Yesterday I followed a link from Linda Kimball’s site Patriots and Liberty to their link on Socialism in America.

As most of us are well aware, the socialist agenda is being unabashedly propagated here in America. From the reduction of the competitive spirit in our youth in our public schools to the association of more than 60 members of the house of representatives with the Democratic Socialists of America or DSA.

Common household names such as Nancy Pelosi, John Conyers and Charles Rangel, all members of the Democratic Socialists of America, subscribe to the same ideology that has historically been the launch pad for decades of death, poverty and oppression from which no nation has ever recovered. These individuals among many others are bent on taking the great political experiment of America and casting it backwards in history. The American Republic has not yet failed nor can it be allowed to fail by the implementation of Democratic Socialism however, we are currently allowing it to fail by not fighting socialism tooth and nail. We will either be a free capitalist nation or we will be an oppressed socialist nation, we do have a choice.

This socialist agenda is being furthered primarily in our public schools. They are getting them while they are young; the socialists are turning our children to their ideology against our will. The revision of history is one of their greatest tools as in "In the Soviet Union, the future is known; it's the past that is always changing." It is time for us to step up or bow down. Stepping up through legal political means is just not working, they are laughing at us as they change our country. The hour is late.

I would like to draw the reader’s attention to the Young Democratic Socialists website.

Save the Date: YDS National Conference, Feb. 16-18, 2007 in NYC

The Young Democratic Socialists (YDS) is proud to announce that Noam Chomsky, Barbara Ehrenreich and Gayatri Spivak will be among our keynote speakers at our annual outreach conference in New York City .  Mark your calendars for the Presidents' Day weekend.  The conference will bring together youth activists and leading left-wing figures from accross the country for workshops, trainings, parties and debates.

I wanted to learn a little bit about the keynote speakers Noam Chomsky, Barbara Ehrenreich and Gayatri Spivak so I jumped over to Discover the Network.

Here are several excerpts from Discover the Network, compiled from several sources about these individuals.

Barbara Ehrenreich

• Writes for The Progressive, The Nation, and In These Times.
• Asks the U.S. to look at the 9/11 attacks with "empathetic ability"
• Author of widely required tract, Nickled and Dimed
• Socialist, 60's radical, feminist
• Honorary chair of Democratic Socialists of America

Barbara Ehrenreich, a well known socialist and former Sixties radical, is the author of the book Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting by in America. As a social activist and radical feminist, Ehrenreich writes on healthcare, families and class. She is the Honorary Chair of the Democratic Socialists of America and a board member of NORML—the National Organization for Reform of Marijuana Laws, a pro-legalization marijuana lobby. Her affinity for Communism and Marxism is not something she takes any pains to conceal. When the Communist Manifesto was re-released on its 150th anniversary, Ehrenreich celebrated the event, while pointing out the irony that in producing the Manifesto as a commercial product, capitalists were - as Lenin once observed - providing the rope that would eventually hang them.

Noam Chomsky

• Professor of linguistics, prolific pamphleteer, highly influential leftist
• Known for his extreme views (e.g., that America is worse than Nazi Germany)
• "The so-called War on Terror is pure hypocrisy, virtually without exception"

…a recent New Yorker profile calls Chomsky "one of the greatest minds of the 20^th century."

The devotion of Chomsky's followers is summarized by radio producer David Barsamian, who describes the master's effulgence in openly religious terms: "He is for many of us our rabbi, our preacher, our rinpoche, our sensei."

But unlike other cult figures, Chomsky's power is not commanded by the authority of charisma or the electricity of revelation. His speeches are flat and fatwa-like, hermetically sealed against the oxygen of disagreement by syllogism and self reference. His power comes not from his person, but from the fact that he, more than any other public intellectual, gives an authentic voice to the hatred of America that has been an enduring fact of our national scene since the mid-1960s. It is a voice that is also easily distinguished from others with similar commitments. Chomsky is interested in a few "truths" which are always "beyond dispute." His citations often loop back narcissistically to his own works. He argues with such streamroller-like disregard for other explanations that he often seems to be talking to himself: "The so-called War on Terror is pure hypocrisy, virtually without exception. Can anybody understand that? No, they can't understand it."

…his defense of Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge; his support of holocaust revisionism—may surprise those who know Chomsky only generally as a critic of U.S. foreign policy.

…take the view that the two aspects of his life's work in fact manifest the same key properties: "a deep disregard of, and contempt for, the truth; a monumental disdain for standards of inquiry; a relentless strain of self-promotion; notable descents into incoherence; and a penchant for verbally abusing those who disagree with him."

But then came word of the Khmer Rouge's killing fields… In 1980, when it when it was no longer possible to deny that some 2 million of Cambodia's 7.8 million people had indeed perished at the hands of the Khmer Rouge, Chomsky continued to deny the genocide, proposing that the problem may have been a failure of the rice crop. As late as 1988, when the skulls were piled too high to ignore any longer, Chomsky returned to the subject and insisted that whatever had happened in Cambodia, the U.S. was to blame.

As Thomas Nichols shows in "Chomsky and the Cold War," the long conflict with the Soviets and the fact that it was fought out primarily in the Third World allowed Chomsky to elaborate on his analogy with the Nazis and "to spin his master narrative on the evils of American power…." The Soviet dictatorship was not only "morally equivalent" to democratic America, but in Chomsky's view actually better because it was less powerful. The chief sin of Stalinism in his eyes was not the murder of millions but giving socialism a bad name.

Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak

• Feminist professor at Columbia University
• Justifies Palestinian suicide bombings
• Calls 9/11 "a response . . . to the state terrorism practiced outside of its own ambit by the United States"

Columbia University professor Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, a self-proclaimed crusader for "international feminism," supports the notion that suicide bombings and mass murders carried out against Israelis and Americans are justifiable - on grounds that Israel and the U.S. purportedly practice state terrorism against weaker peoples in the Middle East. She deems such slaughters the understandable actions of desperate, demoralized populations.

These are the twisted, feminist, anti-American socialists given free reign to poison the minds of the youth at the Young Democratic Socialists annual outreach conference in New York City.

Why?

The disturbing last paragraph on Gavatri Spivak’s profile speaks volumes. This is a drug addled mind rambling on incoherently trying to metaphysically justify someone killing innocents in the commission of suicide. Pure 100% top grade insanity.

I find this part particularly… amusing.

REGISTRATION & COSTS:
Registration costs for the entire conference will be based on a sliding scale of $30 - $60.  Special consideration for low-income individuals will be made with priority given to YDS members and those starting chapters.

~gregmc

For the purposes of this post, the timing for Thomas Sowell’s article A dangerous obsession could not have been better.

My family was one of the first to have the old Pong game. From there my fascination with all things electronic took off. Any time my mom or dad threw away something electrical/electronic I would get it out of the trash, take it apart and try to understand how it worked.

“Back in the day” we traded video games by printing out the code, taking it to the computer we wanted to play it on, type the code in and run it. The code was typically about 3-10 pages long depending on the “complexity” of the game. They were adventure word games, nothing more than simple if/then statements in basic.

With this fascination with electronics and computers I was of course, as were most people in the world very familiar with the name IBM. I remember the main frames down in the basement of the bank where my father worked, they were IBM’s. Most of the electronics down there and in most other businesses were manufactured by IBM.

