Friday, November 18, 2016

Remembering a Gun Control Failure

.Don Chicchetti, writing at the American Thinker on November 18, 2016, has an excellent article entitled Arm the Innocent. Chicchetti uses the attack on the Bataclan theater in Paris on November 13, 2015 as the example for failed gun control policies in the West. Chicchetti asks:
Let me ask you a question: would you prefer, or not prefer, for that brave soul to have been armed? Would you prefer, or not prefer, that 20-30 of the concertgoers had been armed? If you cannot easily say that yes, you wish they had been armed, then you are either allowing your ideology to hold sway over your morals, or you are simply not morally serious. What does it mean not to be morally serious? It means to value your view of yourself as peaceful/pacifist, or simply morally superior, more than you value other people’s lives.
T.S. Eliot said:
"Half the harm that is done in this world is due to people who want to feel important. They don't mean to do harm -- but the harm does not interest them. Or they do not see it, or they justify it because they are absorbed in the endless struggle to think well of themselves."
In the end, other peoples lives, and even our own should weigh more heavily than hanging onto a notion of pacifism that, frankly, is Unbiblical. Jesus was not a pacifist. Neither should we be.  I don't carry a gun because it makes me feel anything.  Indeed, what I feel is a terrible burden of which I would as soon be rid.  But that in not the world in which we live.
The Eagles of Death Metal singer and guitarist Jesse Hughes was front and center at Bataclan when the massacre started. He escaped without injury but the experience changed him, and for a brief moment, the truth shot right through the media wall of leftist thinking when he said:
“I’ll ask you: Did your French gun control stop a single [expletive] person from dying at the Bataclan? And if anyone can answer yes, I’d like to hear it, because I don’t think so.” As he continued: “It just seems like God made men and women, and, that night, guns made them equal. Maybe until nobody has guns, everybody has to have them.”

Thursday, November 17, 2016

It appears Democrats found some new voters

An old joke goes along the lines of:  if the voters don't want to vote for you, you need to find some new voters.

I thought in a year that Republicans seemed to be taking every seat, my adopted home State, North Carolina, seemed to be bucking the trend.  While we delivered the Presidency and the Senate to Republicans, for some odd reason, these same people voted against a Republican Governor that has done a fantastic job.  Whereas near disasters and potential disasters on Democrat Bev Perdue's watch were turned into disasters, Governor McCrory handled Hurricane Matthew as well as can be expected.  But McCrory has done most things right.  So why did NC voters turn against him?

As it turns out, they may not have turned against the Governor.  Instead, it appears there may have been some vote fraud going on.  Matt Vespa at reports that North Carolina Gubinatorial Recoun: Protest Filed in 11 More Counties Over Fraudulent Absentee Ballots
In addition to funneling money to the Bladen County Improvement Association PAC, the North Carolina Democratic Party simultaneously transferred money to political action committees in these 11 counties. Similar absentee voting and handwriting patterns as in Bladen County have been discovered in at least one of these counties, suggesting these PACs may have been harvesting and witnessing multiple absentee ballots as well.
Whenever I have brought up the notion of vote fraud, I usually get the moral equivalence arguement-both sides do it. I also acknowledge that that may be so, for Heaven knows there are no saints on the Republican side either. But, from the Nixon-Kennedy election on down, I never hear or read about a Republican win because of voter fraud. when I hear or read about it, it is always Democrats. This leads me to believe that voter fraud is a distinctly Democrat form of corruption.  And the first clue that it is a uniquely Democrat form of corruption is that the Democrats are always the first, and the loudest, to yell that there is no voter fraud.

As David Codrea is fond of saying, every day is opposite day with these people.

Sunday, November 13, 2016

Leftist acting as if the election was rigged or something3

I was over at National Review this morning, and saw an intriguing article by Kevin D. Williamson, a writer whose style I greatly admire, so I clicked on it.  The article, entitled I Won quotes President Obama in noting that elections have consequences. The subtext was, of course, that Republicans should sit down and shut up. With the shoe on the other foot, how does it feel? Not so good, huh?

