has taken place is that in many industries today it is quite difficult to find sufficient skilled workmen. I am thankful that this is so; because it will help to place the importance of the worker as a man and as a working force in its proper light; and also because in doing so--though there are other motives also--we have a chance of making the activities of the party and its unions better understood and thus securing stronger and more willing support.

Seeing that we insist on the national importance of the function which our economic system fulfils, it naturally follows that the former disunion between employer and employee can no longer exist. But the new State will not and does not wish to assume the role of entrepreneur. It will regulate the working strength of the nation only in so far as such regulation is necessary for the common good. And it will supervise conditions and methods of working only in so far as this is in the interests of all those engaged in work. Under no circumstances will the State attempt to bureaucratize economic life. The economic effects that follow from every real and practical initiative benefit the people as a whole. At the present moment an inventor or an economic organizer is of inestimable value to the folk community. For the future the first task of National Socialist education will be to make clear to all our fellow-citizens how their reciprocal worth must be appreciated. We must point out to the one side how there can be no substitute for the German worker and we must teach the German worker how indispensable are the inventor and the genuine business leader. It is quite clear that under the aegis of such an outlook on economic life, strikes and lock-outs can no longer be tolerated. The National Socialists State repudiates the right of economic coercion. Above all contracting parties stand the economic interests of the nation, which are the interests of the people.

The practical results of this economic policy of ours are already known to you. Throughout the whole nation there is a tremendous urge toward productive activity. Enormous works are arising everywhere for the expansion of industry and traffic. While in other countries strikes or lock-outs shatter the stability of national production, our millions of productive workers obey the highest of all laws that we have in this world, namely the law of common sense.

Within these four years which have passed we have succeeded in bringing about the economic redemption of our people; but we realize at the same time that the results of this economic work in town and city must be safeguarded. The first danger that threatens us here is in the sphere of cultural creativeness. And that danger comes from those who are themselves active in that sphere. For our fellow-countrymen who are engaged in artistic and cultural productivity today, or are acting as custodians and trustees of cultural works, have not the necessary intuitive faculties to value and appreciate the ideal products of human genius in this sphere.

EDUCATION AND THE MEDIA:
A TOTAL PROGRAM OF PROPAGANDA

The National Socialist Movement has laid down the directive lines along which the State must conduct the education of the people. This education does not begin at a certain year and end at another. The development of the human being makes it necessary to take the child from the control of that small cell of social life which is the family and entrust his further training to the community itself.

The National Socialist Revolution has clearly outlined the duties which this social education must fulfill and, above all, it has made this education independent of the question of age. In other words, education of the individual can never end. Therefore it is the duty of the folk-community to see that this education and higher training must always be along lines that help the community to fulfill its own task, which is the maintenance of the race and nation.

For that reason we must insist that all organs of education which may be useful for the instruction and training of the people have to fulfill their duty towards the community. Such organs or organizations are: Education of the Youth, Young Peoples Organization, Hitler Youth, Labor Front, Party and Army--all these are institutions for the education and higher training of our people. The book press and the newspaper press, lectures and art, the theatre and the cinema, they are all organs of popular education.

What the National Socialist Revolution has accomplished in this sphere is astounding. Think only of the following:

The whole body of our German education, including the press, the theatre, the cinema and literature, is being controlled and shaped today by men and women of our own race. Some time ago one often heard it said that if Jewry were expelled from these institutions they would collapse or become deserted. And now what has happened? In all those branches cultural and artistic activities are flourishing. Our films are better than ever before and our theatrical productions today in our leading theatres stand supreme and alone in comparison with the rest of the world. Our press has become a powerful instrument to help our people in bringing their innate faculties to self-expression and assertion, and by so doing it strengthens the nation. German science is active and is producing results which will one day bear testimony to the creative and constructive will of this epoch.

It is very remarkable how the German people have become immune from those destructive tendencies under which another world is suffering. Many of our organizations which were not understood at all a few years ago are now accepted as a matter of course: the Young people, the Hitler Youth, BDM., Womanhood, Labor Service, SA, SS, NSKK, but above all the Labor Front in its magnificent departments--they are all building stones in that proud edifice which we call The Third Reich.

FOREIGN POLICY

This consolidation of the internal life of our German nation also establishes a united front toward the outside world. I believe that it is here that the National Socialist Revival has produced the most marvelous results.

Four years ago, when I was entrusted with the Chancellorship and therewith the leadership of the nation, I took upon myself the bitter duty of restoring the honor of a nation which for fifteen years had been forced to live as a pariah among the other nations of the world. The internal order which we created among the German people offered the conditions necessary to reorganize the army and also made it possible for me to throw off those shackles which we felt to be the deepest disgrace ever branded on a people. Today I shall bring this whole matter to a close by making the following few declarations:

First: The restoration of Germany's equality of rights was an event that concerned Germany alone. It was not the occasion of taking anything from anybody or causing any suffering to anybody.

Second: I now state here that, in accordance with the restoration of equality of rights, I shall divest the German Railways and the Reichsbank of the forms under which they have hitherto functioned and shall place them absolutely under the sovereign control of the Government of the German Reich.

Third: I hereby declare that the section of the Versailles Treaty which deprived our nation of the rights that it shared on an equal footing with other nations and degraded it to the level of an inferior people found its natural liquidation in virtue of the restoration of equality of status.

Fourth: Above all, I solemnly withdraw the German signature from that declaration which was extracted under duress from a weak government, acting against its better judgment, namely the declaration that Germany was responsible for the war.