My fascination and familiarity with computers continued through my life but I never understood what happened to IBM. Why, if they were producing the cutting edge in technology did they almost disappear altogether? To the common person there was no clear explanation and it never made sense to me. Last night on my drive home from visiting family, listening to the audio disk version of “The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History” I learned some interesting yet… alarming history. I learned about anti-trust and governmental intrusion and the literal raping of a company who has the intelligence and ambition and integrity to run a business correctly, a company merely striving to be the best.

Although I had no idea I was being taught Marxism at the time, I distinctly remember being taught an important item on the Marxist socialist agenda of anti-monopoly way back in grade school. Up until last night I was still convinced that the controlling of company monopolies was just. The socialist social engineering wing has done an excellent job at brainwashing entire generations of American youth on this subject. There are so many of these insidious sorts of socialist goals that have managed to weasel their way into our society. I am just barely beginning to get a clue.

The entire purpose behind social justice is supposed to be just that, justice. The way in which the socialist progressive/liberals/left implements this “justice” is not only morally wrong, it is yet another black and white indicator of the insane sickness permeating the minds of individuals who subscribe to this sort of thinking.

No moral intelligent human being can comprehensively justify why anyone would ever consider the punishment of individuals or groups of people who capitalize on an opportunity to be the best. No one should ever be punished for this as long as no legitimate laws are being broken, excluding the zany anti-trust laws.

I am struggling to avoid going into too much of the dry particulars of the socialist governmental bullying of IBM, but I would like to direct you to this link for some of that history.

Jesus said, Beware of the Scribes, who like to go around in long robes.

Mark 12:35-44

Some other outstanding articles of interest on this subject:

From The Antitrust "Shakedown" Racket: Abolish the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act by S.M. Oliva (February 6, 2003)

Every Hart-Scott-Rodino "notification" must be accompanied by a filing fee. For mergers valued at less than $100 million, the fee is $45,000; for mergers of more than $500 million, the price is $280,000. The fee is non-refundable, and the monies collected from said fees are what finance the $330-plus million of the FTC and Antitrust Division budgets not financed by direct appropriation.

In other words, the government is forcing businesses to pay for the very antitrust enforcement that is targeted directly against their interests. This is a classic racketeering scheme. A business is forced to pay protection money to a thug who could turn against them at any time. This is not the same thing as paying for police, military, or fire services. Those are necessary protections against threats to individual rights. Here, the government is the threat to individual rights, acting under the arbitrary authority of antitrust.

From Persecution of Microsoft is Immoral by Richard Salsman, CFA (November 13, 2003)

Microsoft is only the latest in a long line of victims of the unjust antitrust laws. From ALCOA in the 1950s to IBM in the 1970s to Wal-Mart in the 1980s, the government's goal has always been the same: prosecute an exceptional firm that is growing rich not through theft or fraud, but through superior production and voluntary trade.

Here are a couple of quotes we should all remember. Both of these quotes are from the wonderfully murderous hero of liberals worldwide Joseph Stalin, the former Russian Prime Minister, Communist leader and Political Dictator.

“If the opposition disarms, well and good. If it refuses to disarm, we shall disarm it ourselves.”

“When we hang the capitalists they will sell us the rope”.

Coming in the following weeks:

· The Ratchet Effect or how governmental control always goes up during a conflict, goes down afterwards, but never goes down to quite to the same level as it was prior to the conflict.

· Calvin Coolidge, hated by liberal historians for outstanding results driven capitalist/conservative small governmental policies and the outstanding resulting economy.

· WWI, President Woodrow Wilson, Insanity, and the great new socialist ideas that make the left feel all warm and fuzzy

~gregmc

Jesus is the reason for the season! Spread the word, it’s catchy!

Considering its occasional past transgressions, Christianity has found a peaceful and productive niche in the modern world. What many forget is that man is imperfect therefore, any of His creations will also be imperfect.

God did not give us religion.

The attitudes of most Christians have grown to allow the co-existence with even the most liberal of lifestyles and theological transgressions.

In the 21^st century, there are numerous evils threatening to destroy all that we hold dear in this great nation of America. At the forefront of most rational peoples concern is (radical) Islam. The liberal left will not fight this threat, instead they deny it or blame it on America. It often seems that they would much rather give America up to conquerors for a change in policy as in “better the sword of the Turks than the bread of the Francs” or because we deserve it. Life in American is no where near as bad as the Francs tyranny, it’s not even comparable.

The liberal left’s stance ignores the lessons of history and is incompatible with American freedom and we as Americans cannot allow this to continue. The liberal left here in America is the same liberal left that has been around since before time. They are not doing or saying anything new.

They are the same liberal left that historically ignores history.

The overall immoral social nature and Marxist goals of the modern day liberal cannot, for the sake of our survival, be tolerated any longer. Even if a liberal does not fully recognize the implications of their support of the leftist Democrat Party and their subversive goals, they are committing evil. Ignorance is not bliss. If someone encourages or merely enables evil behavior then simply, they are just as guilty in the commission of that evil.

Americans do not want Islamic Sharia Law or a communist economy/government. “American” liberals seem to desire either, take your pick as long as they, as a majority can continue to hate America and its capitalism and Christianity in general. We are approaching the pinnacle of our generations part in the eternal struggle of the haves and have not’s and this struggle has toppled governments. It has killed hundreds of millions of humans. The bubble is about to burst, we can all feel it.

For peace to exist the pendulum of the ideological struggle must maintain a center position however, when it begins to swing one way or another it must be brought back to center and this can only be accomplished with extreme opposition to the offending ideology.

It is a historical fact that nations who have swung far to the right will more often than not swing back to the center however, nations which have swung far to the left maintain that socialist/communist stance with continuous and violent oppression of any opposing view. Polonium cocktail anyone?

The slow implementation of or, more correctly, the enabling of immoral behavior and the complete submission of ones personal financial responsibilities, healthcare responsibilities and retirement saving responsibilities to governmental authority has historically been part of the mechanism to facilitate the implementation of a socialist regime. The liberals who embrace this enabling are too blinded reveling in their “freedom” or are too busy justifying the enabling in the name of multiculturalism and political correctness to see historical truth of the consequences. The progress of this long march through culture is clearly evident in American society today. The persecution and shaming of immoral behavior has been replaced by the embrace of immoral sexual freedom and the homosexual agenda. The only ideology capable of fighting this immorality once it has reached the level it has today is Christianity, of the far right variety.

Most “decent” people are well balanced. They are moderate with leanings to the left or the right but they remain balanced. Today in America the pendulum has swung far to the left. Many Christian conservatives, consider themselves to be slightly right of center however, many are recognizing the truth that to bring the pendulum back to center, a farther reach to the right is mandatory. The radical left have their liberal “freedoms” and are now trying to criminalize the Christian right and are doing a pretty good job of it, they are winning the ideological cold war in America. We have a far radical left driven agenda in control of the Democrat Party. This agenda is being fought by moderate right leaning conservatives and they are loosing.

Human nature mandates that someone will always be on top of the food chain, a nation will always be the worlds super-power. There will always be a CEO of a company and a leader of a household no matter how much you deny it, it will always be so. The liberal leftists see competition as one of the evils of the world, regardless of their noble intentions they are denying human nature. They are actively removing any semblance of competition in our public schools and they desire the removal of America from the pedestal of the world’s superpower, because in their view America is the cause of all of the world’s problems.

