November
11
2014

Old Sarge: Remembering Veterans Day

November 11, 2014

This post was written by Vietnam veteran, author and friend, Forrest L. Gomez, affectionately know as Old Sarge.

REMEMBERING VETERANS DAY:

“The veteran may be the aged fellow who is still trying to shut out the images of the Tet Offensive of 1968, and still remembers how his former best friend in high school called him “baby killer” and “willing tool of the war mongers.”

They are a special brotherhood-sisterhood, they did things most people couldn’t imagine, and they sometimes came home to an indifferent or hostile public. Who and what is a veteran?

The veteran may be the old guy in the pool room who seems rude and defensive, frequently nervous, maybe smoking and drinking too much. How could one know that he lost his squad at the Chosin Reservoir?

The veteran may be the aged fellow who is still trying to shut out the images of the Tet Offensive of 1968, and still remembers how his former best friend in high school called him “baby killer” and “willing tool of the “war mongers.” But that wasn’t as bad as his girl friend leaving him once she got to college and learned a few things there.

The veteran may be the young woman who has to make frequent visits to the VA hospital at American Lake, because she unintentionally walked through an area where Saddam Hussein’s Republican Guards, while in retreat, poured chemical agents on the ground. (You know, those WMDs that many on the left and conspiracy buffs say that the Iraqis never had.) She has a degenrative nerve disorder that doctors can’t identify and treat.

The veteran may be the young soldier who sheds tears of frustration, but continues to serve and fight, even though it seems that many of the Afghani people and his own government are ungrateful.

The veteran may be the guy who is somewhat traumatized, because he knew he could have helped at Benghazi.

And the veteran may be the old guy bagging groceries at the market, the guy who was a tail gunner in a B-17 over Europe in 1944. And oh…how he wishes his wife was still alive so she could hold him when the nightmares come.

All we really want is for the country to love us as much as we love it. The vast majority of us have picked up our lives and made ourselves useful and normal seeming. We simply ask our fellow Americans that our sacrifices not be forgotten, and we really appreciate it when someone says, “Thanks for your service.”

 

A happy and glorious Veterans Day to you all, and please remember that the only true path to peace is to know the peace of the love of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Conspiracy buffs and lefties, please keep your comments to yourselves, thank you.

– The Sarge

Reposted with permission of the author by Reagangirl.com  11/11/14

November
9
2014

Reagan and the 25th Anniversary of the Fall of the Berlin Wall

November 9, 2014

As originally published by Zbigniew Mazurak on November 8, 2014

The REAL causes of the fall of the Berlin Wall

Today is the 25th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. On that evening, on November 9th, the East German government permitted its citizens to cross the border with West Berlin freely, and they began doing so in huge numbers.

These days, the media around the world propagate the claim that it was the citizens of East and West Germany, as well as Mikhail Gorbachev’s reforms and the West German government’s policy, that brought the Berlin Wall down, while Ronald Reagan had little or nothing to do with it. When the world media covers the anniversary and its celebrations this week, you will hardly find or hear any mention of Ronald Reagan in the media or in the city of Berlin itself.

But the truth is that it was Ronald Reagan and his tough policy of exerting maximum pressure on the Soviet Union, especially on European, economic and human rights issues, that brought the Berlin Wall down. Throughout the entire 1980s, the US exerted enormous economic, military, and moral pressure on the Soviet Union and its satellite regimes, and THAT is what brought the Berlin Wall and the entire Soviet empire down.Furthermore, the West German government (and other Western European governments) NEVER had ANY intention whatsoever of dismantling the Berlin Wall and the Soviet empire – and had these European governments had their way, the Soviet empire would’ve still existed to this very day. This article will prove this with facts.

West German Subsidies For the Evil Empire

Throughout the Cold War, and especially since the early 1970s, Western European countries and companies were doing lucrative business with the Soviet Union… lucrative at least for Moscow and for European companies – similarly to how they do today. Western European governments were also loaning lots of money to the Soviet regime, as well as paying the East German government for releasing dissidents from jail.

And just like today, Western European countries were steadily increasing their oil and gas imports from the Soviet Union – and in 1980, they consented to the construction of a new gas pipeline that would increase Soviet gas exports to Europe (and Europe’s dependence on that supply source) still further.

Had that pipeline been built on time and on the proposed scale, the Soviet empire and the Berlin Wall would likely have not collapsed at all.

The story begins in late 1979, when the Kremlin informed the West German government and business leaders that it wished to build a new gas pipeline from the Yamal Peninsula to West Germany, with the goal of significantly increasing Soviet gas exports to Europe. The Ruhrgas AG was to be the direct recipient of the gas, Mannesman AG was to deliver the equipment to build and operate the pipeline, while the Deutsche Bank was destined to finance the construction. After the West German government’s initial okay, secret talks began at Deutsche Bank’s HQ in Dusseldorf. These were so secret that no interpreters were hired – one of Deutsche Bank’s high-ranking employees speaking Russian served as the translator.

The initial talks were successful and were continued in December 1979 by Deutsche Bank personnel in Moscow; with the support from the Soviet and West German governments, the talks were speedily advanced, with the West German business leaders knowing they’d be spending 10 billion West German marks – a huge sum of money – on building a pipeline that would immensely profit the Soviet Union.

With the Soviet and West German government’s support, an initial agreement was soon reached, and a Deutsche Bank branch was soon opened in Moscow to coordinate the project. When then West German chancellor Helmut Schmidt personally discussed the project with Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev on the phone, the talks were greatly sped up.