Members of the German Reichstag: The vindication of the honor of the German people, which was expressed outwardly in the restoration of universal military service, the creation of a new air force, the reconstruction of a German navy and the reoccupation of the Rhineland by our troops, was the boldest task that I ever had to face and the most difficult to accomplish.

Today I must humbly thank Providence, whose grace has enabled me, who was once an unknown soldier in the War, to bring to a successful issue the struggle for the restoration of our honor and rights as a nation.

I regret to say that it was not possible to carry through all the necessary measures by way of negotiation. But at the same time it must be remembered that the honor of a people cannot be bartered away; it can only be taken away. And if it cannot be bartered away it cannot be restored through barter; it must simply be taken back.

That I carried out the measures which were necessary for this purpose without consulting our former enemies in each case, and even without informing them, was due to my conviction that the way in which I chose to act would make it easier for the other side to accept our decisions, for they would have had to accept them in any case. I should like to add here that, at all this has now been accomplished, the so-called period of surprises has come to an end.

As a State which is now on an equal juridical footing with all the other States, Germany is more conscious than ever that she has a European task before her, which is to collaborate loyally in getting rid of those problems that are the cause of anxiety to ourselves and also to the other nations.

RESPONSE TO ANTHONY EDEN, BRITISH FOREIGN SECRETARY

If I may state my views on those general questions that are of actual importance today, the most effective way of doing so will be to refer to the statements that were recently made by Mr. Eden in the British House of Commons. For those statements also imply the essentials of what must be said regarding Germany's relations with France. At this point I should like to express my sincere thanks for the opportunity which has been given me by the outspoken and noteworthy declarations made by the British Foreign Secretary.

I think I have read those statements carefully and have understood them correctly. Of course, I do not want to get lost among the details, and so I should like to single out the leading points in Mr. Eden's speech, so as to clarify or answer them from my side.

In doing this, I shall first try to correct what seems to me to be a most regrettable error. This error lay in assuming that somehow or other Germany wishes to isolate herself and to allow the events which happen in the rest of the world to pass by without participating in them, or that she does not wish to take any account whatsoever of the general necessities of the time.

What are the grounds for the assumption that Germany wants to pursue a policy of isolation? If this assumption in regard to German isolation be a conclusion which must necessarily be drawn from what are presumed to be Germany's intentions, then let me say the following: --

I do not believe at all that a State could ever mean to declare itself intentionally disinterested in the political events taking place throughout the rest of the world, especially when this world is so small as Europe is at the present day. I think that if a State should really find it necessary to take refuge in such an attitude, then the most than [sic] can be said is that it has been forced to do so under the coercion of a foreign will imposed upon it. Now, in the first place, I should like to assure Mr. Eden that we Germans do not in the least want to be isolated and that we do not at all feel ourselves isolated.

During recent years Germany has entered into quite a number of political agreements with other States. She has resumed former agreements and improved them. And I may say that she has established close friendly relations with a number of States. Our relations with most of the European States are normal from our standpoint and we are on terms of close friendship with quite a number. Among all those diplomatic connections I would give a special place in the foreground to those excellent relations which we have with those States that were liberated from sufferings similar to those we had to endure and have consequently arrived at similar decisions.

Through a number of treaties which we have made, we have relieved many strained relations and thereby made a substantial contribution towards an improvement in European conditions. I need remind you only of our agreement with Poland, which has turned out advantageous for both countries, our agreement with Austria and the excellent and close relations which we have established with Italy. Further, I may refer to our friendly relations with Hungary, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, Greece, Portugal, Spain etc. Finally, I may mention our cordial relations with a whole series of nations outside of Europe.

The agreement which Germany has made with Japan for combating the movement directed by the Comintern is a vital proof of how little the German Government thinks of isolating itself and how little we feel ourselves actually isolated. Furthermore, I have on several occasions [sic] declared that it is our wish and hope to arrive at good cordial relations with all our neighbors.

Germany has steadily given its assurance, and I solemnly repeat this assurance here, that between ourselves and France, for example, there are no grounds for quarrel that are humanly thinkable. Furthermore, the German Government has assured Belgium and Holland that it is ready to recognize and guarantee these States as neutral regions in perpetuity.

In view of the declarations which we have made in the past and in view of the existing state of affairs, I cannot quite clearly see why Germany should consider herself isolated or why we should pursue a policy of isolation. From the economic standpoint there are no grounds for asserting that Germany is withdrawing from international cooperation. The contrary is the truth. On looking over the speeches which several statesmen have made within the last few months, I find that they might easily give rise to the impression that the whole world is waiting to shower economic favors on Germany but that we, who are represented as obstinately clinging to a policy of isolation, do not wish to partake of those favors. To place this whole matter in its true light, I should like to call attention to the following bare facts:

(1) For many years the German people have been trying to make better commercial treaties with their neighbors and thus to bring about a more active exchange of goods. And these efforts have not been in vain; for, as a matter of fact, German foreign trade has increased since 1932, both in volume and in value. This is the clearest refutation of the assertion that Germany is pursuing a policy of economic isolation.

(2) I do not believe however that there can be a lasting economic collaboration among the nations on any other basis than that of a mutual exchange of commercial wares and industrial products. Credit manipulation may perhaps have a temporary effect, but in the long run economic international relations will be decisively influenced by the volume of mutual exchange of goods. And here the state of affairs at the present moment is not such that the outside world would be able to place huge orders with us or offer prospects of an increase in the exchange of goods even if we were to fulfill the most extraordinary conditions that they might lay down. Matters should not be made more complicated than they already are. If international commerce be sick, that is not due to Germany's refusal to assist it, but is due to the fact that disorder has invaded the industrial life of the various nations and has influenced their relations with one another. But Germany cannot be blamed for these two things, and especially not National Socialist Germany. When we assumed power the world economic crisis was worse than it is today.

