D-Day

Today is the seventy-fourth anniversary of D Day, the Allied amphibious invasion on the beaches of Normandy during World War II.  That assault began the drive across Europe, liberating towns and villages all across western Europe, and ultimately the defeat of the Third Reich.   

On June 6, 1944, more than 160,000 Allied troops landed along a 50-mile stretch of heavily-fortified French coastline in Normandy, France. Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower called the operation a crusade in which, “we will accept nothing less than full victory.” More than 5,000 Ships and 13,000 aircraft supported the D-Day invasion, and by day’s end, the Allies gained a foot hold in Continental Europe. The cost in lives on D-Day was high. More than 9,000 Allied Soldiers were killed or wounded, but their sacrifice allowed the Americans and her allies to begin the slow, hard slog across Europe.

Other than Fox, did you see any mention of this historic date in any of the mainstream media?  Neither did I.

And that's a shame.

But don't expect the hate-America-first media to remind us of the heroics and sacrifice that 18, 19 and 20-year old American boys made that day and in the months following.  Rather, watch some movies and series that were superb in production, historical accuracy and message.  I'd recommend these: Saving Private Ryan, Band of Brothers, The Longest Day.

It's ironic that Hollywood honors this historic day and the men behind it, but the so-called media will not, and does not.  These films put this event into the proper perspective without propaganda or  slant,

It is history.  And history should be remembered.

Memorial Day: North and South

On Memorial Day, most folks look forward to a day off from work, and maybe some steaks and burgers on the grill with friends and family.  Oh, and a few adult libations.  And yes, from time to time they remember fleetingly,  acknowledging all those Americans who gave their all to America.  But there's a couple of interesting things about Memorial Day that most folks don't know about.

Memorial Day began as a Confederate holiday in 1866, the year following the end of the War of Northern Aggression, which was then called Decoration Day.  Wesley Pruden describes it in this way.

The ladies of Columbus, Georgia, went to the graveyard with broken hearts to decorate the graves of their husbands, sons and brothers who had died defending hearth and home from the depredations of old William Tecumseh Sherman on his infamous march from Atlanta to the sea.

The ladies of Columbus decorated the graves with flags and flowers in remembrance of what love and sacrifice had wrought. They decorated the few Union graves among their dead with flowers, too. “They were cruel,” said one of the ladies of the Yankee invaders, “only to be true to their cause.” This simple act of generosity was quickly noted by several important newspapers in the North.

“The action of the ladies on this occasion,” said the Daily National Intelligencer in the nation’s capital, “in burying whatever animosities or ill feeling may have been engendered in the late war towards those who fought against them, is worthy of all praise and condemnation.” The Cleveland Daily Leader agreed: “The act was as beautiful as it was unselfish, and it will be appreciated in the North.”

And so Decoration Day became a day of remembrance and reconciliation across the land, later to be called Memorial Day, and still, particularly in the small towns of the South, a day of decorating graves of Confederate soldiers of the War Between the States with flowers and flags.

Memorial Day embraces the sacrifice of all Americans, and Confederates as well, and those brave men would not understand or condone the tearing down of statutes that memorialize those sacrifices, nor of the petty act of breaking out the tiny images of Stonewall Jackson and Robert E. Lee from the stained glass windows in the Episcopal Washington National Cathedral in Washington DC.  Despicable.

Another interesting national concern arising from the ashes of that terrible war was the implementation of a civilian rifle proficiency program.  In reviewing the casualty statistics of the war, the Union brass realized that the Southerners, being primarily agrarian, were expert sharpshooters, while the Northerners were largely city boys, and were not very good shots at all.  Dismayed by the lack of marksmanship shown by their troops, Union veterans Col. William C. Church and Gen. George Wingate formed the organization in 1871.  As the the military is drawn from the citzentry, it was decided that it was past time to teach American civilians how to shoot, and shoot well.  The primary goal of this new association would be to "promote and encourage rifle shooting on a scientific basis," according to Col. Church.

And with that decision, the National Rifle Association was born.  Today, the NRA encourages shooting sports, promotes and defends the Second Amendment, advocates for political activism, and teaches gun safety, pre-licensing education for states' concealed carry permits, and gunsmithing. The NRA enjoys huge popular support, especially as the left continues to seek the abolition of the Second Amendment and the universal cconfiscation of all guns   In fact, over six million Americans are dues paying members of the organization, many for precisely this reason.   