On June 30th, 1980, Schmidt arrived in Moscow and, despite the Soviet regime’s aggressive designs and its aggression against Afghanistan (which he didn’t care about), he signed a long-term economic cooperation agreement with Moscow that paved the way for the pipeline’s construction. Two weeks later – on the day the Moscow Olympic Games began – Deutsche Bank and the Soviet government began official negotiations on its pipeline, and a final was struck in Leningrad in 1983. This was AFTER Helmut Kohl and his CDU party came to power in 1982 – because the Kohl government, like the Schmidt cabinet, ALSO supported the pipeline’s construction and continued subsidies to the Soviet regime.

Ronald Reagan Strikes Back

But even before the deal was finally signed, Ronald Reagan counterattacked. Knowing the Soviet Union’s deep economic problems and the fact that destroying the Soviet economy was key to bringing the Soviet empire down, he imposed a slew of sanctions against the USSR in December 1981 after Moscow’s puppet regime in Poland implemented martial law to preserve communism there and crack down on Lech Walesa’s Solidarity.

Among the sanctions imposed on the USSR was a ban on exporting any pipeline machinery as well as machines used to extract oil and gas. This was intended to strike at the USSR’s Achilles heel – its dependence on oil and gas revenue. Western European companies were building such machinery based on American export licenses, but President Reagan revoked these. His sanctions were toughened still in September 1983 after the Russians shot down a civilian Korean airliner (KAL Flight 007).

Furthermore, President Reagan pressured the West German government and business leaders to cancel the pipeline’s construction. He did not succeed completely in that regard, but under his pressure, the pipeline’s scope was reduced from two lines to just one, and the whole project was delayed by many years – so much so that it wasn’t completed until 1999, eight years after the Soviet Union’s collapse.

This huge delay and reduction in scope of the project proved fatal to the Soviet Union. Making matters even worse for them, President Reagan deregulated the oil industry in the US and convinced Saudi Arabia to dramatically increase oil production. This brought about the oil glut of the late 1980s: in November 1985, a barrel of oil cost $30 (in 1985 dollars); by April 1986, it cost only $12. Moscow lost $10 bn (again, in 1985’s terms) in just five months as a result.

It was all downhill for the USSR from then on. That very month, in April 1986, the Chernobyl nuclear powerplant exploded, causing damage costing hundreds of billions of dollars. The war in Afghanistan dragged on – partially because of the Reagan Administration’s covert support for the Afghan mujahedeen fighting the Soviets.

And the Reagan Administration also dramatically toughened the arms race with the USSR by greatly increasing US defense spending and investing it in new, cutting-edge weapon platforms such as the B-2 stealth bomber (first flown in 1989, introduced in 1993), the MX Peacekeeper rail-mobile ICBM that could carry 10 nuclear warheads, nuclear-armed cruise missiles launched from air, naval, and ground platforms (including the BGM-109A Tomahawk A, scrapped unilaterally by Barack Obama), the Pershing intermediate range missiles that countered Soviet SS-20 missiles in Europe, the Ohio class of ballistic missile submarines (carrying 24 missiles each, more than any Soviet submarine could), the Trident missiles deployed on these submarines, the tank-killing Apache helicopter capable of obliterating the massed Soviet tank armies in Europe; the Aegis class of surface combatants; and many more.

Most importantly, the Reagan Administration initiated the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) program, dubbed the Star Wars, against which the Soviet Union wasn’t capable of mounting any effective response due to its technological backwardness. In the 1980s, the US, and especially its military, was quickly being computerized – computers became an integral part of everything and made life and military operations easier. The Soviet Union, by contrast, was as short on computers as on human rights. Even the Soviet Chief of the General Staff, Marshal Nikolai Ogarkov, admitted that the USSR was being overtaken by the US because of the revolution ushered in by computers.

Gorbachev tried his best to negotiate the SDI away, but Ronald Reagan held firm.

Moral Pressure Added to Economic and Military Pressure

Fully confident of its massive economic and military strength rebuilt by President Reagan, the US exerted increasing moral pressure on the USSR. That pressure culminated in the late 1980s.

President Reagan’s goal was nothing short of dismantling the Iron Curtain and the Soviet empire. As he said himself, his goal in the Cold War was to ensure that “we win, they lose.”  His Administration’s goal was to change the Soviet regime, and that goal was enshrined in Reagan’s National Security Decision Directive 75, signed by him in 1983. More importantly, that goal was actively sought (and ultimately achieved).

Like nobody else in the world, President Reagan exerted enormous pressure on the Soviet Union throughout his presidency. Only he had the courage to utter these memorable words in Berlin on June 12th, 1987:

General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization: Come here to this gate.

Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate.

Mr. Gorbachev — Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!

Not only that, but he confidently predicted, “Yes, this wall will fall.” He didn’t just say he demanded that it be dismantled – he predicted that it WOULD BE. And it was. For, as President Reagan said:

As long as this gate is closed, as long as this scar of a wall is permitted to stand, it is not the German question alone that remains open, but the question of freedom for all mankind.

This rhetoric was opposed by many in his administration (including Howard Baker and Colin Powell) and by all Western European governments except Margaret Thatcher’s. President Reagan’s advisors repeatedly attempted to delete those words from the speech, but Reagan personally overruled them.

Yes, to deliver these remarks, President Reagan had to face down many people even in his own administration.

Helmut Kohl and Mikhail Gorbachev: False Heroes Who Tried To Preserve the Soviet Empire

And of course, Western European governments, especially that of West Germany led by Helmut Kohl, still tried to save the Soviet Union with  subsidies, low-interest loans, and debt write-offs. In 1988 alone, West Germany lent the USSR 3 billion Deutschmarks. All told, from 1985 to 1991, Western European governments lent the USSR the equivalent of 15 billion dollars.

