Showing posts with label Paulestinians. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Paulestinians. Show all posts

Monday, August 11, 2014

Why I'll Never Support the Ron Paul Conspiracy Theory-Based Foreign Policy

So quit sending me those danged Youtube links!

One of my Paulestinian buddies asked me, "What's wrong if some Russians living in Ukraine want to be Russian again?

Answer: Nothing. Let them move back to Russia.

Ukraine separated from Soviet Russia by popular vote. The Russians living there moved in under Soviet Communism. Saying the Russian separatists have a right to take Ukrainian land just because they moved there and transfer it back to the motherland is like saying the millions of illegal aliens in the US have the right to take parts of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California and hook it back up to Mexico. Or maybe the Italians could take part of Brooklyn and give it to Italy. There are enough Irish in Boston to make the town Ireland's western-most county. The idea that immigrants can move into an established country and then just peel off part of a country for themselves is just stupidity. And before you shout "What about Israel?" that was a special UN sanctioned case done for a refugee population that had been displaced by war and in real danger. Russian separatists aren't in any real danger from the Ukrainian government.

My buddy went on to state categorically that we should not do anything to irritate the Russians, like stand up to them. "Nothing," he says, "Is worth the risk of nuclear war, even a limited one."

I've got to ask. What are you, Paulistas anyway? French? Do you have any idea what that would mean as a foreign policy simply to let every third rate would-be dictator with an army to run wild?

It means the same thing it does in a junior high classroom where the teacher is weak. The bully that is willing to be the craziest, most violent, most cynical and evil rules unless someone is willing to get beaten up to stand against him. Back in my junior high, we had one particularly aggressive 8th grader who enjoyed tormenting younger, smaller kids. He once punched me in the face for objecting to his taking a basketball away from a group of smaller kids. I told him to his face he had done wrong and I may have used less than diplomatic language. He cold cocked me.

I stood there and took it and even turned the other cheek, but I did not lose eye contact. When Mr. Pauly, the school principle came out and saw my bloodied face, he asked who had done it, I didn't rat my tormentor out. I said I'd been hit by a basketball and went in to clean myself up. Mr. Pauly let it go, but he knew better. The boy left me alone after that, but I had had to take the risk of being punched in the face to make him stop. Even though I wasn't big enough to survive a fight with him, his own over-reaction to being confronted nose-to-nose and the consequences he endured as a result in terms of general disapproval from the rest of the class and a few words from Mr. Pauly encouraged him to greater self-control in the future. It didn't last. He wound up shooting up a bar, killing some folk and ending his short life in Angola prison's Old Sparky. Those in attendance said he wore a look of surprise on his face as they strapped him in.

My Uncle Art taught 8th grade for years and one year he had this huge gentle boy name Harold in eighth grade. Harold was big and muscular, but he wouldn't willingly harm a fly. He was a friend to all the underdogs in the class. One day one of the school toughs started to torment a younger kid who was a friend of Harold's. Harold approached and instructed the young thug to let the kid go.

 "What are YOU going to do about it?" the bully sneered. He woke up flat on his back with a very bloody nose and the entire schoolyard cheering for Harold. Uncle Art had a strict rule about fighting, but he knew what had happened. He told Harold he'd have to be punished. Harold said, "I understand, Mr. Bell." Uncle Art couldn't bear to give him swats for rescuing a younger child from a bully, but his law about fighting was written in stone. He tried to make it easier on the boy and gave Harold the option of serving detention instead of taking swats. Harold said, "No, Mr. Bell. I knew I'd get swats for it. I'll just go ahead and have those now and get it over with."


Uncle Art didn't go easy and the kids in the schoolyard heard three loud pops clear out in the schoolyard. When Harold walked out standing straight, his jaw firm and steady, he became a legend. Word got round among the bullies that Harold would punch you in the face and take swats for it if you messed with any of the little kids. Uncle Art said bullying disappeared from the school almost overnight.

