Pasadena Politics

My new position has required a lot of attention on my part and as such, my posting has and will be on the low side for a while.   But never fear, I am still alive and kicking.

Just a note: Since when were Anti-Semites “right wing extremists”?  The aged nazi was a far cry from being right wing considering his online postings and hit list.   Properly he should be called Left wing Extremist if anything more than evil.

The first one deals with fathers in the delviery room.  A rather interesting article due to its linking the rise of men in the delivery room with the decline of men being fathers.    An interesting observation.   Perhaps more or less a subliminal recognition in the culture that men need to be there as fathers?

The other article just lends more fuel to my general: “I hate Unions” sentiment.    Essentially detailing how the unions and their political supporters once again attack their competition via regulation if not outright decimation of the competition’s funding.    The irony that “professional educators” claim they want children to succeed with one hand out for more money while bludgeoning Charter Schools, Free Choice/Vouchers, and Home Schooler with a bat in the other hand is rich.   In the end, it all boils down to greed and envy.

The Unions are greedy for more members (cries for smaller class sizes and unionization of all educators) and thus greedy for more money (see how the Teachers Union in California has done an amazing job of grabbing money while increasing the idiocy of the youth lending to more cries for funding).    Poor performing teachers are not weeded out by the Unions – it doesn’t matter if the teacher gives other teachers a bad rap, harms the children, or fails to educate, all that matters is that the Union maintains it’s membership and thus income.  Leaches seems the most appropriate word.

Then there are the enlightened educators and politicians who view children as the future for their sustained power in politics and societal views.  Thus children are not taught Grammer, Logic, or rhetoric.  Nor are they taught essential math and the soundness of the Scientific Method lest they learn to think logically.   No, they are taught to perform based off of their feelings.  To expect promotion despite poor performance, and otherwise coddling by the Institutions and latter on Government.    These ‘enlightened’ people seek to usurp an Uncle  for a Mother.   If the last election were any indication of their success in this arena, I can’t think of what else may be.

4 in 40

Lest there be any mistake, it is illegal to murder someone – even if morally, what they are doing, is wrong. While abortion is morally and ethically wrong (the harm to and killing of innocents) it is regrettably legal. Dr. Tiller’s murder should not have happened.   Dr. Tiller’s line of business should not be legal either.   In a just Nation that respects life, Dr. Tiller would be tried and punished before a court of law – IF the law were against him (and it is not).    While a few people are lauding Tiller’s killer as a good thing, it was not.   It neither served justice, nor did it serve the cause of the Pro-Life movement.

However, to the Left and “progressives” in the USA: in the past approximate 40 years that abortion has been legal by Judicial Fiat, only 4 abortion doctors were killed.    Compared to the number of lives taken by abortion itself, it is a joke to make the death of 4 doctors whose practice is to deprive an innocent of life mean more than it does. 4 in 40 is hardly noteworthy evidence of any “Climate of Hate”

Susan Sotomayor

Certainly she has a noteworthy history as do some of the justices on the Supreme Court.  But the history that matters is the history of her decisions and what they stand for. Some people like to think that we should just brush her into the Seat without much ado because we are “replacing one Liberal with another Liberal”.   If only that were the case.   Sotomayor goes beyond being a standard Liberal to being outright in favor of racism and a “time to remake the Constitution” liberal. There are different kinds of Liberal and some are more respective of the rule of law than others – despite their label as Liberal. Sotomayor’s most recent and notable red flag is the decision to uphold New Haven’s decision to throw out test results on racial grounds.  What is interesting about the test is that it was designed to avoid favoring one race over another.   Still, New Haven decided that those who studied for the test and did well were not representative enough of the ethnic diversity they were seeking.  Ah… gotta love affirmative action, nothing like using racism to expunge the appearance of racism.

El Presidente Barack Hussein Obama

Let us define some things (courtesy of Merriam-Webster Online)

Socialism:
1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods2 a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done.

Fascism:
1often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition2: a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control <early instances of army fascism and brutality.

The interesting thing about both is that they achieve their goals the same way: Centralized Government.   Something I find interesting about the definitions is that the characterization of Fascism makes it seem worse than Socialism.  However practical Socialism is identical to practical Fascism:  Centralized Government making the decisions and calling the shots, suppression and oppression of dissent, seizure of private property for the “public good”, severe economic stratification to the complete elimination of a middle class, and the absorption of private industry into the machinations of the State (former USSR and increasingly the current Russian government, Cuba, Venezuela more and more, North Korea, Argentina, and China are all examples). At the end of the day, Fascism and Socialism are identical: the individual is oppressed and stripped of power.

So we have our President who not afraid to exercise central control of Finance (sure, it might have started with Bush, but at least he was not trying to Control the industry – just keep it afloat – Obama has gone much further by dictating to them what they can or cannot do), government control of 2/3rds of the American Auto Industry (yeah, sure we believe you Obama  – just like we believed your campaign promises after you won the nomination), wants to regulate every aspect of the American Citizen’s life under the guise of combating Global Warming, manage who lives and who dies via Nationalized Health Care (great if you never need it), and is just chummy with the other dictators of the world. I have the sense that Conservatives have their work cut out for them.

Much of what Obama builds up will have to be torn down and it won’t be easy because the longer it is there, the more people will come to depend on it.   Much of FDRs work will likewise have to be torn down, but more along the lines of phasing programs out – like Social Security, than outright removing it.

Zombies… you know, the undead?

Che Guevara is on odd symbol young adults like to wear today. Che was a murderer.   Che’s actions resulted in impoverishment of millions despite his seemingly benign start as being sympathetic to the plight of the poor. The path he chose was violent, not peaceful, and the result was a deepening of the impoverishment of the poor while simply transferring wealth and power from a few to another select few.

Interestingly, this is always the result when revolution is inspired, not by the seeking of freedom, but by the desire to raise up the poor. Struggling to make less poor simply results in their increase, not decrease. Freedom such as Freedom from intrusive government sought by the Founders, leads to fewer poor as Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are respected and protected.