Molon Labe.

The Great Censorship Movement

It appears that the great Censorship Movement is very much alive and well, thank you.  And it's growing and thriving all over the world.  Let's just look at two examples, one in the UK, the other in the US.

Stateside, pretty much everyone has now come to understand that the real purpose of Facebook, what with Marky-Mark testifying - er lying - in front of congress recently, is to collect and sell data on its users.  But, they tell us, we're not politically aligned necessarily, and we don't censor conservative voices.  Gee,  they say, we don't do bias here at Facebook, we want all sides heard.  OK, that's what Facebook's management wants you to believe, anyway.  But the reality is something quite different than the company's talking points.  Consider that one Matt Margolis, a best selling author, regularly uses Facebook ads for promoting his books.  Now several of those books are exposes on the evil and corruption in the Kenyan's regime, er, administration.  According to PJ Media, 

The last time he tried to advertise his latest book, The Scandalous Presidency of Barack Obama, on Facebook they banned him for a week for "spamming." Facebook never explained how paying for advertising and then distributing that ad in conservative groups is "spamming." Now Facebook is doing it to him again. This time Margolis attempted to buy an ad for the re-released and updated version of his first smash hit, The Worst President in History; The Legacy of Barack Obama. After filling out the appropriate form, Margolis received this response from Facebook: "Your ad was not approved because your Page has not been authorized to run ads with political content. What to do: Complete the authorization process."

So,in order to engage in commerce by selling his book, Margolis started the long and arduous process to "authorize" the ad.  The ad, mind you, represents income to Facebook.  But nope, we can't have an ad promoting a book that exposes the corruption of our Dear Leader The Kenyan.  Even if we loose money by doing so.  But wait, in fairness, Facebook did - sorta - agree to run the ad if only Margolis would give Facebook his home address, a copy of his driver's license (both sides), and his social security number.  Right.  That should do it.  Now let's be clear: with the revelation of what Facebook really does with your private information, I'm sure any trusting soul would gleefully render his driver's license and his social security number without question.  And neither did Matt Margolis.  So if you're a conservative, and you write conservative books - especially if they are unflattering to the Kenyan or his gal Hill - you have zero chance of buying ad space on Facebook.  Censorship?  Hell, yeah.

Tommy Robinson arrested for showing the truth

Or how about the unbelievable case of Britain's Tommy Robinson across the pond in the UK?  On Friday, the saga of Tommy Robinson entered a new chapter.  British police officers pulled him off a street in Leeds, where, in his role as a citizen journalist, he was live streaming a Facebook video from outside a courthouse. Inside that building, several defendants were on trial for allegedly being part of a so-called "grooming gang," a group of men, almost all Muslim, who systematically rape non-Muslim children, in some cases hundreds of them over a period of years or decades and in so doing prepares them for a lifetime of sexual slavery.  Forced prostitution.  But rather than focus on the heinous crimes of these Muslims animals, the British government found it more expedient to charge, arrest and incarcerate the journalist.  No trial.  No appeal.  Straight to prison for thirteen months.  Consider that because the vast population of prisoners are Muslim, our Mr. Robinson has a very good chance of becoming dead before his sentence ends.  That's British injustice for you.  Worse, yesterday there were protests from large crowds of angry Brits who recognized the application of George Orwell's warnings in his book 1984.  Protests were held at 10 Downing Street, as well, and those citizen concerns have also fallen on deaf ears.  Haven't heard of this, you say?  Well, it's because some heavyweights have essentially instituted a complete media blackout on it.  Of my British cousins I ask, doesn't Neville Chamberlain's infamous policy of appeasement teach you anything about the proper way to deal with tyranny?  It seems to me that the Nazi threat of then is the same as the Muslim threat of today.

So isn't it curious, that on two separate continents, in two separate cases of ham-fisted censorship, we find that the truth about Muslims - whether outed or closeted - are so tyrannically implemented?

Actually, I think it tells us a lot.

What Feminism Hath Wrought

Feminism as a concept is a pariah on the American culture. Whatever the goal of feminism was in the beginning of that movement many years ago, it certainly isn't the same now.  Back then the feminazis - shrill, ugly hags who couldn't get dates -  just wanted equality with men, or so they said.  But today feminism seeks to make men more feminine and women more masculine, and thereby turn the whole idea of the vive la différence of the sexes upside down.  And they've been damn good at doing so, too.