I fear however that I must interpret Mr. Eden's words as meaning that in the carrying out of the four years plan he sees an element of refusal on Germany's side to participate in international collaboration. Therefore I wish it to be clearly understood that our decision to carry out this plan is unalterable. The reasons which led to that decision were inexorable. And since then I have not been able to discover anything whatsoever that might induce us to discontinue the four years plan.

I shall take only one practical example: In carrying out the four years plan our synthetic production of rubber and petrol will necessitate an annual increase in our consumption of coal by a margin of something between 20 and 30 million tons. This means that an extra quota of thousands of coal miners are assured of employment for the rest of their active lives. I must really take the liberty of asking this question: Supposing we abandon [sic] the German four years plan, then what statesman can guarantee me some economic equivalent or other, outside of the Reich, for these thirty million tons of coal?

I want bread and work for my people. And certainly I do not wish to have it through the operation of credit guarantees, but through solid and permanent labor, the products of which I can either exchange for foreign goods or for domestic goods in our internal commercial circulation.

If by some manipulation or other Germany were to throw these 20 or 30 million tons of coal annually on the international market for the future, the result would be that the coal exports of other countries would have to decrease. I do not know if a British statesman, for example, could face such a contingency without realizing how serious it would be for his own nation. And yet that is the state of affairs.

Germany has an enormous number of men who not only want to work but also to eat. And the standard of living among our people is high. I cannot build the future of the German nation on the assurances of a foreign statesman or on any international help, but only on the real basis of a steady production, for which I must find a market at home or abroad. Perhaps my skepticism in these matters leads me to differ from the British Foreign Secretary in regard to the optimistic tone of his statements.

I mean here that if Europe does not awaken to the danger of the Bolshevik infection, then I fear that international commerce will not increase but decrease, despite all the good intentions of individual statesmen. For this commerce is based not only on the undisturbed and guaranteed stability of production in one individual nation but also on the production of all the nations together. One of the first things which is clear in this matter is that every Bolshevik disturbance must necessarily lead to a more or less permanent destruction of orderly production. Therefore my opinion about the future of Europe is, I am sorry to say, not so optimistic as Mr. Eden's. I am the responsible leader of the German people and must safeguard its interests in this world as well as I can. And therefore I am bound to judge things objectively as I see them.

I should not be acquitted before the bar of our history if I neglected something--no matter on what grounds--which is necessary to maintain the existence of this people. I am pleased, and we are all pleased, at every increase that takes place in our foreign trade. But in view of the obscure political situation I shall not neglect anything that is necessary to guarantee the existence of the German people, although other nations may become the victims of the Bolshevik infection. And I must also repudiate the suggestion that this view is the outcome of mere fancy. For the following is certainly true: The British Foreign Secretary opens out theoretical prospects of existence to us, whereas in reality what is happening is totally different. The revolutionizing of Spain, for instance, has driven out 15.000 Germans from that country and has seriously injured our trade. Should this revolutionizing of Spain spread to other European countries then these damages would not be lessened but increased.

I also am a responsible statesman and I must take such possibilities into account. Therefore it is my unalterable determination so to organize German labor that it will guarantee the maintenance of my people. Mr. Eden may rest assured that we shall utilize every possibility offered us of strengthening our economic relations with other nations, but also that we shall avail ourselves of every possibility to improve and enrich the circulation of our own internal trade.

I must ask also whether the grounds for assuming that Germany is pursuing a policy of isolation are to be found in the fact that we have left he League of Nations. If such be the grounds, then I would point out that the Geneva League has never been a real League of peoples. A number of great nations do not belong to it or have left it. And nobody has on this account asserted that they were following a policy of isolation.

I think therefore that on this point Mr. Eden misunderstands our intentions and views. For nothing is farther from our wishes than to break off or weaken our political or economic relations with other nations. The contrary is the truth. I have already tried to contribute towards bringing about a good understanding in Europe and I have often given, especially to the British people and their Government, assurance of how ardently we wish for a sincere and cordial cooperation with them. I admit that on one point there is a wide difference between the views of the British Foreign Secretary and our views; and here it seems to me that this is a gap which cannot be filled up.

Mr. Eden declares that under no circumstances does the British Government wish to see Europe torn into two halves. Unfortunately, this desire for unity has not hitherto been declared or listened to. And now the desire is an illusion. For the fact is that the division into two halves, not only of Europe but also of the whole world, is an accomplished fact.

It is to be regretted that the British Government did not adopt its present attitude at an earlier date, that under all circumstances a division of Europe must be avoided; for then the Treaty of Versailles would not have been entered into. This Treaty brought in the first division of Europe, namely a division of the nations into victors on the one side and vanquished on the other, the latter nations being outlawed. Through this division of Europe nobody suffered more than the German people. That this division was wiped out, so far as concerns Germany, is essentially due to the National Socialist Revolution and this brings some credit to myself.

THE COMMUNIST THREAT

The second division has been brought about by the proclamation of the Bolshevik doctrine, an integral feature of which is that they do not confine it to one nation but try to impose it on all the nations.

Here it is not a question of a special form of national life in Russia but of the Bolshevik demand for a world revolution. If Mr. Eden does not look at Bolshevism as we look at it, that may have something to do with the position of Great Britain and also with some happenings that are unknown to us. But I believe that nobody will question the sincerity of our opinions on this matter, for they are not based merely on abstract theory. For Mr. Eden Bolshevism is perhaps a thing which has its seat in Moscow, but for us in Germany this Bolshevism is a pestilence against which we have had to struggle at the cost of much bloodshed. It is a pestilence which tried to turn our country into the same kind of desert as is now the case in Spain; for the habit of murdering hostages began here, in the form in which we now see it in Spain. National Socialism did not try to come to grips with Bolshevism in Russia, but the Jewish international Bolsheviks in Moscow have tried to introduce their system into Germany and are still trying to do so. Against this attempt we have waged a bitter struggle, not only in defense of our own civilization but in defense of European civilization as a whole.