Williamson's point is that Democrats are going to rediscover a lot of their old talking points, because, heaven knows, they won't sit down and shut up.  Last night, I went to sleep with some leftist stabbing her fingers at the conservative as she explained in a loud voice why Donald Trump is more evil that Hitler himself.  But, the real point Williamson is making is that Leftist, by and large, are a totally unaware lot.  The protesters and rioters seem to be poster children for the unexamined life. Williamson:
Ten minutes ago, Democrats were fretting that Donald Trump and his partisans would refuse to concede defeat, and insisting that Trump must make a dramatic public commitment to personally working toward a peaceful transfer of power. (Well, he did.) There were whispers of political violence, of riots in the streets, arson, smashed windows, violent assaults. Five minutes later, all of that came to pass — perpetrated by progressives in reaction to Trump’s winning the election fair and square.
Ten minutes ago, Democrats were complaining that Trump’s talk of “rigged” elections undermined faith in democracy and in the legitimacy of the United States government. Five minutes later, Democrats were complaining that the elections were rigged against them by an electoral system that treats the states as states — entities with political interests of their own — rather than as administrative subdivisions of the federal government. With their candidate set to lose the presidency in spite of her being projected to win the most individual votes, Democrats once again turned their rage upon the American constitutional order itself, and out came the signs: “America Was Never Great!”
If it is any consolation to them, I doubt Trump will treat these people the way conservatives have been treated for the last eight years.  It is hard not to throw it all back in their faces, but it also doesn't advance what we need to do.  It is even harder to pray for these people, though I know I must, and so should you, dear reader.

Meanwhile, go to the National Review and read Kevin Williamson's article.  Then start figuring out what you can do to help make our lives livable again.

Saturday, November 12, 2016

Assassination Threats? Isn't that Unpossible?

So, Trump has won.  Yes, I voted for him.  I now pray daily that he will surprise us all by being a good President, and begin the long slog back to Constitutional governance.  In the meantime, it is interesting to note that the New York Post reports that assassination threats flood twitter. Aren't these the people who wanted to take away guns? Aren't these the same people who are so peaceful, so tolerant, so brilliant, get the idea. What gives?  Apparently the only people who should have guns are Hillary supporters.

Moreover, the people plotting to take Trump out have misplaced their anger. They should be angry at me, at you, at all the Trump voters, and if you look at a map of all the counties that voted Trump, there are a lot of us. We voted for him for a variety of reasons, most of which can be summed up as weariness with the arrogant Left. In putting up a literal criminal as a candidate, and supporting that criminal, you, who voted for her, took that criminality on as well. Perhaps it would be wise for you to, as you said to us, "sit down and shut up." But I don't say that to try to actually shut you up. Rather, maybe before you go out an riot and shoot your mouths off about assassinating people, you should listen and learn first.

If you have been following this blog, you know that there is no love for Trump here.  I will be the first to call him out for any betrayal or misstep.  But I do think you should give him the same chance we gave Mr. Obama.

As for those who vowed to leave if Trump was elected, maybe that would be a good idea.  I have also noted many times that there are plenty of liberal utopias around the world.  Pick one.  Canada speaks English and isn't that far.  But Sweden is also a good choice.  Bernie seems to think Sweden is a good model for the masses, though I understand it he has just bought himself a $575,000 house, his third, so he won't be moving any time soon.

Saturday, October 8, 2016

The Myth of Not Voting for Evil

We learn today that in 2005 Trump made some lewd remarks about women,for which he has apologized. Not that one should forget the long train of abuses, malfeasance, lying, and outright felonies for all of which Hillary has never seeming payed the price.  Hillary also has a terrible temper, and is mean to subordinates, treating them with utter disdain and gross disrespect.  Trump, as I understand it from people who know him, is generally kind to subordinates, and is not at all the bombastic, angry individual one sees on the stump.  All of which brings up the people who won't vote for either one.  These people believe that voting for either would be voting for the lesser of two evils. Since they do not want to vote for evil, they then decide to vote for neither.

Here is the problem with this analysis.  There may be some better choices out there, but in a fallen world, there are no good choices, and there never have been.  We romanticize the Founding Fathers because their work was, I believe, Divinely Inspired.  But we make a mistake when we attribute to these men angelic motives, or when we attribute less than awe and respect for their work because we discover that they had feet of clay.  That Jefferson's work on the Declaration of Independence was Divinely Inspired Genius is without doubt.  The Jefferson himself was a flawed human being is also without doubt.

Today, we face an election in which one of the candidates will take the nation further from its Constitutional roots, and one where one of the candidates is an unknown, but there is a chance to begin returning to our Constitutional roots.  One candidate is a disciple of Saul Alinskey, who dedicated his book to Lucifer, the other is a successful businessman.  Both are flawed candidates.

As a Christian, and after prayer and careful analysis, I think I will vote for the flawed businessman.  