What the blind followers of the socialist Democrat Party of America fail to realize is that their socialist leaders will maintain America as the world’s superpower but as a communist state and they will rule its people with an iron fist.

Similarly, no American wants Iran or China or the Soviet Union to ever be the world’s superpower. There are some flakes here in America who believe that would be preferable to American “imperialism” but their attitudes would change real quick once they figure out the grass is not greener on the other side. Au contraire, it is stained with the blood of their families.

It is the moral responsibility of American Christians to stand up and take control. It is time for the far right to stand up to fight back the far left that has been allowed to spread like the disease it is, the disease of immorality which was allowed to spread through our altruistic desire to turn the other cheek. Maybe we have been cowed out of some sort of obligation for penance to be paid for the sins of our religions past that has been crammed down our throats for long enough.

There is an ad I often see on liberal websites. The ad is for a hateful little children’s book entitled “Why Mommy is a Democrat” by socialist*, class warfare provocateur* and anti-Semite* Jeremy Zilber. Every time I see this book I get this awful sick feeling in my stomach because if Mommy knew the implications of her support of the socialist Democrat Party of America then she would not be so eager to raise her child for that party of evil.

*Democrat

From: frontpagemag.com

American democracy works best with two strong, competent and reasonable political parties. But new non-partisan analytical and scientific research is finding evidence that the Democratic Party, the left wing of the American eagle, is descending into irrational extremism…

At Syracuse University, Professor Arthur Brooks’ ongoing General Social Survey has found that even since the heated political climate of Vietnam-era 1972, the percentage of self-described “extreme liberals” has grown “far more” than of those calling themselves “extreme conservatives.” Between the presidential election years 1972 and 2004, the proportion of such “extreme liberals” among those surveyed has increased by almost 57 percent.

Wednesday’s Washington Post, in an article titled “Polarization Across Party Lines, or Politics as Contact Sport,” authors Shanto Iyengar, director of the Political Communication Lab at Stanford University, and Post polling director Richard Morin described their recent research.

Iyengar and Morin reported finding “a widening chasm between Republicans and Democrats, with the percentage of partisans who have moved to the extremes…increasing significantly over time. In fact, polarized assessments of presidential performance are higher today than at any other time in recent history, including the months preceding the resignation of President [Richard M.] Nixon.”

Their study, which included having participants physically strike images of politicians, found in self-evaluations afterwards that “Democrats place the Republicans close to the point of maximum negativity…Republican assessments of Democrats are less extreme….”

Using their numbers, one can calculate that the Republican partisans Iyengar and Morin tested were on average approximately 19 percent “less extreme” than Democratic partisans in how they perceived leaders of the other party.

The “point of maximum negativity” that Iyengar and Morin saw typically approached by Democratic partisans could be called demonization, political hatred so extreme that it makes political cooperation and compromise difficult. This level of extremism among Democratic partisans undermines small-d democracy by turning politics into uncompromising warfare and every issue and statement into weapons.

Even more discouraging is research by Emory University psychologist Drew Westen, who did Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) scans of the brains of partisans as they processed political information during the 2004 presidential campaign.

What Westen discovered, as CBS commentator Dick Meyer described, was that in these partisans “it was the portions of the brain that process emotion, not rational thinking, that became active.” As Westen told Meyer, “The thinking caps went off and the feeling caps went on.”

Reacting emotionally, these partisans were quick to ignore negative or contradictory information about the politicians they favored, and were quick to believe the worst about politicians of the other party.

These brain scans show that the politically partisan brain behaves both emotionally and illogically, almost as if drugged, hypnotized or Mesmerized. “This is your brain,” wrote Meyer. “This is your brain on politics.”

And this, in growing proportions, is the brain of Democratic politicians and voters. If present trends continue, America might soon wage its elections between largely rational Republicans and entirely emotional Democrats. Such a polarization would make reasonable democratic compromise and mutual respect almost impossible. Sigmund Freud might describe these as elections between two contrary parts of the human mind, the civilization-sustaining Superego and the self-indulgent emotional Id.

And as students of Freud and of the movie “Forbidden Planet” know, the Id can produce violent monsters.

For those liberals who would be tempted to toss out the race card…

You are hereby cordially invited to pack sand:

From: randomhouse.com

What is the origin of the expression "call a spade a spade"? Is this a politically correct expression?

Let's get two things straight here: first, the expression to call a spade a spade is thousands of years old and etymologically has nothing whatsoever to do with any racial sentiment. The second is that in spite of this, some people think it is a racial statement, and therefore it should be treated with some caution.

To call a spade a spade, which means, ironically for this discussion, 'to speak plainly and bluntly; to speak without euphemisms', is first found in Ancient Greece. The exact origin is uncertain; the playwright Menander, in a fragment, said "I call a fig a fig, a spade a spade," but Lucian attributes the phrase to Aristophanes. Later, Plutarch notes that "The Macedonians are a rude and clownish people who call a spade a spade." (It is worth noting that the Greek word translated as "spade" seems actually to mean something like "bowl" or "trough"; the "spade" may be based on a Renaissance mistranslation. In this case the original expression was "to call a bowl a bowl," and thus the "spade" expression is "only" 500, rather than 2,500, years old.)

After it first appeared in English in the sixteenth century, the saying became quite common, and was used in various forms and allusions. My favorite English example:

Cecily: When I see a spade I call it a spade.

Gwendolen: I am glad to say I have never seen a spade. It is obvious that our social spheres have been widely different.

--Oscar Wilde, The Importance of Being Earnest

BTW why do the liberals over at dailykos.com call themselves Kossacks? Boy, talk about American pride!

Chavez Calls for United Socialist Party of Venezuela

By: Gregory Wilpert - Venezuelanalysis.com

Forgive me for being facetious but: blah blah…

And most importantly:

On other occasions Chavez has indicated that his government would examine all aspects of the constitution to see what needed to be changed so that it would be more in tune with the creation of socialism. Another change he has proposed is the elimination of the two-term limit for the president, so that he might be able to run again, in 2012. All such changes would be submitted to a popular referendum.

Wow…

While reading over my previous essay last night before I posted it today, I was talking to my lady about it and I told her, “What scares me is if one of these communist Democrats gets into office and figures out a way to get a 3^rd term as president, and never lets go. What if they are in the middle of a conflict like Roosevelt in WWII but they stick around and never go away?”

Are we seeing it in Venezuela now?

Why is it when you combine the words Democrat and Communist you get Demonist?

The Communist Left Tries to Win the Cold War in Retrospect (and Beyond)

By William R. Hawkins
FrontPageMagazine.com | February 16, 2006

New York University has announced a new Center for the Study of the Impact of the Cold War on the United States. It will offer dissertation and post-doctoral fellowships and a number of summer stipends over the next five years. The Center's mission is to encourage research on how the Cold War and the "red scares" {their term) shaped domestic political culture and foreign policy. The announcement stated a particular interest in proposals that deal with the presumed degradation of civil liberties, civil rights, and academic freedom; the use of political repression; and the resistance these measures provoked. Other topics may include: gender relations, internal security, labor relations, foreign policy, and political economy. NYU is also looking "forward to supporting projects that see the central issue of these years as the U.S. response to revolutionary nationalism and decolonization in Asia, Latin America, and Africa." There was no mention of the Soviet Union, which provided the main support for Marxist radicals in the Third World while its tank armies and nuclear missiles menaced Europe and America.