Gender confusion has been one such result.  Now we must deal with - what? - maybe six or so types of sexuality?  Kids as young as five or six years old are being taught that their sex is fluid.  Mom, I feel kinda girly today.  I call BS.  Biological science is pretty straightforward in confirming that - even today - there are only two sexes.  Yeah, the fetus begins as female, and depending on which X or Y chromosome it gets, may stay female or become male.  I get that.  But except for the rare case of being born a Hermaphrodite, one is either male or female. Sorry, snowflakes, the science is settled.

As the cultural misandry spreads and men become, well, something other than men, we're advised by the feminists that men are unnecessary in the family.  Dads are ejected from the family unit to allow the woman to "grow," whatever that means.  I guess it means that male children grow up without a strong, reliable father role model, and either seek sexual transformation, or shoot up a school.  To the misandrist, that's called "progress."   Destroyed and decimated families with dysfunctional children are another fine result of modern feminism.

Perhaps feminism is simply trying to emulate Islam, in which one sex has total and tyrannical control over the other.  In the Muslim world, "a woman's rights" is an oxymoron.  Here in the west, feminism seeks to apply a reversal of  that notion in the woman's favor.  The result is movements such as MGTOW, where men just refuse to have anything to do with women.  Personally I like women in general, I guess because I'm an archaic chivalrous male heterosexual.  But even I was stunned the other day when this issue came up unexpectedly.  I was yakking with my mechanic and a retired chap who was hanging around.  This guy said he had little to do except loiter around the shop.  I jokingly said, "You need a woman, man!"  Both my mechanic and this fellow - in unison - loudly and affirmatively decried such a notion.  No, they're not homos, they're just battle-weary guys tired of the constant chaos that is part and parcel of having a modern feminist woman in their lives.  Another result of modern feminism is men simply avoiding the shrill sex.   A consequence of that is noted by the birth rate in this country is down dramatically.

Want more?  How about the rise of things like Rosie O'Donnell's vicious observations?  Or the idiotic #MeToo thing, where women who use their charms - and are rewarded as expected - suddenly are appalled that they were successful in getting what they wanted?  Or the unstoppable murder of millions of babies every year through Panned Butcherhood, the darling of the radical feminists?

But the topper is this:  Millennial women say that they are repulsed by the effeminate girly-boys that several decades of castration has produced.  They love the idea that the difference between boys and girls has become blurred, that's cool, but they just don't want to date one.   Or marry him.  Those ingrained biological urges that demand women seek a strong and stable man keep bubbling to the fore, despite the feminist indoctrination.  In fact, studies a few years ago revealed that the more society accommodated women, the less happy and fulfilled they became.

So, man-bun, get a trim and grow a pair if you want to be desirable to women as a human male. You won't get your foreskin back, but at least it's a start.  And faddishness aside, biology will triumph.

For the rest of those men waiting for the sexual culture to stabilize into normalcy, maybe soon there will be no need to deny "You need a woman, man!"

More Winning

Winning isn't everything; it's the only thing.  Vince Lombardi said that.   This administration is winning so much, it has almost run out of promises.   That's a good thing.  DJT has made good on nearly every promise he made during the campaign.  Well, okay, we're still working on the wall.  Have patience. 

But one of the most notable accomplishments that has been made is not a policy change, or a tax cut, or massive job creation, or reuniting the races, or abandoning self destructive deals, or recognition of some pet issue from one of the snowflake identity politics groups.

Nope, the most amazing things is his recognition and identification of the nation's enemies, both foreign and domestic.  Consider the intestinal fortitude - that means guts - it takes to do something like that.  But as the late great F. Lee Ermey has observed, sometimes guts is all it takes.  Gunny is right.  And Donald J. Trump has guts.

As the so called religion of peace continues with its policy of murdering everyone and anyone in sight, and that includes some 14 million other Muslims Muslims have killed since the dawn of this new enlightened century, Trump's efforts have reduced the Islamic State and its adherents from a caliphate to just a consortium of lone-wolf insane malcontents.  If they're happy killing each other, I'd like to support that effort.  Let me know when the last one is left; I'll take it from there.  But the media mafia and their cohorts in the Democrat party go apoplectic over an American President realizing that Islam is an existential threat, not only to individuals of all creeds, but to the Western way of life.  Oh, and to Christians, too.  But Trump knows this, and says so, and seeks to ban Islam from the US just as have Poland, Russia and Japan.  And that's wise.  