Fortunately, that proved to be woefully inadequate for the USSR to survive, thanks to Ronald Reagan’s skillful use of the economic lever. The ongoing war in Afghanistan and the costs of maintaining a global Communist empire and a huge state bureaucracy added to the USSR’s economic woes.

Nor did Gorbachev try, or even intend, to dismantle the Berlin Wall and the Soviet empire. On the contrary, he wanted to preserve and strengthen that empire. That was the goal of his reforms – perestroika and glasnost. His reforms were intended to STRENGTHEN the Soviet Union and the Communist system without touching their very nature. He believed that through half-measures such as less interference in state-owned enterprises’ affairs, he could revive and strengthen the Soviet economy.

This was no different from Tsar Alexander II’s and Tsar Nikolai II’s half-hearted “reforms” in the 1860s and 1900s, respectively: to change something so that nothing would really change.

Gorbachev’s reforms failed to strengthen the USSR – just like those Tsars’ pseudo-reforms failed completely – because you can’t save a rotten, totally failing, broken system by reforming it timidly and too late. If a system is completely broke and failing, the only right thing to do is to scrap it completely and start anew – which Gorbachev was completely unwilling to do.

Nor did Gorbachev want to dismantle the Soviet empire and free captive nations, despite his promise to give Eastern European nations the right of self-determination. He did not use force to stave off the Soviet empire’s demise – because he wasn’t able to. By 1989, the Soviet Union’s economic problems were so deep, the USSR – freshly booted out of Afghanistan by sandal-shod mujahedeen – was in no position to intervene militarily in East Germany, Poland, or Hungary. The fiscal costs alone would’ve been prohibitive, and those countries’ populations would’ve certainly resisted.

Gorbachev is not a hero; he’s just a flake who couldn’t keep the Soviet empire from collapsing. And today, he supports the murderous, criminal, illegal neo-Soviet dictator of Russia, Vladimir Putin, who is trying to restore the Soviet empire. This proves what an immoral person Gorbachev is.

Ronald Reagan Is The Real Hero

The real architect of the Berlin Wall’s and the USSR’s collapse was Ronald Reagan. As Professor Robert Kaufman rightly observed in 2011:

It is hard to see (…) how Gorbachev and a policy of conciliation deserve more credit for ending the Cold War in America’s favor than Reagan and his policy of vigilance. The restoration of American power under Ronald Reagan gave the Soviet Union little choice but to take the risk of choosing a reformer such as Gorbachev, who recognized that the Soviet Union could no longer compete against a rejuvenated, self-confident United States unless it liberalized at home and pursued a more conciliatory policy abroad.

Nor was Gorbachev a genuine democrat. He aimed only to reform Communism, not to abolish it. His regime began to implode under the cumulative effect of decades of U.S. containment, Reagan’s confrontational policies intensifying American pressure at a critical moment, and the mortal contradictions inherent in the Soviet system. Whereas Gorbachev did not intend the breathtaking collapse of Communism that his domestic reforms unwittingly unleashed, Ronald Reagan expected and dedicated his political life to achieving this outcome.

When the free world celebrates the 25th anniversary of the Berlin Wall today, don’t forget to honor the real architect of that event – President Ronald Reagan.

peacethroughstrength

 

Ronald Reagan’s historic speech at the Brandenberg Gate

Remembering the end of the Cold War

Reposted with permission of the author by Reagangirl.com  11/9/14

November
7
2014

Prepping the Essentials for Veterans

November 7, 2014

As originally published on American Preppers Network

Prepping from Square One: How Returning Veterans Can Start Setting Up

Returning VeteransBy Christina Moore

As much as you might have looked forward to leaving the service, making that transition is always difficult. Life in the service is so regimented and so controlled that when you leave, all of that (for lack of a better word) freedom can make you feel like you are literally at loose ends. Even the most well adjusted have a hard time making the transition.

One sentiment that many people express after they leave the service is that building their home helped. This doesn’t have to mean literally building a house, though if you want to spend some time volunteering for Habitat for Humanity, that’s great! In this case, what they mean is finding a permanent home, moving in and making it their own.

Note: It is true that many service people get sent out to active duty and their families stay behind and take care of the home finding/nesting things while they are away. For active duty service people whose families traveled with them and who primarily used base housing, finding a new house and “nesting it up” can be very soothing.

Of course, it’s also worth noting that the buying process can be very stressful, especially if you and your spouse are now trying to find civilian employment. Remember: there are some housing benefits that are only offered after you leave the service. For example, service members are entitled to lower mortgage rates than civilians. Of course, not all lenders know how to track down service details and apply these benefits, so it may be helpful to reference online resources like Low VA Rates, which specializes in helping veterans find mortgages.

Once you have the house, you can start nesting and prepping. A lot of veterans find that creating a schedule for these things and sticking to it is very helpful. In a way, they take the rigid time management of their service and apply it here: they spend X time working on unpacking, helping the family decorate, etc. Then they spend X time finding employment, meeting with transition counselors, getting set up with their health and other VA benefits, etc.

Another great place to apply this rigidity is with your budget. It’s great that you want to jump right in to prepping but don’t spend all of your money on supply stocks. Instead, create space in your household budget to build up your supplies. Then, portion that line item out into things like food, canning, non perishables and other supplies, etc. There are all sorts of items that you’ll want to store.