In January and February of the year 1933, when the last decisive struggle against this barbarism was being fought out in Germany, had Germany been defeated in that struggle and had the Bolshevik field of destruction and death extended over Central Europe, then perhaps a different opinion would have arisen on the banks of the Thames as to the nature of this terrible menace to humanity. For since it is said that England must be defended on the frontier of the Rhine she would then have found herself in close contact with that harmless democratic world of Moscow, whose innocence they are always trying to impress upon us. Here I should like to state the following once again: --

The teaching of Bolshevism is that there must be a world revolution, which would mean world-destruction. If such a doctrine were accepted and given equal rights with other teachings in Europe, this would mean that Europe would be delivered over to it. If other nations want to be on good terms with this peril, that does not affect Germany's position. As far as Germany itself is concerned, let there be no doubts on the following points: --

(1) We look on Bolshevism as a world peril for which there must be no toleration.

(2) We use every means in our power to keep this peril away from our people.

(3) And we are trying to make the German people immune to this peril as far as possible.

It is in accordance with this attitude of ours that we should avoid close contact with the carriers of these poisonous bacilli. And that is also the reason why we do not want to have any closer relations with them beyond the necessary political and commercial relations; for if we went beyond these we might thereby run the risk of closing the eyes of our people to the danger itself.

I consider Bolshevism the most malignant poison that can be given to a people. And therefore I do not want my own people to come into contact with this teaching. As a citizen of this nation I myself shall not do what I should have to condemn my fellow-citizens for doing. I demand from every German workman that he shall not have any relations with these international mischief-makers and he shall never see me clinking glasses or rubbing shoulders with them. Moreover, any further treaty connections with the present Bolshevik Russia would be completely worthless for us. It is out of the question to think that National Socialist Germany should ever be bound to protect Bolshevism or that we, on our side, should ever agree to accept the assistance of a Bolshevik State. For I fear that the moment any nation should agree to accept such assistance, it would thereby seal its own doom.

I must also say here that I do not accept the opinion which holds that in the moment of peril the League of nations could come to the rescue of the member States and hold them up by the arms, as it were. No, I don't believe that. Mr. Eden stated in his last address that deeds and not speeches are what matters. On that point I should like to call attention to the fact that up to now the outstanding feature of the League of Nations has been talk rather than action.

There was one exception and in that case it would probably have been better to have been content with talk. In this one case, as might have been foreseen, action was fruitless.

Hence, just as I have been forced by economic circumstances to depend on our own resources principally for the maintenance of my people, so also I have been forced in the political sphere. And we ourselves are not to blame for that.

Three times I have made concrete offers for armament restriction or at least armament limitation. These offers were rejected. In this connection I may recall the fact that the greatest offer which I then made was that Germany and France together should reduce their standing armies to 300,000 men; that Germany, Great Britain and France, should bring down their air force to parity and that Germany and Great Britain should conclude a naval agreement. Only the last offer was accepted and it was the only contribution in the world to a real limitation of armaments.

The other German proposals were either flatly refused or were answered by the conclusion of those alliances which gave Central Europe to Soviet Russia as the field of play for its gigantic forces. Mr. Eden speaks of German armaments and expects a limitation of these armaments. We ourselves proposed this limitation long ago. But it had no effect because, instead of accepting our proposal, treaties were made whereby the greatest military power in the world was, according to the terms of the treaties and in fact, introduced into Central Europe. In speaking of armaments it would be well to mention in the first instance the armaments possessed by that Power which sets the standard for the armaments of all others.

Mr. Eden believes that in the future all States should possess only the armament which is necessary for their defense. I do not know whether and how far Mr. Eden has sounded Moscow on the question of carrying that excellent idea into effect, and I do not know what assurances they have given from that quarter. I think however that I ought to put forward one point in this connection. It is quite clear that the measure of a country's defensive armament should be in proportion to the dangers which threaten that country. Each nation has the right to judge this for itself, and it alone has the right. If therefore Great Britain today decides for herself on the extent of her armaments everybody in Germany will understand her action; for we can only think of London alone as being competent to decide on what is necessary for the protection of the British Empire. On the other hand I should like to insist that the estimate of our protective needs, and thus of the armament that is necessary for the defense of our people, is within our own competency and can be decided only in Berlin.

I believe that the general recognition of these principles will not render conditions more difficult but will help to release tension. Anyhow Germany is pleased at having found friends in Italy and Japan who hold the same views as ourselves and we should be still more pleased if these convictions were widespread in Europe. Therefore nobody welcomed more cordially than we did the manifest lessening of tension in the Mediterranean, brought about by the Anglo-Italian agreement. We believe that this will first of all lead to an understanding which may put a stop to, or at least limit, the catastrophe from which poor Spain is suffering. Germany has no interests in that country except the care of those commercial relations which Mr. Eden himself declares to be so important and useful. An attempt has been made to connect Germany's sympathy for Nationalist Spain with some sort of colonial claims against countries which have taken no colonies from her. Our sympathies with General Franco and his Government are in the first place of a general nature and, secondly, they arise from a hope that the consolidation of a real National Spain may lead to a strengthening of economic possibilities in Europe. We are ready to do everything which in any way may contribute towards the restoration of order in Spain.