Domestic enemies include the Deep State, that swamp of lawyers, lobbyists, and other unelected bureaucrats who run things outside - and out of sight - of the will of the people.  Remove them.  Fire them.  Charge and arrest them if necessary.  The damage they have done is evident by the exposure of the corruption at the FBI and the Department of Justice.  Those folks were political hacks that sought to overturn the results of a fair and legal election.  Rather than go quietly into that good night after the election, these denizens of the swamp chose to corrupt two (or more) of America's most trusted institutions.  And the Kenyan's Marxist/Islamic will is writ large over all of this nonsense and corruption.  And Trump has rightly called them out over it.  Some of these hacks may yet see prison time.

Foreign enemies, like our friend Rocket-man, Dear Leader of North Korea Kim Jong Un, have seen the light of what a strong, powerful and determined foe can be.  Trump politely asked Kim to dispense with all the nuclear threats and posturing.  Or else bad things are gonna happen to you.   We have two naval fleets on either side of you, and this will be over in less than two hours.  And I don't bluff.  Lunch? 

Further, I think Kim got a reality check when the last NoKo nuke test blew up an entire mountain, seismically destabilizing the whole peninsula.  Right Kim, that was way too much gun.  Now, Kim can't do enough to make nice with the US.  Hey, y'all come on over and watch as I take apart our nuclear capability okay?  Sure, Kim, we'd be happy to do that.

So President Trump is only eighteen months into his first four year term, and judging by the rumbling on the street - that's the vibe that it's clear that most Americans have had enough of the left's constant maniacal witch hunt - there's a lot more winning coming.  Even pollsters are seeing that not only will there be no blue wave, the midterm tsunami will be red, white and blue Americans.  Even the worst of the worst talking heads at NBC, ABC and CNN are grudgingly admitting that DJT is not only right, but he will be proven to be a Great President.

So, yeah, I like winning.  And, if you'll forgive just a little schadenfreude here, I love it when Hillary admits she just can't come to terms with loosing.  

If only the Kenyan would go away forever, and take our gal Hill with him.

The rest of America will keep on winning.

Be As The Yogi

In modern Western circles, the word "yoga" conjures up images of lithe, young babes stretching and bending in torturous positions.  And that type of yoga is the method by which training and strengthening of the body is accomplished.  That process is called Hatha Yoga.  But there are other yoga methods, and one in particular, seeks to strengthen the mind and enlighten the spirit, and that's Raja Yoga.  One who practices yoga may be called a yogi, 

Defining Yoga is tricky, as defining any spiritual discipline can be, but in short we can say it's a total discipline for seeking enlightenment. To reach a level of enlightenment, one must train body, mind and spirit.  There are no shortcuts to enlightenment; it's a lifelong commitment.  According to the Yoga Alliance website:

Yoga was developed up to 5,000 years ago in India as a comprehensive system for well being on all levels: physical, mental, emotional and spiritual. While Yoga is often equated with Hatha Yoga, the well-known system of postures and breathing techniques, Hatha Yoga is only a part of the overall discipline of Yoga. Today, many millions of people use various aspects of Yoga to help raise their quality of life in such diverse areas as fitness, stress relief, wellness, vitality, mental clarity, healing, peace of mind and spiritual growth.

Yoga is a system, not of beliefs, but of techniques and guidance for enriched living. Among Yoga’s many source texts, the two best known are the Yoga Sutras and the Bhagavad Gita. Both explain the nature of—and obstacles to—higher awareness and fulfillment, as well as a variety of methods for attaining those goals. 

Because of this, you could say that yogis don’t really belong to a certain “religion."  Rather, they are beyond it. Many people of various religions, or even those that have their own private nonsectarian spiritual practices, could be considered a yogi.

The takeaway here is that there exists an ancient and proven system that anyone may employ to help rise above the petty, nasty and destructive influences that are perpetually injected into our lives.  You don't have to become Hindu to take advantage of this system.  It's personal system that doesn't intrude on or contradict any other belief system; in fact it can, and probably will, enhance one's existing spirituality.