This year the Center expects to offer one dissertation fellowship, one post-doctoral fellowship, and two summer stipends. Dissertation fellows will receive stipends of $20,000 for a nine-month academic year; stipends for post-doctoral fellows will be $40,000; and summer fellowships are $2,000 per month. One-semester fellowships will be offered at half of the above stipend. Health insurance is also available, and office space will be provided. All fellows will have a formal affiliation with NYU.

The new Center is a joint project of the Faculty of Arts and Science and the Tamiment Library, a special collection at NYU documenting the history of "Labor and the Left." The Tamiment Library began as part of New York City’s Rand School of Social Science, founded in 1906 by the American Socialist Society - a group of socialist intellectuals that included Charles Beard, Morris Hillquit, William Ghent, and George Herron - who wished to found a school for "workers." Teachers included James Harvey Robinson, Stephen Vincent Benet, and John Dewey. Scott Nearing and Bertrand Russell also came there after losing teaching positions elsewhere because of their radical politics, including antiwar agitation.

The Tamiment Library supported the research needs of the Socialist Party and various trade unions. Many of the early leaders of the Socialist Party like Eugene Debs, J. B. S. Hardman, Meyer London, and Harry Laidler donated collections of papers to the Library. The records of the Socialist Party are one of Tamiment's core collections. Tamiment's archival collections also document the activities of the Communist Party of the United States, " its leaders, cadre, rank and file activists, and fellow travelers."

After the Russian revolution, Rand lost a number of instructors and staff who supported the Bolsheviks while the school itself remained "firmly in the right-wing of the party" as described by Andrew H. Lee, a former Tamiment staffer still at NYU, writing for the London Socialist Historians Group in 2004. The school swung leftward again in the 1930s.

In 1956 the People’s Education Camp Society, which operated the Camp Tamiment "socialist summer camp" in the Pocono Mountains, acquired the school and the library. It merged all the operations into the Tamiment Institute. In 1963, after losing its tax exempt status, the library was given to New York University, but retained its radical alignment.

According to the library’s website, "Tamiment has one of the finest research collections in the country documenting the history of radical politics: socialism, communism, anarchism, utopian experiments, the cultural left, the New Left, and the struggle for civil rights and civil liberties." The Library offers an annual $5,000 award for the best video production on the history of labor and radical politics.

The Tamiment Library uses as its logo a red rose. "The red rose has always been an important symbol with anti-authoritarian associations" says its website. After World War II, the rose became widely adopted as a symbol of the European Socialist movement. When it was thought that the "Socialist Party's symbols were considered to be too masculine, and with more women becoming active in the movement, the rose was adopted as a more gender-neutral emblem."

What makes the launch of the new Center for the Study of the Impact of the Cold War on the United States of interest is that despite its long record of radicalism, the Tamiment Library has not made foreign policy a central focus in recent years. In 1998, the aforementioned Andrew H. Lee signed an "open letter" from Librarians Against War (a far left group with sympathies for Communist Cuba) and the Action Council of the Social Responsibilities Round Table of the American Library Association proclaiming:

"As we write, our government is preparing an air assault on Iraq which will be devastating to the already suffering Iraqi people and which will contribute nothing to the cause of democracy or peace....It would be only another macho demonstration of military superiority, an object lesson in U.S. willingness to use any means, no matter how disproportionate, to pursue its ends. There are forces, among them the United Nations, which are striving for a diplomatic solution to the impasse over site inspections in the sovereign nation of Iraq. We support all such efforts."

Of course, Saddam Hussein threw all the UN weapons inspectors out of the country, provoking President Bill Clinton to launch a series of precision air and missile strikes against sites suspected of being part of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.

But since then, Tamiment has concentrated on traditional "progressive" concerns about the plight of international workers, labor laws, racism, and left-wing political movements. The library is also home to the Radical History Review journal, a creation of the radical New Left, which has followed these same themes. The Fall 2005 issue is a departure, being dedicated to Homeland Security, which means a series of articles on American torture, militarism and oppression of minorities (including homosexuals and intellectuals). This is, however, the first time since the Winter 2003 issue to deal with these kinds of topics. The Winter 2003 issue had the theme of "Terror and History" which was, of course, addressed mostly along the lines of seeing terrorists as freedom fighters.

The theme of the Spring 2005 of Radical History Review was "Another World Was Possible: A Century of Movements." Much of the content was dedicated to trying to salvage the revolutionary mission from all the failures of socialist and communist agitation since the 19^th century. The new Center for the Study of the Impact of the Cold War on the United States should be seen within this framework, as the Left waxes nostalgic for "another world" in which the United States lost the Cold War and the dogmas of Marx and Lenin prevailed across the world.

By: William R. Hawkins

The maintenance of a civilization REQUIRES that one major part of itself does not, in the deepest darkest depths of the word hate, another. For if one part truly hates the other, attempts at the reduction of the other parts influence upon that civilization will become fatal.

In the digital age the submission of ones viewpoint has become so simple and accessible to others that it may result in expediting an existing nation’s civil war. I think that possibly an unforeseen consequence of humans getting too smart too fast is that, we share too much information.

History shows that without a major divisive factor, two distinctly different parts of a society can co-exist peacefully. When a subject of significant substance such as war rears its ugly head, the division can become abundantly and dangerously clear.

I have seen two very disturbing words written on both liberal and conservative blogs. I have heard those two words spoken on both liberal and conservative talk shows. It is said that if Democrats don’t stop dividing this country on the topic of the Islamic threat this country faces, we could be cast into civil war…

Democrats... Please stop.

~gregmc

This is the sixth and final installment in my 6 part series On Being a Sheepdog.

The heat of the moment

For the life of me I can’t remember what term was used to describe this topic but it is comparable to road rage. This topic is directed at everyone who wishes to be a protector.

There is a broad line that cannot be crossed while operating as a sheepdog, if that line is crossed then we are no better than the criminals we fight.

Police officers can attest that after a chase whether it’s on foot or in a vehicle, when the suspect is finally apprehended there is often an overwhelming desire to take all of the adrenaline, frustration and fear out on that suspect. After a chase there is an overwhelming sense of indignity, “how dare they run?!?” Civilians have absolutely no concept as to what it takes to not beat the living snot out of criminal scum who run. When a human is operating in an honorable law enforcement capacity, the anger at the audacity of a criminal running from them can overwhelm their inherent desire to do the right thing. The right thing is to use only the proper amount of force to apprehend and detain a suspect, not to punish them. Although I understand and have experienced this “condition” there is absolutely no excuse for a law enforcement agent to beat a suspect after they are subdued.

I consider revenge to be one of mankind’s ultimate evils. When violent action is taken it should only be taken to eliminate an immediate threat to your life, never ever as revenge. When you start doing what you do for the purpose of revenge, you are no better than a criminal.

Anger will get you killed or thrown in jail. Calm, cold, precise action will get your goals accomplished.

My disclaimer:

I want to restate that this essay is not intended to instruct anyone on the use of firearms or violence. You should refer yourself to a trained licensed professional for this purpose. What I have outlined here is merely my observations through my life’s experience, the hand my good Lord dealt me.