In the beginning, though, you’ll want to stock up primarily on food stores and basic supplies like toilet paper. A lot of ex service people think the best way to do this is by buying up caseloads of MREs but believe us when we tell you: there are lots of other types of food that you can store and store well. Yes, having the MREs on hand will give you peace of mind, but do you really want those things to be your first option instead of your last? Even when, if you learn how to can and store better tasting stuff, you can have lots of great stuff on hand?

You can also apply this structure to learning new skills. Make time to learn things like canning, building, etc. You learned a lot of survival skills while you were in the service. There are, of course, other skills that can be helpful to someone who wants to really embrace the prepping lifestyle.

A lot of people believe that our lifestyle is extreme and, no matter how many episodes of the Walking Dead they watch that they don’t need these skills. Even if you’re pretty sure you’ll never really need your stores and prepping skills, the prepper lifestyle is a great way to help ease the stress of transitioning from active duty to civilian life.

Reposted by Reagangirl.com  11/7/14

November
6
2014

Old Sarge on the 2014 Midterms: The Brink of Ruin or Triumph?

November 6, 2014

This is an excellent analysis of where we are as a nation on the brink of ruin, or triumph, written by Vietnam veteran, author, historian and friend, Forrest L. Gomez, affectionately known as Old Sarge.

FROM THE DESK OF OLD SARGE:

Charlie Crist of Florida now holds a peculiar place in history. He is the only candidate in America to lose various elections as a Republican, a Democrat, and an independent. Joni Ernst, the new senator from Iowa, is not going to have to wait until she gets to DC to hear the squeals of tax-and-spend progressives. Liberal callers to radio talk shows are squealing everything from “fraud” to shades of Armageddon. Many are seminar callers, asking what the Republicans are going to do first: outlaw abortion, outlaw gay marriage, or pass more tax breaks for the rich. Some are sure that the GOP will have boots on the ground in Iraq and Syria by the end of next year. The Libertarian Party was well funded by the Democrat Party, and managed to prevent success for Republicans in several key areas. Democrats spent more than twice as much on the aforementioned election, proving once again that a great deal of money spent on candidates does not necessarily guarantee success. That’s why Ross Perot, Steve Forbs, and Donald Trump were not our last three presidents.

Once again, pity the poor Democrats. So many have called Suicide Prevention, that hold times average 2.5 hours. Many Dems did not get out of the needle exchanges in time to vote. The Seattle Police say that 25% of Seattle’s population is high at any one time. Perhaps that and apathy explains much. They should all take their illegal immigrant house servants to lunch and chill.

Once again, Democrats and their associates in the media are formulating the usual excuses: 1) It was not a wave, just a protest against incumbents, 2) We didn’t shout our message loud enough, 3) The GOP cheated and/or stole elections, and 4) The people are stupid. The conspiracy buffs are out in force as well, and as usual. For myself, I am glad that the arrogant, snarky libs who said we were going to have our a**** handed to us are looking for reasons why they failed, other than the fact that they support a system that always fails.

Perhaps some people saw the irony of Democrats accusing my side of a “war on women,” then appointing chronic woman-abuser Bill Clinton as a spokesman for the cause. Perhaps some people are disturbed by the President trading five top terrorists for a probable deserter, but not lifting a finger to help a Marine held unjustly in a Mexican jail. Perhaps some people are disturbed that Democrats don’t care for Americans owning guns, but don’t care that our government has given weapons to drug cartels and Muslim extremists. Perhaps some people were disturbed that our government wants to fund contraception for college girls, but not fund the Military. Perhaps many were disturbed by the incessant scandals and wasting of money, projects like the CDC studying how chimpanzees throw dung at each other to communicate.

large_di-0707-2_m-4535_march-to-trenton-web

Politically, we are at the stage George Washington and the patriots were following the Battles of Trenton and Saratoga. There is much to do and a long way to go to take the country back, and we could still lose if we show weakness and any hesitation. We are going to have to think generationally in terms of repairing the damage done to our country by liberalism and political correctness. God has smiled on us this day for our efforts. He will not do so again if we procrastinate.

Remember, my brothers and sisters, we are the children of the American Revolution. The misguided types on the left are children of the French Revolution. Look it up if you don’t know what that means.

May God hold you in his mighty embrace always, friends, and be with you this day.

- The Sarge

Reposted with permission of the author by Reagangirl.com 11/6/14

November
6
2014

Hickenlooper Staffer Uses Obscene Gesture at Victory Speech

November 6, 2014

In typical classy Democrat fashion, John Hickenlooper’s chief of staff, Roxane White flips the bird at those asking for her to serve four more years.

I hope all you squishy Coloradans who voted for this smug, gun-grabbing Obama suck up realize that you made a massive mistake.

Posted by Reagangirl.com  11/6/14

November
4
2014

Ten Ways to Tweet Yourself onto an NSA Watchlist

November 4, 2014

“I didn’t send those tweets. My Twitter account was hacked!” ~ Congressman Anthony Weiner (former, NY)

For those unacquainted with the subtleties of the tweet, let me offer you a short Twitter primer.

  1. Tweets must convey information, a thought, a picture, a URL, or a combination of these in 140 characters or less.
  2. Handles must always have the @ preceding them. It’s kind of like owning a planet when you can put @ before your name.
  3. Hashtags–these things #####–are used to create searchable content, such as a group interest item (#TeaParty) a trending item (#Election2016) something completely irrelevant (#ObamasSuccesses) or something designed to be controversial (#ThingsIProbablyShouldntTweet)

Back in 2012, that year of innocence when hope was high and life worth living, I actually got away with these tweets!