So when trying to deal with - and comprehend - the insanity that passes for current events in today's world, engage in a little spirit lifting.  As the great philosopher and sage Wei Li once said, "You can't change the world, but you can change your reaction to it."  Happiness begins there.  If for you that's the physical Hatha, fine, do that.  If it's the more meditative and spiritual Raja, do that.  Or do both. 

But do take some time to cleanse yourself of the negativity that you'll find in daily life.  You might find that things become easier for you.  Or that people are not as cumbersome for you. Or that you're somehow a little happier.  The concept of controlling oneself is not new, and many, if not most, religious teach some of these concepts.

So save your sanity; be as the yogi.  It works.

Namaste!

The War Between And Among The States

Back in the middle of the nineteenth century, a war broke out between the several states over what role, that is to say how much power, the federal government should have over the rights of individual states.  Four years and 600,000 lives later, it became clear that it would be a lot, as the Constitution took a sharp turn toward centralized federal power.  Folks in the north called it the Civil War.  Folks down south refer to it as the War Between the States, or the War of Northern Aggression.  The later is probably the most apt.

Fast forward one hundred fifty-eight years, and we're hearing the same kind of rumblings - discontent with how Washington DC is handling things. This time however, the issues are somewhat different, but the concern of how the far more controlling federal government is managing - or recognizing - states' rights is the same.  And this time, it's not so much North versus South as it is Left versus Right.  There is serious anger on both sides.  And both sides glare angrily at Washington.

In the last dozen years or so, primarily under the Kenyan's tyrannical reign, the left has become more emboldened, as well as radicalized farther and farther to the left; toward full blown Marxism.  The left wants to take the country all the way into tyrannical socialism.  The right wants limited government, and the preservation of the Constitution as it was written.  Racial tensions, again due to the Kenyan's prompting, have deteriorated to levels not seen in this country.  This time, though, it's the radical blacks who are spewing hate and divisiveness.  I've always acknowledged that human beings are essentially tribal in social settings, that is, folks like to be with other folks who are like them.  But that isn't racism.  That's familial bonding.  The hate and violence the left puts out comes in the form of groups like the Black Panthers, SPLC, BLM and Antifa, among others.  That's not tribalism; that's tyrannical racism.  It's hate, and it comes from the left.

Consider that California residents will be voting in November on a referendum that could split California into three separate states: NorCal, SoCal and Cal. They have over 600,000 signatures to ensure the Cal3 initiative will be on the November ballot.  A deeper look into the genesis of this movement will reveal that the great divide in political outlooks within the state are irreconcilable, or so it would seem - at least to six hundred thousand Californians.  While a divorce is sometimes the first thing warring factions consider,the result of separation could be devastating, both fiscally and politically.

Even South Carolina, noted for secession, is feeling the pain of creeping Federal tyranny. Several representatives have introduced a bill that would allow an open debate about the pros and cons of seceding from the Union should gun confiscation become law.

Some on both sides of the issue have said that there can be no reconciliation between the two; that a divorce is not only necessary, but desirable.  The USA must be split into separate countries that embody local citizens' political stance.  They maintain that this is necessary because there is no way the two - left and right - can come to a compromise.  Individual freedom on the right is incompatible with centralized socialism of the left.

But that aside, I propose that the United States be preserved for several reasons.  First, the logistics involved in such a division are staggering:  we're dealing with political points of views, rather than geographical identity.  Second, in the history of man, this miraculous experiment in self government has demonstrated itself to be the best yet devised.  Why destroy that, especially in order to placate the insane ideas of the radical left? The left can't be reasoned with.  They want the complete destruction of the ideals of Judeo-Christian values, limited government, and individual freedom upon which the United States was founded.  Nothing else will do.  There's no point in giving them half the country; it wouldn't satisfy them at all, anyway.  Think of the ramifications of having a hostile nation on your border.  Ask Israel or Poland or Hungary how that feels.

The only solution to this ideological divide the country is facing is the elimination of one side or the other.  Period.  Total defeat or total victory.  The left and all of its manifestations is a clear and present danger to the American way; it's an enemy within the gates.  No civilization can withstand an internal enemy. The left must be defeated at the ballot box, in social media, in the schools, in the streets, and by any means necessary.  We can't be squeamish, because given the chance, annihilation is exactly what the left has planned for the rest of us.