And that's why I have the attitude I do with regard to isolationism - that and I do read history. I'm never going to change my attitude about it. I'm tired of being called stupid by dim-witted ideologues. I was invited to become a member of MENSA for crying out loud and I do qualify. I have the intellectual chops to figure out what's so and what ain't. I will never support the idea that the United States of America, the only decent country on the planet that anyone can even halfway trust and the only power left that could actually stand up to any sort of geo-political threat, should sit back and let the worlds bully boys have their way. Ain't gonna happen. You Paul-bots are wasting your delusional emails on me. All this conspiracy claptrap and twisted ideology is unconvincing and has yet to survive even half-hearted scrutiny on my part.

What I'm concerned about is that the loony left and the loony right are now the craziest people in the room. My fear is that if we don't some of us stand up to them, they're going to rule and that's when the world will sink back into semi-feudal barbarism.

I would like to thank my Paul-bot buddies for the blog post material, though. You guys stop by often and remind me how stupid I am. I get advertising dollars every time you do.


© 2014 byTom King


Thursday, June 19, 2014

Ghosts of 1933 - Nationalists, Isolationists and Socialists, oh my!

Finally, my neo-anarchist Ron Paul lovin' buddies have come out of the closet. This morning I got another breathless post from my Paulista buddy with a copy of a Robert Sheer article praising Obama's policy in Iraq and flogging poor old George Bush yet again.

Well at least the Paulistas are expressing their love for Obama openly now. I've always thought these conspiracy devotees were neo-anarchists in disguise. Historically, anarchists always were the partners of socialists in revolutions and have always worked side by side with them to bring down nations.

Sheer asks when has nation-building ever worked?

How about post WWII Germany, Japan and Italy?


On the other hand I can cite you plenty of evidence that failure to nation build has failed?

Post WWI Germany, for instance!

So why did is it failing in Iraq?  It failed because Obama abandoned Iraq in the midst of the process. What I really can't believe is the attempt by Sheer to turn Saddam Hussein into our best buddy. The man was a megalomaniac, a butcher and he DID have weapons of mass destruction! Where the hell do you think Syria got all those chemical weapons? Where do you think Saddam got the stuff to nerve gas tens of thousands of Shiites in his own country. Did he wave a friggin' magic wand and suddenly their lungs were all burned our and their eyes roasted in their sockets?  Even if it was magic and he really didn't have chemical weapons, his magical powers would qualify as a WMD in and of themselves and the man needed to be put down. Ghaddafi fell because he over-reached. He was quiet all those years because he was afraid. Reagan blew up his house for attacking Americans. It made him appear weak.


Of course, in Arab countries a show of weakness will almost always get you killed. That's been going on in the Barbary States for more than a millenium. It's how leadership works in most Islamic countries. Only strong men willing to do horrific things to their enemies tend to survive long at the top in the Arab world - at least long enough to die peacefully in their beds, although you should probably do a toxicology screening as part of the autopsy.

Neo-anarchists and their willing allies on the left, think that if you repeat "Saddam has no WMD's" and "power vacuum" enough times that it will make sense to people with a modicum of native intelligence. Why not? It worked for another famous nationalist/socialist - Joseph Goebbels. In 1939, these idealogues would have been fretting about a power vacuum in Europe if we removed Mr. Hitler. They were, in fact, carving Mussolini's ugly mug on the walls of New York public building in tribute to his visionary leadership. They were isolationists, pounding their tubs and insisting that the world would sort itself out on its own without our interference.

I want to scream I really do.
We are so doomed! Between the unicorn/rainbow/sex/drugs/rock n' roll left and the isolationist/anarchist/conspiracy-obsessed fringe right, we're in the hands of a generation of spoiled brats who hate America and everything that they can't have or control.

God give us strength because the American ship is sinking fast and the passengers aren't bailing anymore. They're pouring water in to make us sink faster.


And I just realized something scary. The fringe right are nationalist, America only fanatics. The hard left are socialists.  Nationalists? Socialists? Working together? Sharing goals? Anybody remember the last time nationalists and socialists got together on something during a big economic downturn?


All we need is some determined fringe radical with a fanatic following.................................uh-oh.


© 2014 by Tom King

Wednesday, June 18, 2014

ISIS and Her American Political Minions


Has anyone twigged to the fact that the acronym for the jihadi army now slaughtering Christians and Muslims alike across Iraq and Syria is "ISIS"? It's the name of the Egyptian Goddess Isis - the mother of Horus, the Egyptian god of war! Her name means literally "throne". Is it an accident that ISIS marching on Baghdad - the prophetic seat of the Caliphate that Islam believes precedes the conquest of the world and the coming of the Muslim version of the Messiah? Check out Isis' headdress. It's a throne. Of course, that's all coincidental. The Obama/Ron Paul policy clearly states that if we just leave the Middle East alone, peace and joy will break out spontaneously.