I have debated back and forth on whether to post this because of how controversial some of the subject matter is and how it can be misinterpreted and misused. I am of the mind that no thing can make any person do something they don’t want to do. I call this personal responsibility. If any of you take this information and kill someone and claim it was because of my writing you are full of crap. Grow up and take responsibility for your own actions.

This essay is not to be used while operating heavy machinery.

This essay is not to be used while using your snow blower on your roof.

This essay is not to be used while using your iron on clothing you happen to be wearing.

This essay is not to be used while spilling hot coffee on yourself, somehow thinking it won’t be hot.

This essay is in no way shape or form meant to replace professional training on the subject matter contained herein. Nor is it a declaration or express permission of when and how you should harm someone in defense of your own life, that is a decision you as an individual must make and not blame on me or my essay.

~gregmc

In an attempt to get my point across clearly, I request that you attempt to ignore the names here because, for the purpose of this essay they just don’t matter. I had originally written this with the names omitted but, for context, names are required.

I was paying attention to this race and I knew who I was voting for long before I heard that Ciro Rodriguez was a traitor to America. Why he is not jailed for treason is one of those questions I will be asking for a long time to come. A more disturbing question is why do Democrats continue to support him? Even former President Clinton showed up this weekend to prop him up. Considering Ciro Rodriguez’s background, which is shared below, any person who continues to support this traitor should also be swept up and thrown in jail.

Former FBI Assistant Special Agent in Charge Al Ortiz Lays Out the Case Describing Ciro Rodriguez Ties to Islamic Extremists and Known Terrorists

EX-CONGRESSMAN CIRO RODRIGUEZ EXERCISES DANGEROUS JUDGMENT

Former FBI Assistant Special Agent in Charge Al Ortiz Lays Out the Case Describing

Ciro Rodriguez Ties to Islamic Extremists and Known Terrorists

(San Antonio-TX) As a member of Congress, Ciro Rodriguez co-sponsored legislation (H.R. 2121). If passed, it would free convicted terrorists by repealing the Secret Evidence Act, this act is a valuable tool used by federal law enforcement to protect our national security, which has resulted in the capture of suspected terrorists, such as Nasser Ahmed. During Rodriguez’s efforts to enact this legislation, he sponsored a summit on Capitol Hill where an estimated 500 supporters gathered to listen to speakers, including Abdurahman Alamoudi, a convicted terrorist and a direct political contributor to the Ciro Rodriguez campaign. At the Rodriguez summit, Alamoudi made remarks in support of releasing the “Blind Sheik,” Omar Abdel Rahman – who was convicted for his role in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Ciro Rodriguez’s dangerous judgment regarding this legislation and his acceptance of support from known terrorists may be based on the influence of his former close aide Asim Ghafoor.

Ghafoor worked for Rodriguez in Austin before joining the ex-Congressman in Washington. Since leaving Rodriguez’s employment, Ghafoor has worked as a political consultant, spokesman, and public relations director for several Islamic organizations with known ties to terrorists, including the Global Relief Foundation and Care International. Ghafoor also formed a PAC, whose only contribution was to Ex-Congressman Ciro Rodriguez. Ghafoor’s previous statements illustrate his ultimate goal in influencing Ciro Rodriguez: “We [Muslims] are here [in the U.S.] not just to be nice to people, not to say great things about people, but to bring truth and justice and Islamic ways to this country….you should rule by Islam otherwise you’re a Kafir (unbeliever, non-Muslim).”
During a press conference today, Congressman Henry Bonilla offered his former colleague Ciro Rodriguez an opportunity to explain several key questions resulting from Al Ortiz’s review of this information:

• Why did you co-sponsor the Secret Evidence repeal bill knowing it would put suspected terrorists like Nasser Ahmed back on the street?

• Why did you sponsor a conference with suspected (and later convicted) terrorists at the U.S. Capitol?

• What are your guidelines for accepting and returning contributions from individuals who are suspected of having ties with Islamic extremist organizations or are sympathetic to their causes?

The above information is not speculation or someone’s opinion, they are documented facts.

Ciro Rodriguez is still in the running and still has massive support from progressives, liberals and the left in general here in Texas.

With all of that being said, the purpose of this article is not to bash Ciro Rodriguez. That is being accomplished well enough already and they don’t need my amateur help. The purpose is to question why anyone would still give support to Ciro Rodriguez. Why, considering Ciro’s horrible judgment, would an ex president show up to support him? To show Democrat Party solidarity? They would not stand by Senator Joe Lieberman because he supports the war and the battle in Iraq in particular. What message does that send us?

The Democrats will not show solidarity with someone who supports the battle in Iraq but they will send out the cavalry (to include former President Clinton) to support a Democrat who aids, sympathizes with and takes money from a terrorist who tried to gas ten’s of thousands of Americans.

I don’t care if it is a republican or a democrat, people like Ciro Rodriguez and any and all of his supporters should be shamed, shunned and jailed.

This, to me is the final 100% proof that the Democratic Party is not only the party of socialists (as is abundantly proven) but has turned into the party of terrorists. It’s all the proof I need to know that they are enemies of this nation. I don’t need to wonder any longer. You can’t tell me that former President Clinton did not know this individuals history concerning his support of terrorists, he knew and he still showed up to give him support. He gave support for the party, not the nation.

Why do liberals continue to support someone with a record like this? Why?

As Bill puts it over at Ejectejecteject.com in his essay Tribes.

…“The mobs of murdering Hutus and swarms of slaughtering Serbs are as different racially as it is possible to be, and they are cut from precisely the same cloth.”…

Emphasis mine

And as I state in my essay Think About It:

“why can’t we all just get along?”… “because we are humans, and as long as that is so, there will always be someone who wants to steal from you, someone who would want to hurt you, someone who would kill you and ultimately, on the very top level of madness, someone who would want to destroy your entire way of life and your country along with it.”

Ultimately, because they are crooks all the same on varying levels, they have always been around. From the petty street level mugger, to a former president who supports an individual who receives donations from terrorists (and that individual himself), to a nation’s dictator proclaiming that he will destroy Israel and the West. They are cut from precisely the same cloth and they support each other. An enemy of my enemy is a friend of mine, birds of a feather flock together, show me who your friends are and I will show you who you are… just ask the liberals.

Liberals keep showing us your true colors, they will eventually run.

The colors of America won’t.

~gregmc

This is the fifth installment in my 6 part series On Being a Sheepdog.

Abduction and escape

If you are ever abducted and placed in the trunk of a car, kick, tear, do what ever you must to break out the tail lights. This will hopefully cause the vehicle to be pulled over and if/when that happens make all of the noise you can. You will be rescued.

Do not ever let the abductor move you to a second location. If you are going to fight for your life, that is the time to do it. This is because most killers kill their victims at the second location, that’s why you are moved.

There is nothing fancy about fighting back in these situations. You should tear their throats out with your teeth if you can. Take off their ears, nose, and fingers, whatever you can get your teeth around. You gouge eyes and tear flesh. Kick, scream, punch and bite. You must become an animal and do your best to rip them to shreds. You have to do what you must to survive.

Shoving the sissies aside

Long ago I learned that trying to debate with someone with an opposing view concerning these kinds of topics is useless, I have better ways to spend my time. The simple truth is that, on this topic we are right and they are wrong, most of them have no concept as to what they are talking about so they are simply talking out of their arse’s. These are the individuals we are usually protecting.