So be prepared, a showdown is imminent.  The left won't stop, and sooner or later, planned civil disruptions will be occurring in your very own front yard.  The fate of the nation - and the last best hope for mankind - is literally at stake.  Freedom is often taken for granted by those who never have had to fight for it.  And it can disappear forever if that fact is ignored.  Maintaining the American way of life means defending it.  And that means by force of arms if necessary.  We need to be vigilant, informed, and strong. And we need to be ready.

Our confederation of individual states must be preserved as the beacon of freedom that it is.  And the enemy within must be vanquished.

"Did You Get My Check?"

That's the burning question Facebook's Dear Leader Marky-Mark Zuckerberg will be asking members of the House committee next week, as he testifies before congress about Facebook's questionable handling of member's privacy issues.  But that's little surprise to normal Americans who shake their collective heads at the corruption that occurs between the Deep State and the so-called Titans of Technology.

But as USA Today reports, it's true.  I quote from www.westernjournal.com:

The congressional panel that received the most contributions from the company is the House Energy and Commerce Committee, whose lawmakers are set to question Zuckerberg on Wednesday.  Of the 55 members on this committee, all but nine of them have received contributions by Facebook for the past decade, with the average Democrat receiving nearly $6,750 and the average Republican receiving $6,800.

Panel members announced their committee would question Zuckerberg to shed light on what they call “critical consumer data privacy issues and help all Americans better understand what happens to their personal information online.”

They also said they appreciate Zuckerberg’s “willingness to testify.” In regards to Facebook’s campaign gift, however, Republicans got a mere 33 percent and Democrats got 65 percent, adding to about $7 million worth of gifts.

As we've posted here previously, part of the issue is the selling of information mined from users' profiles and posts that is used in political campaigning.  There was little interest in Facebook's normal business model when that detailed information was sold to the Kenyan's reelection efforts in 2012, but all hell broke loose when the Donald Trump campaign did the same thing in 2016.  Now the Democrats in Congress are in high dudgeon that  - gasp! - the Republicans should be able to access that business model's data for their own purposes as well.  Fair only works one way in the democrat mind.

The other issue, and probably more sinister, is the more than seven thousand fake Facebook accounts that were run by Russian operatives - the infamous trolls.  They would upload provocative posts, and when users "liked" them, the trolls would collect that data, and recruit those members to rally or protest or otherwise engage in political discourse.  All propaganda aimed at the expense of American interests, of course.

One such piece of propaganda is seemingly all-American on its face.  See image (right).  Posted on Facebook's Instagram, it seeks to elicit anger against the Muslim invasion.  How could any red-blooded American not agree with that?  It got 6,000 "likes."  But, friends and neighbors, it was a Russian plant.  Untold in this story - yet, anyway - is what happened to all the information contained on all those 6,000 Facebook users who "liked" that post.  Are they targets for Russian/Marxist/Leftist retribution?  Or perhaps recruitment?  Or is their personal information just stored, ready to be accessed and used at some other time?  I don't know, either.

But I do know that whenever you cede power over yourself to others, it will invariably be used against you.  Keeping your own personal power is what freedom is really all about.   And within the whole of mankind's history, there always have been forces that seek to relieve you of that power.  And only the vigilant and wary can resist.

And that's some of the issues - hopefully - that Marky-Mark and his Facebook data monster will have to address.

Right after he verifies that those in congress got his check.

Because We Can, That's Why

God is dead. Privacy is dead. Freedom is dead.  Sigh.  That's a pretty depressing revelation, don't you think?  Maybe I'll post a picture of my breakfast, or my dog, or the last theme park I visited, on Facebook and wait for all my "friends" to "like" it.  You know, all those folks whom I've never met, but were polite enough to invite me as their friend.  Maybe that thin gruel of social acceptance will placate me, and make me feel better.

The enlightened have already killed God.  It seems - to them, anyway - that it is no longer necessary for man to seek a higher authority.  We've evolved beyond that silly paternal longing.  Yet our most respected scientists have told us we are really nothing more than self aware protoplasm, and on an evolutionary scale, just a small step up from bacterium.  Well.  That's encouraging.  And this insane notion of worship-man-as-God was short lived; except perhaps within the Democrat party.  Thankfully.  To replace God, the enlightened ones have told us, we first had to acknowledge that we - mankind - was all the God we needed.  Wow.  That's a lot of gods.  And in nearly the same breath, now they tell us that we must build better artificial intelligence - superior to us - so that we may worship AI instead of ourselves or some vague, unseen creator.  I wonder by what name would we call AI - "them" or "it"?  