 

 

November
3
2014

Why Liberal Women Love Pigs

November 3, 2014

In a sexually confused world where women who stay home with their children are mocked by pop culture, and men who protect and provide for their families are a dying species, it’s to be expected that the inventors of policies destructive to marital love and the nuclear family would live outside those traditional norms.

ClintonLeer

Powerful liberal men, no matter how libertine and abusive they are, always seem to have women who stand by them through storms of scandal and public humiliation. The National Organization for Women (NOW), like a battered wife watching her sisters sustain beatings by a troglodyte husband, stands silent in the wake of the most recent attack on a woman by ultra-lib sniveler, MSNBC’s Martin Bashir. Bashir’s scatological attack on Sarah Palin is too vile to be recounted here, but it’s hard to imagine anything more hateful and misogynistic than his unhinged rantings against the beautiful, accomplished, tough, and principled Palin.

The silence of the National Organization for Women and other so-called women’s groups in the face of venal assaults on women who just happen to believe in conservative principles, and live those principles, leads one to believe that liberal women encourage cultural rape when committed by liberal pig men.  Even when liberal women are victims, if the men are politicians or pundits who toe the liberal line, the leftist agenda always supersedes any consideration of their personal dignity or respect for their womanhood.

Hillary Clinton and Huma Abadin are just two examples of smart, educated, accomplished liberal women who stay with their wiener-wielding, whoremongering husbands, despite the fact they have their own successful careers and cash aplenty. Normal people like you and I are left breathless at the lengths to which these lib gals will go to defend their husbands and protect their marriages. Behind the veneer of veneration for their families, however, is something fundamentally flawed about the liberal female mindset that naturally draws them into relationships with the very men who once justified the existence of the modern Feminist Movement; male chauvinist pigs.

Liberalism, and its mutant daughter, militant Feminism, defy human nature. Feminist theory deconstructs human nature by denying or attacking the natural biological roles that men and women fill as functions of human procreation and survival. Progressive Feminists–lib gals–adhere to the notion that women who strive to compete with men for jobs, political office, etc., are actually like men in their emotional makeup and social roles. In order to be true to Feminist theory, women like Hillary and Huma cannot expect their husbands, with whom–according to Feminist theory–they have few differences, to treat them with the dignity afforded by traditional male/female, husband/wife, father/mother roles. In other words; for a liberal woman to decry the wolfish, unfaithful behavior of her male chauvinist pig husband would constitute a fundamental hypocrisy. Feminist theory holds that since women and men are only superficially different, that for a woman to want a husband to be a faithful, respectful, protective partner in marriage would require acknowledgement that male and female roles are deeply different, and that the traditional model of marriage is biologically driven as well as being a construct of social evolution.

The following values are rejected in Feminist theory, and are therefore unimportant to the powerful liberal men with whom lib gals like Huma and Hillary hook up.

Chastity: Remember the unattractive, amorphous Sandra Fluke? This “iconic” lib gal who spawned the Democrat social platform in 2012, espoused one value, and one value alone; promiscuity. Fluke personified the modern Feminist approach to sex. It is not about love, relationships, children or the formation of families. Sex is about doing it as much as one wants, with no limitations, and no consequences. Fluke, the Feminist Betty Boop, is really just a liberal male politician in a frumpy suit. Liberal men, when groping unwilling victims, tweeting pictures of their private parts, or cheating with multiple partners, are only displaying behaviors that Sandra Fluke and her militant feminist sisters advocate.

The Sexual Revolution assassinated the rules of chastity upon which all social interactions between men and women were once based. The Feminist Movement asserted that if men can’t get pregnant through sex, that women–who are just like men–shouldn’t have to get pregnant either! Declining moral values, the loss of norms like courtship and abstinence before marriage, preceded institutionalized abortion. These concepts all came from Liberal thought and Feminist theory.

I actually feel a little sorry for guys like Wiener, Clinton, Spitzer, Filner, etc….ad nauseum, who, when acting within the philosophical boundaries of the chosen ideology of their girlfriends and wives, are publicly renounced and prosecuted. Hell’s bells! It must be confusing to be a male politician simply living the Liberal American Dream.

Ideology: Liberal women are inculcated via Feminist theory to love power more than relationships. Feminism teaches that relationships, especially those with men, are oppressive, and that marriage constitutes a form of socially sanctioned rape. Many liberal women simply expect their liberal husbands to be womanizers–or manizers–because to them, marriage is an unpleasant pretense necessary to broaden their appeal to a center-right electorate. Although liberal power marriages may produce children, the innocents are not  always sacred charges to their political parents, but rather resume’ enhancers; proof positive that every mandate put forth is indeed “for the children.” “Look at me, I have a child! How could I possibly not care about the children?”

In simple terms, feminist thought regards norms associated with traditional marriage and marital roles as hypocritical. To be true to their favored ideology, lib gals have no choice but to overlook the salacious actions of their partners.

Dignity in traditional sexual roles: Traditional marriage and the nuclear family were casualties of the Sexual Revolution of the 60’s and 70’s.  Again, liberal–progressive–feminist thought decried the sovereign family, consisting of a husband and wife at the head, and children who were supported, taught, and protected within the home, as an outdated, unnecessary encumbrance on individuals who wanted to “find themselves” without old-fashioned social constraints.