Speaking of the vast Obama/Paul conspiracy, I was challenged today by a Paulista in the middle of his rant about how evil George Bush was. He challenged me to "...tell me what GOOD has came (sic) out of "The Idiot's" lame adventure ? How bout ONE thing?"  Okay. I can do that. He also asked what Jesus would have done in George W. Bush's place? Obviously he's thinking "turn the other cheek", not the sort of political answer he might have received from the God of the Old Testament. An omniscient God might give my friend a rather different answer than the one he expected. So let me answer my isolationist friend's two major questions.

1. What would Jesus have done in George W. Bush's place?

If Jesus had been in Dubyah's place, we'd all be in heaven now. It would mean He'd come back to get us and he would have taken home the innocent and let the guilty burn down the world around themselves. Unfortunately, President Bush (my hero), had no divine powers. He couldn't take us off planet. His job was to protect and defend people who are stuck here on this planet with no other place to run. He did that, I believe, to the best of his ability. Your characterization of the former president, paints a very different picture of the man than either his words or his deeds in his personal life would match up with. The man is a humanitarian of the first order, working thousands of hours and donation millions of his own personal wealth to fight AIDS in Africa. He greets soldiers coming home at DFW airport whenever he can. He was the first politician to reach the hospital at Ft. Hood after the shootings and, unlike your hero, Barak Obama, he didn't bring an entourage of press photographers. In fact, he was in and out before the press could react. He seems a decent man who does good works out of sight of the press. Not the sort of evil arrogant plotting Machiavelli your conspiracy theory suggests. His charity work goes largely ignored by the media which is too busy vilifying him.

Bush responded to an escalating war by terrorists by doing something rather more energetic than crashing some helicopters in the desert or bombing an aspirin factory. I think he was wise to do so. Osama Bin Laden had issued a very public declaration of war against America. Bush took him at his word. I personally think one should believe one's enemies when they say they want to destroy you. To not do so is the height of stupidity. To believe that surrendering to the demands of someone who not only says they want to kill you, but also has just killed 3000 innocent civilians is to invite them to go even further than they did. See Neville Chamberlain in the history books for an object lesson in how the whole appeasement policy works. Please tell me how pulling our troops out of the Middle East (which was what Osama was demanding) would have brought about "peace in our time"

Finally, as to how God might have instructed George W. Bush had God rung him up on the red phone......well, one need only go to the Old Testament to suss out how an omniscient God instructed Israel to treat its foes (the original Palestinians). That is not a policy any man should institute in today's world, since we have not got His unerring advice on the subject. Personally, we are instructed by Christ to turn the other cheek, a practice I adhere to when the cheek being threatened is my own. However, should someone threaten my family, I will act to preserve their life and safety. The commandment "Thou shalt not kill" in the original Hebrew reads more like "Thou shalt preserve life." It expands the meaning of that command to read it that way.

God has not left our current political leaders direct advice with regard to how a nation-state should act with regard to protecting its people. The Old Testament principle dictated that the judges were to raise up armies when innocent people were threatened by bullies and terrorists and to root them out and destroy them wholesale.  When the Israelites failed to do that, it always came back to haunt them, even thousands of years later when the descendants of those bullies and terrorists are firing missiles at their schools and synagogues. 

2. Can you tell me what GOOD has came out of "The Idiot's" lame adventure?  How bout ONE thing?

To be fair, I copied my friend's question just as he wrote it. One should probably use somewhat better grammar if one is going to call a former president an idiot. I can tell you one big thing right off.

NO TERRORIST ATTACKS ON THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FOR THE REMAINDER OF BUSH'S PRESIDENCY.
  As soon as Bush was gone and the Obama/Paul retreat policy was implemented, they started hitting us at home again with attacks on Ft. Hood, a recruitment depot in Arkansas and other attacks or attempts. So we reward them for committing acts of terror and it can only be seen by them as a reward.  I'm sure the terrorist leadership and rank and file Islamic militants see themselves as having successfully frightened America - a nation of cowards to their way of thinking - into releasing the Taliban's terrorist board of directors.