Why Environmentalism is both a Religion and a Con Game

Chet Richards over at the American Thinker answers the question: Why Emvironism becaame both a religion and a con game First, Mr. Richards explains the difference between a Conservationist and an Environmentalist:
I am a Conservationist. I am not an Environmentalist. What? Aren’t the two the same thing? No, they are not. In fact the two movements are diametrically opposed.
John Muir was a Conservationist, not an Environmentalist. He saw the wilderness as a “primary source for understanding God: The Book of Nature.” Muir did not worship Nature, as modern environmentalists do. Muir worshiped God, the Judeo-Christian God. So, here is the difference: Conservation derives from the Hebrew Bible. Mankind is to be Stewards of the Land. We are charged to husband God’s creation.
Environmentalists, for the most part, believe that the Earth’s biosphere is God. And, that human beings are destructive parasites, eating away at the life of their deity. In effect, most environmentalists are atheists searching for something larger than themselves to worship. But environmentalists see themselves as not being the riff-raff parasites that the rest of mankind are. Environmentalists believe they are the elect, the knowing, the superior beings, the priests, the Gnostics.
Because I worked in the Navy Environmental Program, some people think I too am an environmentalist. But I, like Chet Richards, I am a conservationist, a steward of God's creation. I worship the Creator, not the Creation. I recognize my place in creation as a fellow creature, who none the less has been given responsibility for the creation.  Environmentalists like to say that we conservationists want dirty air and polluted water.  That was never true, of course.  After all, we live here too, as well as our children and grand children.

 After discussing Rachel Carson and Paul Ehrilich, two unfortunate examples who gained fame and a modicum of fortune by scaring the public with unscientific theories, he then gets into the heart of the problem with James Lovelock and his theory of "gaia."
And then came James Lovelock with his “Gaia Hypothesis.” This is the notion that the biosphere is an environment-regulating ensemble of living organisms. In the large, the biosphere, together with its non-organic matrix, could be considered an organism, itself.  The idea is interesting. Indeed, it has proven to be scientifically fruitful.
But other people latched onto the biosphere and made Gaia a god. And, with it, made environmentalism a religion. A religion, which Lovelock himself rejects as misinformed – if not dangerous. Lovelock went through his hysteric period in the early years of the ecology mania, but he has since moderated his outlook now that his predictions of imminent environmental doom have proved unfounded.
In answer to the question "Why do people do it," Richards writes that it is a combination of ignorance, insecurity, and hubris. I think though, that the reason people put on these cons, and others follow them, is that people don't want to face up to the fact that the correct answer is the ancient one: living a spirit filled life following the Creator of everything that is, and that is not.  But man and his ego always get in the way of the message unless people proceed carefully and prayerfully.

Muhammad's ego got in the way 1400 years ago, and we are still facing jihad today.  The Gnostics thought they had discovered "secret knowledge," but there was no secret knowledge.  God had put it out there already.  Today, man thinks he is "evolving" and doesn't need to follow the old laws.  But as they will sooner of later discover to their own horror, the God of creation did not set these rules to punish, but rather, so we could live long and happily in His Creation.

Thursday, October 6, 2016

This Will Not End Well

I have referred from time to time to Rudyard Kipling's poem The Gods of the Copybook Headings. Copybook headings were moral sayings designed to both uplift the reader and provide a sentence or two for the young and budding penman to copy in an effort to improve his penmanship. Nothing like copybooks exist today, but they really should. In any case, the point of the poem is that mankind can, and has violated the morality of the copybook headings to its own catastrophic peril. Whether violating these moral precepts offends God such that he sends disasters down upon us, or, as I look at it, violating these natural laws brings about the natural consequences, the effect on mankind is the same.

This will not end well.

Today, Kurt Schlichter over at has a piece that is must read.  The article, entitled Liberal Attempts to Silent (sic) Dissenters Will Not End Well. It seems the headline writer for Townhall may not be a native speaker. However, the rest of the article is a graphic warning. Schlichter does not mince words, or use euphemism to try to bury the effect.
And maybe our guy will sit down and hold his tongue. And then maybe he’ll remember how he went to a Tea Party to politely register his dissent and how he was dumped on for daring to try and be heard. Then maybe he’ll vote for Donald Trump because maybe if he’s a little louder and a little ruder then perhaps someone will listen to him about not turning his little girl’s bathroom into a social experiment, about the illegal aliens like the one who ran into his truck and didn’t have insurance, and about the rumor going around that his job down at the plant may be moving to Juarez next year.
But then, those concerns apparently aren’t worthy of attention. The news covers, day in and day out, some overeating foreigner and drug lord baby mama who Donald Trump was mean to a couple decades ago, but no reporter ever asks our guy about his problems. And they don’t merely ignore him. They come after him, jamming things down his throat like gender neutral bathrooms and murderous Muslim refugees and Wall Street scams that mean he gets about .001% interest on that money he saved just like the experts told him to. And he’s expected to just take it.
This will not end well.
I have been warning people as well, for the last eight, almost nine years as well. I am an old man, and my time here is passing. If it weren't for those I leave behind, I would not care. But I do care because they are being led to violate the laws of nature set down by the God who created everything that is. They are being led there by a corrupted process that makes everyone, even those who don't vote, responsible for outcome.

This will not end well.

PS:  Hello to readers in France and Germany