The nuclear family, however, is the most successful model ever tested for the perpetuation and progress of mankind.  One man/one woman marriage is founded in biological and social-emotional reality. The normal developmental paths that lead children to want to marry a member of the opposite sex have been derailed in recent decades by the LGBT lobby, as well as political and fiscal policies that reward unwed mothers and cohabitating couples while punishing married couples. But without those phony impositions pushed by social evolutionists–and crappy legislation–men and women prefer to marry and bring children into the world to be raised and taught within their own homes.

In a sexually confused world where women who stay home with their children are mocked by pop culture, and men who protect and provide for their families are a dying species, it is natural that the inventors of policies destructive to marital love and the nuclear family would live outside those traditional expectations. Liberal male politicians and their feminist wives don’t even believe in the traditional roles of the sexes, so why the hell would they worry about living them?

Women in the news and politics may caterwaul about those “awful cheating men,” and ask the question, “How can strong, ambitious, progressive women such as Hillary and Huma endlessly tolerate such unfaithful pigs?” The answer lies within their own belief system. Anthony Wiener, Bill Clinton, Eliot Spitzer and every womanizing liberal Democrat male to bedevil the political waters with his lasciviousness is simply a product of liberal women.

by Marjorie Haun 11/3/14

November
2
2014

Why Zero-tolerance Policies Increase Bullying


November 2, 2014

The hours spent in the principal’s office, the in-school suspensions, and the occasional expulsion were all worth it. Rarely did a bully, after I chased, caught them, and beat them nigh unto oblivion, bully me again.

sadboy

I was terribly bullied as a kid. I was socially awkward–still am–had fuzzy red hair, freckles, and at around the age of 7 became a bit of a chunk. Then I went through a growth spurt in 4th grade that made me taller than anyone else in my class. I had five older brothers and when the school rules changed to allow girls to wear trousers I wore my brothers’ hand-me-downs. I played like a boy, liked boy things such as snakes and lizards and bugs and playing Army. And I fought like a boy. So, there I was, the fiery red-haired tomboy who was bigger than most of the boys in elementary school, tougher than many, and always, always the socially inept misfit. But my story is different. Because I was the scrappy product of a scrappy, male-dominated family, I didn’t tolerate the bullying, I beat the tar out of bullies, boys and girls alike. Teachers often looked the other way when children would prod me and call me names, pull my hair, throw rocks or sticks, and challenge me to fights. I was on my own, left to my own devices to satisfy the raging sense of injustice my taunters ignited in me, so I fought back. And in retrospect, I did the right thing. The hours spent in the principal’s office, the in-school suspensions, and the occasional expulsion were all worth it. Rarely did a bully, after I chased, caught them, and beat them nigh unto oblivion, bully me again.

What seemed like Hell then is now a wistful thought, and I can smile at the dust ups of those days. Though bullying has always been a factor in human socialization, its modern implications are troubling, and too often, deadly. Although our culture, its schools and families, are trying to foster greater awareness of the nature of modern bullying, and seeking a healthy balance between natural consequences vs. retribution and protectiveness vs. coddling, it persists in schools, social media, and the workplace.

TROLLS and FLAMERS

Social media is the ideal outlet for people known as Trolls, or Flamers, who relish the anonymous bullying opportunities the Internet presents. There is a population of isolated, possibly mentally ill people who troll websites, social media, and personal profiles looking  to demean random victims and spew hate. If you’ve encountered a troll or flamer you know they’re not interested in debate, they’re out to do harm. And there is little to stop Internet trolls other than blocking them when they surface. For the unsuspecting, lonely, or inexperienced, however, anonymous trolls can inflict stinging insults that can harm one’s sense of worth and make a body doubt their own beliefs.

KNOWN BULLIES

Stories with tragic outcomes related to bullying of youngsters are becoming more prevalent. Children bullied to the point of despair have taken their own lives, feeling hopelessly trapped by aggressive peers at school. Many of these instances, however, have resulted from Internet bullying by known people on sites such as Facebook. The victims are often the targets of endless threads of cutting comments, cruel pictures and artwork, and remarks by bullies taunting the children, in some way, to end their lives because the world would be a better place without them.

ADULT BULLIES

Bullying is not limited to minors. Workplace, neighborhood, and sports bullies present challenges to adults as well as children. Workplace bullying includes but often goes beyond things like sexual harassment, or sadistic managers. Adults ordinarily are equipped with better interpersonal skills, and stronger self-regulation when dealing with bullies and using proper venues to report their abuses, than children. Nevertheless, there is often a sense that aggressors are becoming more aggressive and adult confrontations with bullies, more dangerous.

HOW ZERO TOLERANCE POLICIES FAIL VICTIMS OF BULLYING

Remember the recollections of my childhood as a bullied kid who refused to be a victim? Despite the fact that I got in trouble with my school authorities, my parents and brothers, and the few children I called friends, stood by me when I fought back. I refused to be a victim, and an hour in the principal’s office was worth the justice I meted out to my cruel little tormentors. Zero-tolerance policies did not exist at the time, so bullied kids like me had a means of recourse. School and workplace zero-tolerance policies regarding “fighting,” “aggression,” and “violence,” have failed to decrease bullying, but have effectively tied the hands of potential victims, negating their ability to draw the proverbial lines in the sand, and defend their personal space and dignity.

Zero-tolerance policies on school violence and aggression fail to differentiate between bullies and victims of bullies. Because victimized children fear punishment equivalent to that of their tormentors, they will tolerate or try to ignore the abuse, at the cost of personal dignity, social relationships, and often mental health. School violence zero-tolerance policies have the opposite effect of what they’re designed to do. Instead of decreasing violence, they increase the aggression and boldness of bullies and gangs, leaving victims with few means of self-defense. Despair and anxiety related to bullying are much greater today than in past decades because the only tool that some children have to stake their claim on dignity and worth has been removed from them. Nobody likes to see children go at one  another, but sometimes fighting back the most effective deterrent to bullying, which is the domain of insecure, cowardly kids.