SECOND GOOD THING WAS THAT IT GAVE JEWS, BUDDHISTS AND CHRISTIANS A WINDOW OF OPPORTUNITY TO GET OUT OF IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN. Tens of thousands have left Iraq and Afghanistan and apparently just in time if the Christian death toll is any indication. And oddly enough, I still don't hear a single word of sympathy from the Paulistas for the victims of the ISIS jihadi army.

A THIRD GOOD THING WAS THAT IT OPENED UP IRAQ'S OIL INDUSTRY SO THAT THEIR ECONOMY HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO RECOVER AND STARVING PEOPLE GOT FED AND GOT JOBS. It also helped bring down oil prices not for the United States, but for Europe, China, India and other countries. We get our oil from Central America by and large and Alaska and such places. A relatively small percentage of our oil comes from the Middle East. Opening oil supplies helped keep economies going and staved off recession for years until a grasping Democrat House and Senate succeeded in wrecking the economy during an ongoing war by politicizing the funding of the Iraq/Afghan wars. It's quite a remarkable achievement in the annals of history to have held our soldiers hostage to one party's socialist agenda. Within 18 months of the Democrat takeover of congress, the economy collapsed. Good job guys. And the Ron Paul solution was to surrender the war on terror and come home and to beg the Democrats, still flushed with success to make government smaller and do away with the Federal Reserve. Like that was EVER going to happen.

A FOURTH GOOD THING WAS THAT IT CREATED A POWER VACUUM. I know, "creating a power vacuum" is supposed to be a bad thing. Diplomats like to deal with powerful leaders. It gives them the illusion that they've accomplished something when they get powerful people to sign treaties and stuff. (again, see Neville Chamberlain waving around his peace of paper signed by Mr. Hitler that gave us all "peace in our time"). Now let me think. How exactly did that work out? Anyone remember? A power vacuum left by the removal of an evil dictator is always a good thing. You just have to make sure something worse doesn't come along. Unfortunately, the genius diplomats think they need powerful leaders to manipulate (they being geniuses and all - they think they can do that). Big bunches of free people make diplomats nervous. I mean, who is going to control all those people?  I like power vacuums. Who says we need people holding that much power

A FIFTH GOOD THING WAS THAT IT TOOK BOTH THE TALIBAN AND SADDAM HUSSEIN OUT OF THE COMMANDER'S CHAIRS OF LARGE AND DANGEROUS ARMIES. Saddam had already tried to roll over his neighbors once. He saw himself as a great conqueror. He did have weapons of mass destruction which Syria is hauling out of storage now to use against rebels and any old enemies Assad can bump off in the confusion - Christians for instance. What did you people think was in those trucks rolling across the Syrian border contained? Humanitarian relief? Thinning out those armies gave everyone a break from the threat hanging over their heads.

A SIXTH GOOD THING WAS THAT WE KILLED OR CAPTURED TENS OF THOUSANDS OF THE WORST OF THE JIHADIS.  The evidence (no terror attacks for 7 years) suggests that killing terrorists DOES reduce the number of incidents of terror. It also encourages people to tattle on terrorists when someone actually then acts on the information and removes the terrorists. It has been shown that if you lock up 5 or 6 criminals in a town, it can reduce and even almost eliminate crime there. So, I suspect that removing 50,000 or so terrorists from the playing field might reduce the number of bombs going off, people being stoned or beheaded. What might the death toll have been otherwise. It was getting pretty awful during the Clinton administration. Remember the attacks on our embassies, the USS Cole and the first attack on the World Trade Center? Now that we've renounced the war on terror as foolishness and made it a police matter, how's that working out? This administration has like one "arrest" of a terrorist and they're going to appoint him a lawyer and probably give his defense team copies of the anti-Islamic "movie" that the administration says made him rape and behead an American ambassador. Now, every time a jihadi shoots up a military base or recruiting office they have to relabel it "workplace violence". At least when we were in open war with them, we were winning. In the past five years, this president has imposed rules of engagement that are getting soldiers killed faster than they were during the "evil Bush years". Wonder how come the media doesn't celebrate those milestones of death like they used to?