Our schools have been overwhelmed by women and tulip touting pacifist men. Men are, more often than not, sheepdogs where women are more often than not, the nurturers of our society. This is as nature and God intended. Our boys are being taught by the sissies in our public schools that aggression and violence under any circumstances is wrong. The reasoning behind this teaching is stunningly ignorant however noble it may be. As long as there are predators in our world, violence will be required to deal with them to protect the sheep (and ourselves). Since the dawn of mankind, there have always been wolves and therefore, there will always be sheepdogs.

Most pacifists care for the wrong people. This is the shield they hide behind. You will never hear them admit this but fear is ultimately the driving force behind pacifism. Sheepdogs care but, the sheep will never understand that we know how to care for the right people. In a sheepdogs mind wolves don’t deserve to be cared for.

It is up to us as men to raise our boys with the understanding, ideals and values to be “good” sheepdogs.

Don’t ever waiver in your belief that aggression and the capacity for violence is required in this world we live in. Look at the nay-sayers and smile, maybe nod your head as you gently shove them to the side.

Dreams of peace and what if’s and second guessing yourself are best left to the sheep. As a sheepdog you must be confident and determined, not wishy-washy. You are either a sheepdog or a sheep (or a wolf), there is really no in-between.

Next:

The heat of the moment

I venture to guess that liberals go through about the same thought process as conservatives do when it comes to current events. We all care, we do. Through the observance of all the war and killing I believe we both arrive at the same conclusion, “why can’t we all just get along?”… This is where, I believe liberals stop thinking (God bless their hearts) while conservatives continue to think and arrive at: “because we are humans, and as long as that is so, there will always be someone who wants to steal from you, someone who would want to hurt you, someone who would kill you and ultimately, on the very top level of madness, someone who would want to destroy your entire way of life and your country along with it.”

Liberals, the reason you are turning a blind eye to the threat of Islam is that the only persuasion that has the intestinal fortitude to fight the fight that must be fought is the conservative persuasion. You are fearful of a conservative majority so you have thoroughly politicized the entire issue. You fear the conservative majority required to save our collective arse’s as opposed to the liberal majority we have “enjoyed” for the past 30ish years. I am afraid you are just going to have to deal with it because we are rising up and will take the reins from your inept limp wristed grip to save our nation.

There is one incident I want to remind you all of. In 1993 Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman (Arabic: ??? ??? ??????) or the Blind Sheik was the master mind behind the bombing of the World Trade Center. Rahman became one of the most prominent and outspoken Muslim clerics to denounce Egypt’s secularism. Liberals, yes, look at the date. Wow that was long before President Bush led our Nation into Iraq. Take a good look at that date again, I just want to make sure you catch that. Here it is again: 1993.

1993

Rahman denounces Egypt’s secularism in addition to the West’s immorality. Did you catch that part? Secularism. Do any of you need this in a different language so it sinks in?

Secularism, not Christianity but secularism. Got it? Not oil or American imperialism but Egyptian secularism. Why is that so hard to grasp, why do you have such short memories?

The bomb Rahman helped create had neat little canisters full of a nerve agent that, if it had not, through pure luck, burned up in the explosion would have killed approximately 20 – 30 thousand New Yorkers. That is 20,000 to 30,000 Americans. Had the tower collapsed and assisted in the dispersion of the gas the death toll would have been much higher.

If a Democrat genuinely displayed the ability to do what needs to be done to save the world from Islam, I would vote for them. We can deal with the socialism issues later.

That date again? 1993

Something Moslems hate as much as America? Secularism.

For the lives of our families…

Think about it.

~gregmc

This is the forth installment in my 6 part series On Being a Sheepdog.

The very best in home security systems

Good internal and external lighting. No shrubbery around your windows and a big dog and a weapon.

That’s it.

Burglars will often scope neighborhoods and target the houses that look easy. Once again, don’t be a target.

Have a plan for home invasion

My father always reminded us children that at night, if we get up to go to the restroom and we think he may be up, we had better let him know who we are. He instructed us to call out to him so he would not accidentally shoot us. If you are going to be armed in your home, I recommend advising your family similarly.

If I wake up to noise in my home that does not belong (and my dog’s low growls) my lady slides onto the side of the bed opposite the door with her Lady Smith .40, I slide down there with her, armed with my Ruger .357 (loaded with .38 hydra shocks for safety) and she prepares to dial 911. I recommend calling out and warning the intruder that you have a weapon and hopefully they will leave. I also recommend stopping here for most families. Just protect your bedroom and let them take what they want. Don’t try to clear your home until the police arrive and you have to open the door for them. When you open the door make sure you have laid your weapon down and inform the officer, don’t reach for your weapon again or you will probably be taken down rather roughly, the police officer doesn’t know positively that you are not the intruder, he/she just got there.

If you have children in your home I recommend seeking some training on structure and room clearance techniques.

Kitchen knives

This is just some basic info on knife fighting. Once again Hollyweird tries to make it look cool by having the heroes hold their knives with the blade pointing down and out along the forearm. Once again this is unpractical. You are reducing your reach by using this “technique”. Hold the knife with the pommel down and the blade up so you can cut anything the aggressor puts within your reach. Don’t use the downward stabbing motion as it is the easiest strike to block, even with a knife. Cut with combinations. If they put a hand out there slash it and follow that up with a slash across the face or throat if you can do it. You are better off cutting them to shreds. Cut from the left, the right, up and down but do so in succession, use combinations. To be effective and avoid being spastic, practice your techniques.

If you don’t have the time, money or access to a course in knife fighting, go and get yourself a rubber practice knife and practice what feels right and makes sense based on the basics I have outlined above. Better still seek training.

Remember: if they offer it, cut it deep.

Broomsticks and branches

The most commonly found weapons in the world are sticks. We have long sticks, short sticks, stout sticks and weak sticks. Learn how to fight with a stick, learn to use it effectively because it might be the only weapon you have access to.

Next:

Abduction and escape

Shoving the sissies aside

Irony

On 10/07/93, on the way from Constanta, Romania enroute to Istanbul, Turkey, my ship, the USS Ashland, LSD-48 was diverted to Operation Restore Hope Somalia, Africa. Our mission was to assist in supplying and the support of, our forces there to help fight back the psychotic Moslems killing everyone there. We arrived 10/18/93.

Details of that mission are not relevant, what is relevant is the irony of the fact that we were about to visit a city that the same psychotic Moslems took by bloody sword 540 years ago. 540 years ago, in 1453, Moslem forces took Constantinople and Christendom’s greatest church the Hagia Sofia. At around the same time they were sweeping in from the south into Spain. It happened in the past and it is happening now.

Last night, while listening to Hugh Hewitt a caller reminded me of the significance of Iraq. Iraq is a crossroads holding back the forces of Iran. There is a good reason that Saudi Arabia, Syria and Iran are sending thousands of fighters over the borders into Iraq to fight our forces. Iraq IS the first major battle of WWIII. If we allow Iraq to fall under the radical influence of the Sunni Iranians, their puppet government the Syrians their army (among others) al-Qaeda and Saudi Arabia and all of the other Sunni maniacs will overwhelm the Middle East.