MADE VULNERABLE BY THE DESIRE TO NOT OFFEND

Internet bullying is indirect and often anonymous. It rarely occurs in real time, and bullies can scheme and lay traps outside of the view of victims who can be overwhelmed by complex webs of intrigue, and cruel comments targeting them on their social media pages. Youngsters seeking social acceptance will often use websites such as Facebook to make friends and form alliances they hope will carry over into daily life. If victimized, such kids may be reluctant to rebuff insults for fear of losing friends, or getting a reputation for being weak or oversensitive. The desire to maintain social media friends and followers may drive a young person to endure emotional torture. Insecure or lonely children are made even more vulnerable on social websites by the desire to not offend. This is why simply blocking people, or making reports–which is a common practice of adults–can be difficult for children, leaving them exposed to psychological pain and social rejection.

My brothers taught me how to fight, not because I wanted to but because I had to. The rule of thumb for human behavior is that people do what they can get away with, because they can get away with it. Bullying is a growing phenomenon because resistance to bullies, whether physical or emotional, is hampered by cultural impositions of “zero-tolerance” policies. The social seeking of isolated adolescents who turn to social networking also lends to anonymity and vitriol employed by bullies. As we are are all endowed with the God-given right to defend our persons by having a means of defense equal to a given threat, we need to teach our children that they have the God-given right to defend their persons and dignity with any appropriate means available. Personal and civil peace is not engendered by passivity because the worst elements of humanity, bullies, will always seek to dominate the weak. Peace is kept when force is confronted by strength and adults and children alike know they are free to fight back when necessary.

by Marjorie Haun  11/2/14



November
1
2014

Democrat Apps for your Not-so-Smart Phone

November 1, 2014

Hey kiddos, have you heard of the “Rape Whistle App” or the “Anthony Weiner App?” Well, stop texting for one frigging minute and check out the new and amazing Liberal Democrat Apps for your Not-so-Smart Phone!

hill222

  • The Slick Willie App: Extremely popular with single men, this app uses GPS and facial tomography software to identify reasonably attractive women within the user’s vicinity and alerts him as to their location. It has a sensitive, high-definition camera lens that can work from as far away as 300 yards. The user simply scans his surroundings and the camera will identify and pinpoint any woman over the age of 15 and under 300 lbs as a potential pick-up.
  • The Lois Lerner IRS Emails App: This powerful app has the ability to scour clean the hard drives of computers and servers, eliminate emails stored in the computers and servers of those who received them, and cause hard copies of sensitive data to dissolve into the ether. Once you upload the Lois Lerner IRS Emails App you will also be able to strike from the memory of any person in the world any data which may have been obtained through Lois Lerner’s emails.
  • The Border Invasion App: This application works much a silent dog whistle. It emits no discernible sound but when activated sends a signal to all the poor people in Central America calling them to show up at the Border where they will get open passage into the country, free food, medical care, transportation to the city of their choice, and a CD containing all the speeches of Barack Obama in Spanish.
  • The Terrorist Border Invasion App: Like its sister app, this one links into the social networks of terrorist cells in Mexico, Central and South America and beyond. When activated it will send a direct message to its terrorist users written in Arabic saying, “The border with America no longer exists. Dress like a peasant, keep your head down, and enter by blending with the tens of thousands pouring into America, get an apartment in Austin, sign up for food stamps, and start building your bombs. See you in September.”
  • The Border Invasion Language App: This powerful application uses Universal Translator software to help politicians such as Sheila Jackson Lee and Nancy Pelosi welcome illegal aliens into the country. The user speaks into the microphone and the speech is audibly translated into Arabic, Chinese, Yemeni, Urdu, Russian, Nahua, or in a pinch, Spanish. This app is a mandatory feature of all iphone 5s currently being distributed by the Department of Self-Immolation to all illegal border invaders.
  • The Hillary Clinton Benghazi App: Nobody knows what this app does, but what difference, at this point, does it make?
  • The Bowe Bergdahl App: The ratings for the Bowe Bergdahl App are not good because of its buggy nature. Once downloaded the app will take up the 24 hr news cycle for approximately 2 weeks and then it will inexplicably disappear, never to be mentioned again.
  • The Depressed Taliban App: Using a digital voice software which mimics Barack Obama, this app sends voice messages of encouragement and hope to terrorist detainees at Gitmo, all of whom have an iphone 5.
  • The Anthony Weiner App: Also known as “digital male enhancement,” this app works with your camera to enlarge a specified portion of a photographic image while keeping everything in the background in its proper proportion.
  • The Hobby Lobby App: For reasons which remain a mystery to ordinary smart phone users, this app, when activated, causes liberal women to go into convulsions and scream, “My body, it’s my body, and I have a right to make you pay for my contraceptives!” This app comes with an appropriate warning, which usually goes unheeded by Democrat-leaning sluts.
  • The Rape Whistle App: Liberals and most Democrats, who have an unusual aversion to the mere concept of guns and armed self-defense, like this simple app. In the case of an attempted rape the user simply activates the app and it emits a shrill sound similar to a whistle. Although it has reportedly never prevented a rape, it remains popular among liberal gals because it makes them feel good.
  • The Obamacare Website App: Although this application has been in development for years and has cost nearly a billion dollars to bring to market, it is still too buggy for consumer use. It is likely the developer will have no choice but to create the Single Payer App in its stead.
  • The Veterans Administration Waiting List App: There is a real version of this app, and a fake version of this app. Neither works properly, but the fake version creates the appearance that its working. In the end, it’s a totally useless piece of crap. No one, however, is willing to take this expensive piece of crap off the market and replace it with something that works because hundreds of thousands of over-paid bureaucrats like it just the way it is.
  • The Al Sharpton App: This application works much like a teleprompter but uses phonetic syllables to help the speaker say even the simplest words correctly. Within the text are alerts in a bright yellow font reminding the speaker to “speak slowly and don’t spit so much.”
  • The Alinsky App: This handy application, with just the touch of an icon, can help idle Socialists plan how to use racial politics, wedge issues, hate mongering and scare tactics to organize their neighborhoods into little balkanized islands consisting of haves and have nots, blacks and whites, rich and poor. Extremely popular among Democrats the Alinsky app is tricky to use and will cease to function if the Free Market Capitalism App is used in the same vicinity.
  • The History Revision App: Liberal teachers love this app. It works as a sort of translator and can translate text, or website content taken from history texts or databases, and revise it to fit the liberal, “America sucks” narrative. Using terminology such as “genocide,” “conquest,” “invaders,” “religious zealots,” and “Capitalist pigs,” the History Revision App will take the most heartwarming American tale and turn it into a story of injustice, racism, violence, and hate, almost too much to bear.
  • The Liberal Male App: This optical application turns the screen of your smart phone into a sort of fun house mirror. The typical liberal male, physically inadequate with splotchy face and body hair, sallow skin and dead eyes, can gaze into this app and it will reflect back to him an image which is well-muscled, fit, and properly hairy. Though it may give the liberal male a temporary boost of confidence, liberal females have been known to break phones with this app, having a rabid hatred of manly men.
  • The Liberal Female App: Much like its counterpart, this application is to be used only in secret. They typical grotesque liberal female gazes into the screen of her smartphone and reflected back is the image of a beautiful woman such as Sara Palin or Megyn Kelly. Liberal females must be careful not to use this app in the presence of a liberal male as it has a tendency to cause them to become Conservative Republicans.