But I think that the following considerations should not be left out of account:

During the last hundred years a number of new nations have been created in Europe which formerly, because of their disunion and weakness, were of only small economic importance and of no political importance at all. Through the establishment of these new States new tensions have naturally arisen. True statesmanship however must face realities and not shirk them. The Italian nation and the new Italian State are realities. The German nation and the German Reich are likewise realities. And for my my own fellow citizens I should like to state that the Polish nation and the Polish State have also become realities. Also in the Balkans nations have reawakened and have built their own States. The people who belong to those States want to live and they will live. The unreasonable division of the world into nations that have and nations that have not will not remove or solve that problem, no more than the internal social problems of the nations can be simply solved through more or less clever phrases.

For thousands of years the nations asserted their vital claims by the use of power. If in our time some other institution is to take the place of this power for the purpose or regulating relations between the peoples, then it must take account of natural vital claims and decide accordingly. It it is the task of the League of Nations only to guarantee the existing state of the world and to safeguard it for all time, then we might just as well entrust it with the task of regulating the ebb and flow of the tides or directing the Gulf Stream into a definite course for the future.

But the League of Nations will not be able to do the one or the other. The continuance of its existence will in the long run depend on the extent to which it realize that the necessary reforms which concern international relations must be carefully considered and put into practice.

GERMAN COLONIAL EMPIRE

The German people once built up a colonial Empire without robbing anyone and without violating any treaty. And they did so without any war. That colonial Empire was taken away from us. And the grounds on which it was sought to excuse this act are not tenable.

First: It was said that the natives did not want to belong to Germany. Who asked them if they wished to belong to some other Power? And when were these natives ever asked if they had been contented with the Power that formerly ruled them?

Second: It is stated that the colonies were not administered properly by the Germans.

Now, Germany had these colonies only for a few decades. Great sacrifices were made in building them up and they were in a process of development which would would have led to quite different results than in 1914. But anyhow the colonies had been so developed by us that other people considered it worth while to engage in a sanguinary struggle for the purpose of taking them from us.

Third: It is said that they are of no real value.

If that is the case then they can be of no value to other States also. And so it is difficult to see why they keep them.

Moreover, Germany has never demanded colonies for military purposes, but exclusively for economic purposes. It is obvious that in times of general prosperity the value of certain territories may decrease, but it is just as evident that in times of distress such value increases. Today Germany lives in a time of difficult struggle for foodstuffs and raw materials. Sufficient imports are conceivable only if there be a continued and lasting increase in our exports. Therefore, as a matter of course, our demand for colonies for our densely populated country will be put forward again and again.

SUGGESTIONS FOR THE FUTURE:
FOREIGN POLICY PLANS

In concluding my remarks on this subject I should like to note a few points concerning the possible ways which may lead to a general pacification of Europe, which might also be extended outside Europe.

(1) It is in the interests of all nations that the individual countries shall possess internally stable and orderly political and economic conditions. They are the most important conditions for lasting and solid economic and political relations between the peoples.

(2) The vital interests of the different peoples must be frankly recognized. Mutual respect for these vital interests alone can lead to the appeasement of the essential needs of the nations.

(3) The League of Nations, to be effective, must be reformed, and must become an organ of the evolutionary concept, and must not remain an organ of inactivity.

(4) The relations of the people towards one another can only be regulated and solved on a basis of mutual respect and absolute equality.

(5) It is impossible to make one nation or another responsible for armaments or for limitation of armaments, but it is necessary to see this problem as it really is.

(6) It is impossible to maintain peace among the nations so long as an international irresponsible clique can continue their agitation unchecked.

A few weeks ago we saw how an organized band of international war mongers spread a mass of lies which almost succeeded in raising mistrust between two nations and might easily have led to worse consequences than actually followed.

I greatly regret that the British Foreign Secretary did not categorically state that there was not one word of truth in those calumnies about Morocco which had been spread by these international war mongers. Thanks to the loyalty of a foreign diplomat and his Government, it was possible to clear up this extraordinary situation immediately. Supposing another case arose in which it turned out impossible to establish the truth so readily, what then would happen?

(7) It has been proved that European problems can be solved properly only within certain limits. Germany is hoping to have close and friendly relations with Italy. May we succeed in paving the way for such relations with other European countries. The German Reich will watch over its security and honor with its strong army. On the other hand, convinced that there can be no greater treasure for Europe than peace, it will always be a reasonable supporter of those European ideals of peace and will be always conscious of its responsibilities.

(8) It will be profitable to European peace as a whole if mutual consideration be always shown for the justified feeling of national honor among those nationalities who are forced to live as a minority within other nations.

This would lead to a decisive lessening of tension between the nations who are forced to live side by side, and whose State frontiers are not identical with the ethnical frontiers.

In concluding these remarks I should like to deal with the document which the British Government addressed to the German Government on the occasion of the occupation of the Rhineland.

I should like first to state that we believe and are convinced that the British Government at that time did everything to avoid an increase of tension in the European crisis, and that the document in question owes its origin entirely to the desire to make a contribution towards disentangling the situation of those days.

Nevertheless, it was not possible for the German Government, for reasons which the Government of Great Britain will appreciate, to reply to those questions.

We preferred to settle some of those questions in the most natural way by the practical building up of our relations with our neighbors; and I should like to state that, complete German sovereignty and equality having now been restored, Germany will never sign a treaty which is in any way incompatible with her honor; with the honor of the nation and of the Government which represents it; or which otherwise is incompatible with Germany's vital interests and therefore in the long run cannot be kept.