The technical revolution has made us aware - in no small fashion - that privacy is dead.  And the courts have upheld time and again that citizens have no expectation of privacy.  There used to be a quaint notion of privacy granted by God and guaranteed by the 4th Amendment, that Americans have "the right . . . . to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."  But we gave that away willingly.  We put our lives and soul on Facebook, for no other reason that to seek fleeting approval by others.  We allow everyone to track our every movement, and record our every utterance, just because we cannot turn off our cell phones.  We put our own eavesdropping devices in every room of our homes. Google. Echo.  Alexa.  We are not the consumer of this technology - we're the product of it.  And it's only $99 on Amazon.  Oh, and free shipping, too.

OK, what about freedom?  Have we lost that yet?  I think we have.  For example, think of all the words that you cannot use without being charged with a hate crime.  Whatever the hell that is. Think of a religion that you may not question.  Or, conversely, think of a religion that you're free - and even encouraged - to denigrate.  Say something about the evolution of certain aspects of the human race.  Or someone's perceived sexual orientation.  Speak the truth about certain political dynasties, expose their corruption and crimes, and see where you end up.  You will be ruined and broke.  You may well ask who invented the term "politics of personal destruction".  Or worse, you may find yourself on the receiving end; perhaps having a dirt nap and becoming worm food.

So perhaps there's something to be learned from the Luddites' resistance to technological innovation.  Maybe we should take a deep breath and reconsider this headlong rush into the Brave New Artificial World.  Let's have time to adapt, psychologically and socially.  Technological innovation doubles every two years, according to Moore's Law, and even that is accelerating as applied to other related technological disciplines. Heads are spinning, algorithms know more about you than your mother, cars drive themselves, drones hit targets from miles away, and media manipulate your thoughts and beliefs.  Humans have little chance against the accelerating - and inevitable - takeover of technology.

But even more, why would we do any of  this to ourselves?  Because we can, that's why.

Breach? What Breach?

Ladies and gentlemen, please stay calm.  What I'm about to tell you may shock and possibly enrage you.  But it's true. 

Yes, there was no breach of data at Facebook.   Nope.  None at all.  To call what actually did occur a breach is simply either naivete or outright propaganda.

Here's why.  Facebook is a thriving business that collects detailed information on every single user member, stores it, and then sells that information to other business concerns that require it.  For this, it makes an enormous profit.  It also sells advertising that is mated with users' personal interests, which is displayed on the particular page that that user is viewing.  For this it makes another enormous profit.

When the Democrat party, working for the Kenyan's reelection, needed a way to ascertain potential voters' political trends in 2008, they went to Facebook, who, as a matter of standard operating procedure, simply sold that data to the DNC.  No problem, congress, that's the business we're in.  

But when Cambridge Analytica, working for the Republican party and Donald Trump's campaign,  needed a way to ascertain potential voters' political trends in 2016, they went to Facebook, who, as a matter of standard operating procedure, simply sold that data to the RNC.  No problem, congress, that's the business we're in.  

It's ingenious, in a way.  While other data mining companies like Google and Amazon engage in stealth in their data collection methods, Facebook comes right out and asks users for it.  Right up front.  And  normal folks, most of whom love to talk about themselves, were eager to willingly provide detailed and intimate information about themselves, and upload that personal information to a public forum read by billions of people.  Facebook users completed detailed profiles of themselves, complete with sexual orientation and current domestic partnership information.  They breathlessly supplied a detailed list of their favorite books, movies, music, hobbies and interests.  They posted personal opinions, political leanings, and just idiotic and inane stuff freely.  And they "liked"  other users' ramblings.  Just so there would be no question as to who was actually posting this personal information and opinions, Facebook users added photos of themselves, along with their friends, family, colleagues, and even pets.   And they uploaded a lot of them.

All voluntarily.  Willingly.  Eagerly.  

Now, when this comes to light through a lopsided political revelation, these same folks are shocked - shocked! - that goofy little Mark Zuckerberg is actually Big Brother, watching - censoring and tracking - not only them but everyone they know!  One wonders if folks were thinking:  "What's the worst that could happen?"  Maybe.  You post your identity on the Internet and what did you think Facebook would do with it?

So it's off to Congressional hearings Marky-Mark must go, to testify that, well, this is the business we're in, but we just don't want the conservative right to be privy to any of this valuable and marketable information. 