by Marjorie Haun  9/26/14

October
31
2014

DHS Zombie Scenarios: Designed to Desensitize?


October 31, 2014

zombies

Everyone should be alarmed when government agencies which brand military veterans, people of faith, and Conservatives as potential “domestic terrorists” begins to use moving, breathing, human targets as fodder in their para-military drills.

 

 

 

 

Dictators have always used creative ways to dehumanize their opponents. In Hitler’s Germany, Jews were portrayed in pictures, articles, textbooks and propaganda films as sub-human filth; vermin, apes, dogs, malformed and malevolent. This systematic dehumanization effectively chips away at the moral repugnance most have against harming other human because they are taught that the object of their contempt is NOT human. Not human, sort of like Zombies?

 

In Obama’s America numerous government agencies such as the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Defense have issued BOLO lists of “domestic terrorists” which include veterans, members of the Tea Party, pro-lifers and Right-wingers.  Take note that most of these “groups” are comprised of ordinary people who are patriotic, law-abiding, prefer limited government, and believe in the Constitution. It’s for their beliefs they are pegged potential terrorists. The label “terrorist” when applied to these generally conservative Americans is like unto Hitler’s use of “vermin” in reference to “Juden.” The words are dehumanizing. It was a German citizen’s duty to country to expose and punish “vermin.” In Obama’s America, certain political elitists believe it is their patriotic duty to expose and destroy the Tea Party, pro-lifers, and any groups that pose a threat to the sacrosanct authority of the state.

For several years DHS has been holding “Zombie Drills” and “Zombie Apocalypse Training” during which actors in zombie garb with horror makeup and glassy eyes confront armed government agents in mock attacks, purportedly to hone the tactical skills of the agents. But most recently the Pentagon has jumped aboard the corpse cart, laying out complete battle plans for a full-out Zombie invasion. One could surmise that this is just a cutesy approach to training which heightens morale among the domestic agency troops. I disagree. Given the increasingly hostile attitudes of government agents, and the agencies giving them orders from Washington D.C., it should surprise no one that dehumanizing opponents of the state is a central motif for all armed domestic agents’ tactical training.

The DHS drills use live actors made up to look like threatening, though dead, human beings. They have human form, but lack the pathos of non-zombie humans. They walk and groan, but lack human warmth and intelligence. Killing actor zombies with firearms which carry blank rounds is the step between shooting decidedly non-living cardboard cutouts and killing living humans with whom one can identify. That in-between step in Hitler’s Germany looked like “apes” and “vermin.”

xc1991-1024-0001

I’m troubled by the use of zombies not because of the nature of the zombie phenomenon, but because of the nature of the United States Government, and many increasingly inhumane state and local governments. The novelty of zombies has worn off–they’ve expired if you will. Nevertheless everyone should be alarmed when government agencies which brand military veterans, people of faith, and Conservatives as potential “domestic terrorists” begins to use moving, breathing, human targets as fodder in their para-military drills.

The path of desensitization is one of increments. Few are sufficiently psychopathic to kill another human without devastating anxiety–unless their level of exposure has been high. I believe that Zombie Apocalypse scenarios are being used by agencies with armed law enforcement to provide that exposure by degrees, and will eventually create domestic armies to be turned against opponents of the state, zombies or not.

by Marjorie Haun  10/30/14


Content Protected Using Blog Protector By: PcDrome.
WordPress SEO fine-tune by Meta SEO Pack from Poradnik Webmastera