I believe that this statement will be understood by all. Moreover, with all my heart I hope that the intelligence and goodwill of responsible European Governments will succeed, despite all opposition, in preserving peace for Europe. Peace is our dearest treasure.

Whatever contributions Germany can make toward preserving it, these she will make.

CONCLUSION: WHAT LIES AHEAD?

Before concluding my address today I should like to give a short sketch of the tasks that lie ahead of us.

FOUR-YEAR PLAN

In the carrying out of the Four Years Plan lies our first task. It will call for gigantic efforts but eventually it will turn out a great blessing for our people. Its purpose is to strengthen our national economic system in all its branches. The execution of it is guaranteed. All those great works which have been started apart from this plan will be continued. Their purpose is to promote the health of the nation and make life more pleasant. Building extensions will be systematically carried out in some of our large cities, as an externalization of the spirit that actuates this great epoch of our national revival. In the forefront of these plans stands that of remodeling and enlarging Berlin and thus making it the real and true metropolis of the German Reich. Therefore I have today appointed, just as I did for the great scheme of national road construction, a general architectural supervisor for Berlin, who is responsible for the reconstruction and extension of the metropolis. Out of the chaos which resulted from the former building schemes in Berlin he will bring order. And that order will be based on such spacious plans as will be worthy of the National Socialist Movement and also of the German metropolis. We have allotted a period of twenty years for the carrying out of this plan.

ART AND CITY PLANNING

May the Almighty God grant us a time of peace in which to bring this gigantic work to completion. Parallel therewith, the Capital of the Movement (Munich), the Party Metropolis (Nuremberg), and the Free City of Hamburg will be remodeled and extended on large lines.

But this work will only be the counterpart of a general cultural development which we wish to see taking place in Germany, as the crowning achievement to the restoration of our internal and external freedom.

NEW CONSTITUTION

And, finally, it will be one of our future tasks to give the German people a Constitution which will be in harmony with the real life of our people, as that life has developed politically. This Constitution will place its seal on this life for all time to come and will be an imperishable and fundamental law for all Germans.

As I look back on the great work that has been done during the past four years you will understand quite well that my first feeling is simply one of thankfulness to our Almighty God for having allowed me to bring this work to success. He has blessed our labors and has enabled our people to come through all the obstacles which encompassed them on their way.

I have had three extraordinary friends in my life. In my youth it was Poverty, which was my companion for many years. When the Great War came to a close it was the profound anguish that I felt over the downfall of our people. This anguish seized me and determined the path I had to follow. Since January 30th four years ago I have made the acquaintance of the third friend--anxiety for the people and the Reich, which have been entrusted to my guidance. From that time this anxiety has never left my side and will probably remain a faithful companion until the end of my days. But how could a man bear the burden of this anxiety were it not for the faith he has in his mission and which enables him to trust that He who is above us all sanctions my work. Destiny has often decreed that men who have a special mission to fulfill must be lonely and deserted. But here I wish to return thanks to Providence for having given me a group of faithful comrades who linked their lives with mine and have ever since fought at my side for the resurrection of our people. It is a great happiness for me that I did not have to walk among the German people as a man alone, but that at my side there was always a group of men whose names will endure in the history of Germany.

At this point I wish to thank my old fighting comrades who have stood by my side throughout all these years and who give me their help today either as Cabinet Ministers, Reichsstatthalter, Gauleiter, or in other positions under the Party or the State. During these days a tragedy is being enacted in Moscow which shows how highly we ought to value that loyalty which binds the leaders of a nation to one another. I further wish to express my sincere gratitude to all those who did not belong to the ranks of the Party but who in these recent years have been loyal assistants and comrades in governmental work and in other work for the nation. All of them belong to us, even though they may not wear the external insignia of our party community. I thank all those men and women who have assisted in building up our party organizations and working in them with success. But above all I have to thank the chiefs of our armed forces. They have enabled us to provide the National Socialist State with a National Socialist defense force, without placing any difficulties whatsoever in the way. Thus the Party and the defense forces are now the guarantors sworn to devote themselves to the preservation of our national existence.

But we know that all our efforts would have been in vain if we did not have the loyal cooperation of hundreds of thousands of political leaders, innumerable officials and countless soldiers and officers, who did their work under the inspiration of the ideal of our national resurgence. And above all we must acknowledge that our success could not have been attained if we were not backed up by the united front of the whole people.

On this historic occasion I must once again thank all those millions of unknown Germans, from every class and caste, profession and trade and from all the farmsteads, who have given their hearts, their lives and their sacrifices, for the new Reich. And all of us, gentlemen and members of the Reichstag, hereby join together in tendering our thanks to the women of Germany, to the millions of those German mothers who have given their children to the Third Reich. During these four years every mother who has presented a child to the nation has contributed by her pain and her joy to the happiness of the whole people. When I think of that healthy youth which belongs to our nation, then my faith in the future becomes a joyful certainty. And it is with a profound [sic] feeling that I realize the significance of the simple word which Ulrich von Huten wrote when he picked up his pen for the last time--Deutschland.