In fact, we'll do whatever we can to censor their homophobic, racist, Islamophobic, misogynist, gun-loving hate speech, so as not to offend the more delicate left leaning members of our Facebook family.  And it's why we're shopping for lobbyists in Washington, DC right now, to ensure we can buy - er, persuade - congress to abide by our way of thinking.   We want to make sure that Facebook remains an open forum for all those who subscribe to our approved speech and thought.

So.  There was no breach.  Only selected preferred users are allowed access to data from our business model, certainly not improperly channeled to Cambridge Analytica to benefit the right.

Whoops.  Facebook stock has fallen 14% as of this writing.  That represents a $100 billion loss in market worth.  Advertisers are running for the tall grass.  And users are rethinking the ramifications of the Internet equivalent of the high school "slam book."

Well, maybe that's the rough justice that the market applies to those who would take advantage.  Hear that, Google and Amazon?

Spare Not The Rod

Andrew Breitbart once said politics is downstream from culture.  What he meant is that in our modern society, culture determines our politics, not the other way around.  And he may be right.

Consider the nonsense and tragedies in our lives today:  mass school shootings, insane 7th century cultists running around beheading everyone they can find, live steaming suicides on social media, social justice warriors executing anyone who doesn't think as they do, unchecked illegal immigrants causing crime, disease and general mayhem across the land, racists calling for the extermination of white people, and other dystopian events. It's a mess out there.

As Talking Heads' David Bryne famously asked, "Well, how did I get here?"  How indeed.  Let's look at that.  Was it the non-existent white privilege in western culture and philosophy that caused all this?  Many in the regressive left will tell you so.  Perhaps it was toxic masculinity, as the shrill harpies in the so-called feminist movement will enthusiastically attest.  Or was it guns in our culture, maybe?  But no, it was none of these.  Those are merely scapegoats of a cancerous mindset in our culture that worships oppression and victimhood.  And that is not unintended, I might add.  The regressive left is intent on bringing down the structure of western civilization, and we're now tasting the fruits of that poisoned tree. 

The root philosophy in western thought is self determination.  Self reliance.  Self responsibility. Belief in the guidance of a higher intelligence; a higher good.  And these are the principals that the left has been - and still is - attacking and seeking to destroy.  They seek to replace our ancient, traditional value system with anthropolatry, broadly defined as the worship of man as god.

In approaching and defining society in this way, the first casualty of western thought is the demise of ethics.  Regressives scoff at the notion of an intrinsic "good" or of a rival "evil."  In their view, the self is center, the higher good is communal.  Aleister Crowley put it succinctly:  "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law."  Those who would take exception to this stance are thereby  "oppressors" who must be defeated, and the anthropolatrists - the regressives themselves - are "victims."  Not a very inclusive philosophy, is it?

The next casualty is responsibility.  If there is no higher good other than self, then there is no need for ethics - the acknowledgement of good and evil (or "bad") - and thus no need for "discipline."  So for decades, the left has frowned on discipline as an affront to individual freedom brought on by authority figures - parents, teachers, cops - the ever present oppressors.  What has been the result of that?

The result is a generation or more of people who cannot cope with life as it is.  They can't deal with the crises in their lives, or rejection, or an opinion differing from their own, or restraints on behavior.  It's someone else's fault they feel ostracized, disenfranchised.  They become insecure in themselves, and then fall into self loathing.

Is it any wonder they need pharmaceutical support?  Or that they take up weapons to exact revenge from innocent and unknown folks, for some demonic imagined slight?  This lost generation, called snowflakes in part because of their delicate psychological condition, may never come to reality.  They live in a dark world where nothing is fair, where the deck is stacked against them.  They don't realize only they have the key to their own happiness.  But in anthropolatry, there can be no happiness; unfairness is perpetual and needs to be punished.  That's a pretty bleak outlook.

But to reverse this regressive thinking, we as a society should take a lesson from this failed experiment in total permissiveness, and ensure that life's lessons - good and bad together - are not lost, but exist to be experienced, to build character, resolve, respect, and yes, self sufficiency.  Ironically, the character traits and pursuits the regressive left despises most are the very ones needed to correct society's current unsteady course.  

So what is needed is more God, guns, white western culture, and toxic masculinity.  Oh, yeah.  And discipline.