We cannot for one second consider Saudi Arabia our ally. Our government due to pressure from liberal civil rights groups are allowing Wahhabist mosques to be built by the Saudis, on American soil, tax free, to spread their hate right here. I digress.

Without the squabbling between Sunni and Shiite keeping them all busy, they will have the capacity to concentrate their Hitler-esqe ambitions on the rest of the Middle East, and Africa and eventually, unfortunately, sooner than later… Europe. Don’t assume that because the Shiite hate the Sunni that they are no less of a threat however, with Shiite Saddam Hussein out of the picture, there is nothing except American forces keeping the Sunni tide back.

There was a period of time when Islam contributed much to the civilized world but something has gone horribly awry. What that cause was is of no consequence, our survival is. I have heard it said that it will take at least 40 years to win this war. I can only assume this is due to the fact that the radical teachings of Sunni Wahhabism will have to erased, or that entire generation will have to be erased (or die out) because they cannot be brought back to the fold of peace. An entirely new generation of Middle Easterners will have to be raised WITHOUT the hateful rhetoric that is spewed in their schools and mosques, unless of course, as the evidence is steadily revealing, the hateful rhetoric is inherent to the religion of Islam.

Another piece of irony just dropped into my lap… a good friend of mine just sent me this:

An old man, a boy & a donkey

An old man, a boy & a donkey were going to town. The boy rode on the donkey & the old man walked. As they went along they passed some people who remarked it was a shame the old man was walking & the boy was riding.

The man & boy thought maybe the critics were right, so they changed positions.

Later, they passed some people that remarked, "What a shame, he makes that little boy walk."

They then decided they both would walk! Soon they passed some more people who thought they were stupid to walk when they had a decent donkey to ride. So, they both rode the donkey.

Now they passed some people that shamed them by saying how awful to put such a load on a poor donkey.

The boy & man said they were probably right, so they decide to carry the donkey. As they crossed the bridge, they lost their grip on the animal & he fell into the river and drowned.

The moral of the story?

If you try to please everyone, you might as well...

Kiss your a_s goodbye!

I am not afraid of much in this world but something that does scare me is that during my brief visit to looney land (dailykos) I was overwhelmed by the denial. Many liberals honestly believe conservatives are focusing on the concern over the Islamic threat for political gain. I have been operating off of the principle assumption that we were all at least in the same chapter concerning the threat we face, we are not the libs are not even in the same book. The libs (as a majority) deny it or worse still, they blame it all on America and so therefore, don’t have the stomach to fight for our nation.

~gregmc

I have been trying for the life of me to remember what drove me to be the hateful little liberal that I once was. I guess I was full of ignorant adolescent dreams. I use the word ignorant in its purest definition, not derogatory but just as an absence of knowledge, an absence of the wisdom that most of us eventually understand but so many “mature” liberals consciously ignore in their mass-psychosis. Somehow this insanity of an unrealistic utopian world is propagated through liberal blogs and teahouses and wherever else it is the left gathers. They all feed on each others insanity, it seems to be quite literally, mass-insanity.

I have been not only a witness to, but a participant of quite a few liberal “discussions” and more often than not, what I recall was anger and a lot of it. I remember quite a few very disturbing personalities and such an utter lack of cognitive reasoning as to be quite alarming to anyone outside of our little groups. I recall an inherent hatred for anything that resembled authority and a deep rooted hatred for Christianity.

Something lefties don’t understand is that I can remember what it was like to hold many of their ideas and views, as can many other conservatives, most of us were once there. This is one of the reasons why liberalism is a bastion of the youth and seldom the old, because the youth have not yet lived life and learned what works and what doesn’t. They have not gained the wisdom required to isolate the ideas and resulting behaviors which are ultimately destructive to themselves as individuals and society as a whole. They have not yet learned how to push the fantasies aside and instead, stand up for what history and wisdom has proved and continues to prove as the most correct way to deal with the human condition. My father had always told me to learn from other peoples mistakes. Most of us don’t do that, we have to learn on our own but, that is not a free ticket to ruin the lives of everyone else.

During a, less than intelligent period of my life (for a lack of better terms) I embraced an old pagan crede of “An it harm none, do as thee wilt”. Do what you want as long as it’s not hurting anyone. Through life’s experiences and wisdom (if you learn your lessons) you learn that stigmatism and morals and persecution are not bad words, they keep you from doing the things that, in the long run DO hurt someone. That someone is sometimes yourself and unfortunately, often those around you, or those who come after your harmless actions, like illegitimate children. There are so many things that we do or have done that have long term ringing repercussions that we could not have ever foreseen, unless we had listened to our elders, those who have been there, done that.

One of the liberal commenter’s on my brief trip to dailykos attempted to delegitimize my position due to my “disturbing past”. The disturbing past he was referring to was my involvement 10 years ago in Wicca. Not quite that disturbing if you know anything about “fuzzy bunny” Wicca which is very closely associated with liberal and leftist ideology. Regardless my point is that every single one of us has a past and parts of it are not that stellar. If we cannot admit the faults of our past then what can we do? I recognize and understand the bad decisions I made in my past and I have thankfully learned from them, I don’t repeat them.

Taking the above statements of youth as an excuse for ignorance into consideration, what excuse do individuals like John Kerry and the rest of the “mature” looney left have? Part of it may be the same thing that drives Hollyweird to persist in their liberal ideology. Most of the leftist public elites are wallowing in wealth, wealth which they more often than not, either married into or acquired through avenues which did not involve capitalism, ways that did not involve acquiring an education and working for their money. Playing (working) and living in fantasy land as in Hollyweird and the entertainment industry in general. Many were born rich or “acquired” their wealth and have continued to be rich and have therefore continued to remain ignorant to reality. If you are living the rich life you inherently become out of touch with the reality of what life is really like for the non-rich. These rich politicians reach out to the poor and disenfranchised and the “victims” of those who make it here in America. They are a majority of their base, they are their voters yet they cannot truly relate. I imagine in their ignorance many of the “caring rich” genuinely do care, but alas, they are so out of touch with reality that they don’t grasp the fatality of the implementation of Marxist Socialism to solve the world’s woes.

This leads me personally to another quandary. Why are there individuals such as myself in existence who are not rich, but realize that it is not up to the government to take the money which wealthy capitalists have earned, to give it to me? Why are there so many people out there who do? Is it laziness? I think that possibly, it just might be laziness in part that inspires these individuals to their liberal ideology. Laziness (and cowardice) hidden behind social rights and multiculturalism. Laziness and an uncontrolled amount of inherent jealousy for those who are not lazy, for those who have earned their keep, this is part of their disease.

Another broad line dividing liberals and conservatives is loyalty. I believe that regardless of our nations past, even if we caused all of the turmoil in the Middle East, even if we are the woe of the world, I would not have us lay down to die. I believe in fighting for my nation, my home. I am a patriot and I am thankful of the freedoms I have, I don’t hate my nation. Liberals, as evidenced in their bumper stickers and slogans are not patriots. While I was in the abyss known as dailykos I saw a quote by ML King under someone’s comments. We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy....--ML King, "Beyond Vietnam” This exemplifies what the left stands for, everyone but us, everywhere but their own home.

Something else lacking on the left (at least out of 30+ individual on dailykos) is a firm grip on reality. When I posed my two questions concerning the possibility of another Islamic attack on American soil I was mocked and ridiculed. Snippy comments of “his sky is falling” and “the big bad Islamists are coming” were flung my way along with much vulgarity and unabashed hatred.