Neville Chamberlain ~ Speeches

2011-03-08T16:47:00.002-05:00

I think Neville Chamberlain is interesting because of the comparison that can be made between him and Churchill. Here are his two speeches

Peace in Our Time, October 3rd, 1938

Before I come to describe the Agreement which was signed at Munich in the small hours of Friday morning last, I would like to remind the House of two things which I think it very essential not to forget when those terms are being considered. The first is this: We did not go there to decide whether the predominantly German areas in the Sudetenland should be passed over to the German Reich. That had been decided already. Czechoslovakia had accepted the Anglo-French proposals. What we had to consider was the method, the conditions and the time of the transfer of the territory. The second point to remember is that time was one of the essential factors. All the elements were present on the spot for the outbreak of a conflict which might have precipitated the catastrophe. We had populations inflamed to a high degree; we had extremists on both sides ready to work up and provoke incidents; we had considerable quantities of arms which were by no means confined to regularly organised forces. Therefore, it was essential that we should quickly reach a conclusion, so that this painful and difficult operation of transfer might be carried out at the earliest possible moment and concluded as soon as was consistent, with orderly procedure, in order that we might avoid the possibility of something that might have rendered all our attempts at peaceful solution useless. . . . . . . To those who dislike an ultimatum, but who were anxious for a reasonable and orderly procedure, every one of [the] modifications [of the Godesberg Memorandum by the Munich Agreement] is a step in the right direction. It is no longer an ultimatum, but is a method which is carried out largely under the supervision of an international body.

Before giving a verdict upon this arrangement, we should do well to avoid describing it as a personal or a national triumph for anyone. The real triumph is that it has shown that representatives of four great Powers can find it possible to agree on a way of carrying out a difficult and delicate operation by discussion instead of by force of arms, and thereby they have averted a catastrophe which would have ended civilisation as we have known it. The relief that our escape from this great peril of war has, I think, everywhere been mingled in this country with a profound feeling of sympathy.

[Hon. Members: Shame.] I have nothing to be ashamed of. Let those who have, hang their heads. We must feel profound sympathy for a small and gallant nation in the hour of their national grief and loss. Mr. Bellenger: It is an insult to say it.

The Prime Minister: I say in the name of this House and of the people of this country that Czechoslovakia has earned our admiration and respect for her restraint, for her dignity, for her magnificent discipline in face of such a trial as few nations have ever been called upon to meet.

The army, whose courage no man has ever questioned, has obeyed the order of their president, as they would equally have obeyed him if he had told them to march into the trenches. It is my hope and my belief, that under the new system of guarantees, the new Czechoslovakia will find a greater security than she has ever enjoyed in the past. . . .

I pass from that subject, and I would like to say a few words in respect of the various other participants, besides ourselves, in the Munich Agreement. After everything that has been said about the German Chancellor today and in the past, I do feel that the House ought to recognise the difficulty for a man in that position to take back such emphatic declarations as he had already made amidst the enthusiastic cheers of his supporters, and to recognise that in consenting, even though it were only at the last moment, to discuss with the representatives of other Powers those things which he had declared he had already decided once for all, was a real and a substantial contribution on his part. With regard to Signor Mussolini, . . . I think that Europe and the world have reason to be grateful to the head of the Italian government for his work in contributing to a peaceful solution.

In my view the strongest force of all, one which grew and took fresh shapes and forms every day war, the force not of any one individual, but was that unmistakable sense of unanimity among the peoples of the world that war must somehow be averted. The peoples of the British Empire were at one with those of Germany, of France and of Italy, and their anxiety, their intense desire for peace, pervaded the whole atmosphere of the conference, and I believe that that, and not threats, made possible the concessions that were made. I know the House will want to hear what I am sure it does not doubt, that throughout these discussions the Dominions, the Governments of the Dominions, have been kept in the closest touch with the march of events by telegraph and by personal contact, and I would like to say how greatly I was encouraged on each of the journeys I made to Germany by the knowledge that I went with the good wishes of the Governments of the Dominions. They shared all our anxieties and all our hopes. They rejoiced with us that peace was preserved, and with us they look forward to further efforts to consolidate what has been done.

Ever since I assumed my present office my main purpose has been to work for the pacification of Europe, for the removal of those suspicions and those animosities which have so long poisoned the air. The path which leads to appeasement is long and bristles with obstacles. The question of Czechoslovakia is the latest and perhaps the most dangerous. Now that we have got past it, I feel that it may be possible to make further progress along the road to sanity.

Nazi Invasion of Poland, September 1, 1939

I do not propose to say many words tonight. The time has come when action rather than speech is required. Eighteen months ago in this House I prayed that the responsibility might not fall upon me to ask this country to accept the awful arbitrament of war. I fear that I may not be able to avoid that responsibility.

But, at any rate, I cannot wish for conditions in which such a burden should fall upon me in which I should feel clearer than I do today as to where my duty lies.

No man can say that the Government could have done more to try to keep open the way for an honorable and equitable settlement of the dispute between Germany and Poland. Nor have we neglected any means of making it crystal clear to the German Government that if they insisted on using force again in the manner in which they had used it in the past we were resolved to oppose them by force.

Now that all the relevant documents are being made public we shall stand at the bar of history knowing that the responsibility for this terrible catastrophe lies on the shoulders of one man, the German Chancellor, who has not hesitated to plunge the world into misery in order to serve his own senseless ambitions...

Only last night the Polish Ambassador did see the German Foreign Secretary, Herr von Ribbentrop. Once again he expressed to him what, indeed, the Polish Government had already said publicly, that they were willing to negotiate with Germany about their disputes on an equal basis.

What was the reply of the German Government? The reply was that without another word the German troops crossed the Polish frontier this morning at dawn and are since reported to be bombing open towns. In these circumstances there is only one course open to us.

His Majesty's Ambassador in Berlin and the French Ambassador have been instructed to hand to the German Government the following document:

"Early this morning the German Chancellor issued a proclamation to the German Army which indicated that he was about to attack Poland. Information which has reached His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom and the French Government indicates that attacks upon Polish towns are proceeding. In these circumstances it appears to the Governments of the United Kingdom and France that by their action the German Government have created conditions, namely, an aggressive act of force against Poland threatening the independence of Poland, which call for the implementation by the Government of the United Kingdom and France of the undertaking to Poland to come to her assistance. I am accordingly to inform your Excellency that unless the German Government are prepared to give His Majesty's Government satisfactory assurances that the German Government have suspended all aggressive action against Poland and are prepared promptly to withdraw their forces from Polish territory, His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom will without hesitation fulfill their obligations to Poland."

