Saturday, June 24, 2017

Putting information in a library so that people can't see it for five years? Now Obama uses a library to hide information? George Orwell's Ministry of Truth in real life.

Tuesday, June 6, 2017


On October 27, 1964, Ronald Reagan delivered a televised speech in support of the presidential candidacy of Senator Barry Goldwater. Sometimes this speech is called "A Time for Choosing" sometimes it is known simply as "The Speech." What is not in dispute was that this speech was the launching of the former actor's political career. Two years later he would be elected governor of California and 16 years later President of the United States.

About half way through the speech he said this,

"You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right. Well I'd like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There's only an up or down: [up] man's old -- old-aged dream, the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order, or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. And regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would trade our freedom for security have embarked on this downward course."

This idea of Left and Right is a dualism that is foisted upon the world by collectivism. The collectivists want people to separate into two camps and then battle with each other until they eventually fight. All the while the people have no idea that they are being manipulated. This idea that the people are unaware of what is really happening allows the collectivists to deny that they are involved. Since the people don't have knowledge of this, they blame their opposites in the dualism. The Right is as complicit as the Left and vice versa.

To get angry at those on the other side, whichever side you are on, is counter-productive. In fact this is exactly what the collectivists want you to do. It works because the person on the receiving end of the anger doesn't feel that they are guilty. This makes them more apt to fight back. Although it is extremely difficult, the response should be, to turn the other cheek.

The way to combat this is individualism. The idea of individualism is the primary feature of the U.S. Constitution. The idea that the individual is supreme and that the government works for individual and not that the individual works for the State. The Rights expounded in the Bill of Rights are the primary tools individuals have to defend the concept of individualism.

Collectivists believe that the State is supreme and that all benefits come from the State.

Friday, June 2, 2017


President Trump has pulled the United States out of the scheme known as the Paris Accords and to hear the media tell it, all hell has broken loose. Here is just a sample from the New York Daily News website,

Today is the day that America's global leadership ends. Congratulations, Washington, you have become worse than useless. You are now positively dangerous. Leaving the Paris Climate Agreement is leaving the civilized world.

The civilized world!

What this is, is the essence of collectivism. Collectivism is where one or more people does something not in their own best interest in order to move the whole group, 'theoretically,' forward. If the people that are being required to do something against their best interest resist, then it usually requires coercion. Coercion works well because not only does it remove the people in the collectivists way, but it scares the hell out of everyone else.

It might be hard to find articles on the internet that explain how the Paris Accords injure the American economy because it is now dominated by the collectivist narrative, here is one.

Although some media outlets have made much of the fact that the United States is now one of three countries refusing to support the Paris climate accord, Trump is simply refusing to lead the United States and its economy off a cliff simply because nearly everybody else is signing the accord.

And then there is this from CNN, "[T]his will be the day that the United States resigned as the leader of the free world," the host of "Fareed Zakaria GPS" asserted.

Wednesday, May 24, 2017


There is a ton of chatter in the media these days about 'free speech' especially on college campuses. Conservatives claim their free speech rights are being denied while liberals say their speech is not free speech that it is hate speech. Several non-partisan analysts have pointed out that hateful or not, there is no provision in the concept of free speech which excludes any issues. In fact for centuries proponents of free speech have admonished the point that it is unpopular speech that needs to be protected the most and is actually the proof that there is free speech. There is NO subject that can be regulated.

But sure enough, here come the Republicans to introduce legislation to "protect" free speech. And just as night follows day the Democrats are not only against the Republicans, they claim the laws are not going to help anyone but more likely hurt them. And surprise, surprise, the media are right behind then, almost like an auxiliary branch of the Democratic party.

Thus, readers might be surprised to learn the Gazette Editorial Board opposes Republican-sponsored legislation to protect free speech rights at college campuses, where protesters have silenced speakers through intimidation and disruption. We oppose this legislative initiative because we feel these bills could lead to infringements on protesters' free speech rights. We would rather see UW System officials aggressively enforce current laws to protect the free speech rights of both speakers and protesters.

In this case I have to say that we DO NOT need more laws protecting free speech. We already have the most powerful law on the books, The Constitution of the United States of America. And last I checked, it is still in effect.

Putting information in a library so that people can't see it for five years? Now Obama uses a library to hide information? George ...