I as many men should do, often question my own stances in private. However harrowing my little trip into looney land was, it helped reinforce my knowledge that the left is wrong, oh so very wrong and so very full of hate, ugly, dark, evil hate.

I want them all to know is that we are not afraid of them or their socialist (temporary) or Islamic (temporary) allies. Friedrich Nietzsche said: If you stare into the Abyss long enough the Abyss stares back at you. Call me a wacky right wing Christian if you will but, over at dailykos, I felt just that, the hate focused at me was almost overwhelming.

This is the third installment in my 6 part series On Being a Sheepdog.

Don’t be a target

Hold your head up high, puff your chest out a little bit and throw your shoulders back. Look people in the eye, especially the predators. Don’t eyeball them but let them know you don’t fear them, give them a friendly nod. As you develop that… part inside of you that says “I will not hesitate to tear your head off if you threaten to harm me or my people” the predators will see it and they will think twice before they attack you.

This instruction is synonymous with the behavior of predators in nature. They go after the weak and the old because if they are disabled with a kick in the jaw while trying to take down a strong young buck they will likely die. Unless they are sociopaths, no criminal has the desire to deal with someone who has the potential to beat them, especially when they see that sparkle of anticipation. That little something that says “I invite you to try, I need my sheepdog teeth sharpened.”

Don’t walk around with a stick up your arse but in some situations, if you look meek and weak then you will be considered prey and you will be preyed upon.

People with guns kill

You hear the idiots on the left (and a few on the right) declaring that guns kill. These poor morons are unconscious tools for the socialist agenda of disarming America but that is way off subject.

The bottom line here is that ignorant people with guns kill, not the guns themselves. The first time I see a gun floating around by itself shooting people then I would consider a ban, but until then, take responsibility for your own individual actions.

Teach your children to respect and fire weapons at an early age (I learned at the age of 9). Among the 2 girls and 3 boys in my family, there is not a single gun incident to report even considering the fact that my father always had several loaded weapons somewhere throughout the house for easy access at any time. My father was a high profile banker so naturally, we were at an elevated risk for burglary or abduction.

Intent to kill

One of the first lessons we learn as children on the use of firearms is that, you do not point your weapon at something you do not intend to kill. This is a core lesson especially when coupled with the lesson that once you pull the trigger there is no going back.

In the sheepdog capacity, unless you are trained in the apprehension and detainment of individuals, when you point your weapon at someone who immediately threatens your life with a deadly weapon, you pull the trigger immediately. If you have determined that someone poses an immediate threat to your life or is capable of causing you great bodily harm at that moment then, you drop them, without hesitation. If you don’t you die.

Clearing leather

Proper shooting technique and other tactical procedures can only be learned through training and practice however, I believe this is one technique that I can properly convey here. This advanced technique is probably best practiced on a private range since most range masters (and range rules) demand firing only when fully extended. The practicing of this technique should be reserved for individuals who are already experienced with a sidearm.

When you draw your side arm, or “clear leather” the technique you use can be a lifesaver. In the movies you see the actors draw and lift their weapon up in an arc. This wastes several seconds of potential shooting time, and milliseconds count in a 20 yard handgun fight. When you draw your weapon from a standard side holster, the barrel is obviously pointing down and you must lift it up to target. As soon as you clear leather, rotate your sidearm downrange begin firing and as you fire, “push” the barrel towards your target. This allows you to begin firing as soon as your sidearm is clear of its holster instead of having to wait until you are fully extended. Your shots will most certainly not be as accurate as they will be when you are on target and fully extended but the advantage is that your opponents accuracy will be severely degraded considering the fact that there is lead coming their way, it is a form of suppression.

Flashlights and sidearms

It looks cool in Hollyweird when the actor is creeping along clearing a dark room with his flashlight crossed over the top of his wrist and his weapon underneath it. It looks cool but it’s not practical and I’ll tell you why. If an adversary is hiding in the dark and they see a flashlight where do you think they are going to shoot? They will shoot at the flashlight which you are conveniently holding in front of your chest, not a good idea now is it?

Hold your sidearm normally but hold the flashlight up and out to your side, not directly in front of your body.

Next:

The very best in home security systems

Have a plan for home invasion

Kitchen knives

Broomsticks and branches

This is the second installment in my 6 part series On Being a Sheepdog.

Letting boys be boys

Several schools are considering the ban of, or have actually banned the game of tag. From what I gather the reasons are that the game hurts feelings (when someone is tagged “it”) and kids can get hurt. What I want to address is that simply, it’s way past time to yank the rug out from under these overly protective, limp-wristed, liberal, daisy pickers and let our boys grow up to be the men they must to be. Let them play hard and get hurt.

This has to start at home. Wrestle with your boys, they will get hurt but above all else they will learn dexterity/coordination, how to use strength and technique, pain tolerance and all the things men should know. Let your boys play the games where they punch each in the arm. Let them learn how to take it without either getting mad or crying. If they get angry then admonish them, teach them to play rough without getting angry when they get hurt. When boys play rough it is inevitable that someone will get hurt, that’s ok, let them.

When my friends and I were jumping trashcans on our BMX bikes in the middle of the street wearing nothing more than a pair of cut off jean shorts and shoes, safety was not our first concern. While I won’t hesitate to allow my children to climb trees, swim in creeks and rivers and jump their bikes over trash cans, I will ensure they wear a helmet when appropriate. I do believe in safety first but not to the point of turning our boys into girls. Yup, boys are boys and girls are girls, I don’t blur the sexes. I am aware that many girls are capable of jumping bikes and climbing trees, it’s not exclusive to boys but, boys are more often than not the ones who engage in these types of activities.

Complacency

This is pretty simple. As soon as you start thinking it won’t happen to you, it will. You don’t have to be paranoid all the time but when it comes to separating the survivors from the statistics, it is those individuals who are continuously aware of their surroundings who are most likely to survive a situation that would kill most others.

Be aware of your surroundings. When you walk into a restaurant take a scan of the people in there. When you go to the mall, keep an eye on the thugs in the food court. Be aware of your surroundings. You can’t just say you do it and then don’t because you don’t want to always be “on edge” or because you want to “relax”. Relax and kick back at home.

As with many of the proven techniques and advice contained in this essay, this is a conscious decision you have to make, you will either do it or you won’t.

Judge other people’s appearance

If you’ve got your pants sagging and appear to be wearing colors, you will be suspicious to a sheepdog. If you are drunk and hanging all over every woman in the bar, you will be suspicious to a sheepdog. If you look suspicious at all, you will be a target for sheepdogs.

Just like grazers can tell the difference between predators and the other herd animals, sheepdogs have a 6^th sense for detecting those who are a threat to others, the wolves. The sheep feel the same trepidation however, because of their stark terror of confrontation they deny it and candy coat.

We can be wrong but through experience, we are right more often than not.

Sheep, please don’t argue this point. If you don’t judge people by their appearance then you are a fool. You will probably one day be a statistic. The bottom line on judging a book by its cover is if you desire to look like a thug then you are probably a thug, if not then stop dressing like one.

Next:

Don’t be a target

People with guns kill

Intent to kill

Clearing leather

Flashlights and sidearms