If a reply to this last warning is unfavorable, and I do not suggest that it is likely to be otherwise, His Majesty's Ambassador is instructed to ask for his passports. In that case we are ready.

Yesterday, we took further steps towards the completion of our defensive preparation. This morning we ordered complete mobilization of the whole of the Royal Navy, Army and Royal Air Force. We have also taken a number of other measures, both at home and abroad, which the House will not perhaps expect me to specify in detail. Briefly, they represent the final steps in accordance with pre-arranged plans. These last can be put into force rapidly, and are of such a nature that they can be deferred until war seems inevitable. Steps have also been taken under the powers conferred by the House last week to safeguard the position in regard to stocks of commodities of various kinds.

The thoughts of many of us must at this moment inevitably be turning back to 1914, and to a comparison of our position now with that which existed then. How do we stand this time? The answer is that all three Services are ready, and that the situation in all directions is far more favorable and reassuring than in 1914, while behind the fighting Services we have built up a vast organization of Civil Defense under our scheme of Air Raid Precautions.

As regards the immediate manpower requirements, the Royal Navy, the Army and the Air Force are in the fortunate position of having almost as many men as they can conveniently handle at this moment. There are, however, certain categories of service in which men are immediately required, both for Military and Civil Defense. These will be announced in detail through the press and the BBC.

The main and most satisfactory point to observe is that there is today no need to make an appeal in a general way for recruits such as was issued by Lord Kitchener 25 years ago. That appeal has been anticipated by many months, and the men are already available. So much for the immediate present. Now we must look to the future. It is essential in the face of the tremendous task which confronts us, more especially in view of our past experiences in this matter, to organize our manpower this time upon as methodical, equitable and economical a basis as possible.

We, therefore, propose immediately to introduce legislation directed to that end. A Bill will be laid before you which for all practical purposes will amount to an expansion of the Military Training Act. Under its operation all fit men between the ages of 18 and 41 will be rendered liable to military service if and when called upon. It is not intended at the outset that any considerable number of men other than those already liable shall be called up, and steps will be taken to ensure that the manpower essentially required by industry shall not be taken away.

There is one other allusion which I should like to make before I end my speech, and that is to record my satisfaction of His Majesty's Government, that throughout these last days of crisis Signor Mussolini also has been doing his best to reach a solution. It now only remains for us to set our teeth and to enter upon this struggle, which we ourselves earnestly endeavored to avoid, with determination to see it through to the end.

We shall enter it with a clear conscience, with the support of the Dominions and the British Empire, and the moral approval of the greater part of the world.

We have no quarrel with the German people, except that they allow themselves to be governed by a Nazi Government. As long as that Government exists and pursues the methods it has so persistently followed during the last two years, there will be no peace in Europe. We shall merely pass from one crisis to another, and see one country after another attacked by methods which have now become familiar to us in their sickening technique.

We are resolved that these methods must come to an end. If out of the struggle we again re-establish in the world the rules of good faith and the renunciation of force, why, then even the sacrifices that will be entailed upon us will find their fullest justification.

Rob's Random Rants

On Violent Revolution

Progressive MADness

Intentions, Reflections, and Results

Cynics, Powers, and Accountability

Teachable Moments and Other Nonsense

Morality What it Means to Me

Romney in debates 07-08

The Truth Has No Agenda. What Utter Tripe.

Real World Economics VS Confiscation Fairy Tales

On Mitt Romney

Onward and Upward Action Comics V2 #1

Not a Tragedy But An Attack

I Cry Racist So You Will Be Silent

Building Utopia

Anime What I am Watching

Making a Good Comic Book Movie

The New DC Universe Spoilers Ahead

The Blame Game

The Sillyness of The Congressional Black Congress

Oh No It's The Zionists Fault

Yes Maxine The Tea Party is your Enemy

Remembering Not Just The Bad

The Laws of Plenty and Scarcity

Honesty is the Best Policy Long Term

Their Violence Is it Caused by Max Blumenthal's Lies?

Come on It's Fun! Or The Real Reason you killed Jimmy

With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility

Cosmic Life

Entropy and Government Programs

Crime Scene Investigation

The Search for Truth

Reading Flaws

The New Revamp of DCnU

Feeling Lost

The Human Condition

Everyone Does It.

The Miracle of New Media

The Strange View Of A Fake Republican

Wealth Creation

The Shifting Standard

Nero Wolfe in TV and Novel Forms

This Rant made possible by My Corporate Sponsor Doofensmirtz Evil Incorporated.

Jonah Hex

Our Level of Involvement

Poisoning The Well

It's Bloody Obvious But Not To Them

Remember History

Cynical But I wish I wasn't

Hospitals Part One

My Condition : Diverticultis

Diverticulitis

Contents

Signs and symptoms

Diverticulitis

Diverticulosis

Causes

Diet

Diagnosis

Differential diagnosis

Treatment

Surgery

Primary Bowel Resection

Bowel Resection with Colostomy

Complications

Epidemiology

Understanding in the Head but Not the Heart

Please Go Live in A Bubble

Hearings? Whats that?

Oratory in History By J. Calvin Coolidge

Adolph Hitler Speech 01-30-1937

Neville Chamberlain ~ Speeches

Peace in Our Time, October 3rd, 1938

Nazi Invasion of Poland, September 1, 1939