A SEVENTH GOOD THING IS THAT THE ISSUE HAS POLARIZED THE COUNTRY.
One can see clearly the dividing of the sheep and the goats - if not the actual makeup of the two sides. It matters not that both sides see themselves as the sheep. No one wants to be a goat. Jesus said that just before the end, the sheep would be separated from the goats. I think the divisions are actually more subtle than many of us think they are. I also think that it is Satan's purpose is to use this separation process to set us against one another. Better for Satan's purpose for us to think, "He is a liberal. She is a libertarian. They are socialists." I am a neocon (according to those who disagree with me). It's a false label. Man, we are told, looks on the outward appearance, but the Lord looks upon the heart. The true division among us is not some political boundary. It's a division of purpose. The true division is between those who would stand for the right though the heavens fall and those who stand for themselves. 

I noticed the complete failure in my friend's challenge to express any sympathy towards the tens of thousands of Christian and Muslims who have lost their lives to these evil people. I would challenge everyone who reads this to stop and spend some time in prayer for the people being slaughtered by ISIS forces while our President plays golf and dithers impotently.

Once again, I want to thank all those with differing opinions on this subject, whether they be conspiracy theorists, Paul-bots, socialists, smug, self-important know-it-alls or honest folk, for inspiring another stimulating blog post. This blog could not continue without you. God bless you all and keep you in his care until Christ comes to take us out of this mess we've made. I'm certain He's loading up the bus to come get us even as I write this.


© 2014 by Tom King

Tuesday, June 17, 2014

Failed Obama Middle East Policy and How Ron Paul is Partly to Blame

I'm going to catch H E double hockey sticks for this post, but I'm fed up and I don't care anymore.  I am utterly sick of hearing Paulestinians gloat as thousands of Christians and Jews in Iraq are being slaughtered by the peaceful Islamist armies marching toward Baghdad.  And I am violating my policy of not calling them names like Paulestinians, Paulistas and Paul-bots in this post because they keep calling me a stupid neocon and I'm tired of it.

As Inigo Montoya famously said, "You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means."

If I get one more post from a Paulite gloating about how Ron Paul was right about Iraq and Obama should make him Secretary of State, I'm going to start marking these guys junk mail so I don't have to see it anymore and some of these guys are friends. Of course, they do give me a lot of blog material, which is why I haven't done it yet.

The gloating is completely disgusting. The fringe right is prancing around saying George W. Bush was wrong and this proves that Ron Paul was right. Not a word for the victims of Islam. Not a prayer for the dead or a word of condemnation for the army of Islam - and don't kid yourself, those guys are the armies of Islam. What's even more puzzling, there's been nary a word among my RP loving correspondents condemning Barak Obama's dismal policy failure in the Middle East. This strange support for a clearly disastrous Obama policy only helps encourage more Middle East foolishness by this State Department.

The whole region is going to go up in flames once we come back home to hide. It may tamp down temporarily once either the Sunnis or the Shiites wipe the other side out. When that happens, it will get quiet for a while alright. They'll use the time to rearm, but they WILL turn on us and there won't be a thing we can do about it. They will take Pakistan's nukes and make themselves some more. The top Pakistani nuclear scientist has already said that he wants to donate nukes to all the Islamic nations. Establish an Islamic mega-nation and that's going to be the first thing they acquire. And won't that be fun?

Meanwhile, if we follow the Obama/Paul doctrine, we'll sit back and wait for the attack, believing firmly that no one in their right mind would attack the USA. We're far too strong for that. And besides, we could boost our economy by not having to have such a big military. So let me get this straight. Let's gut our military, withdraw from the rest of the world and people are going to be afraid to attack us. Did you not watch the atomic bomb safety films when you were a kid? Let them attack us first?  Can you say, "Suicide"? I do believe these guys have been smoking rather too much of that marijuana they want to legalize.

And you can be sure that Islam will go first in any war with the West. They are not afraid of the consequences. Allah, their militant wing believes, will protect them. Besides, if Allah gives them a new terror weapon, they believe they must use it. Being terrorists, their militant wing is likely to hold the world hostage for as long as they can to the threat of nuclear war. They've always been able to raise money for the cause that way. It's kind of their favorite fund-raising technique.

I'm not saying all of Islam is evil, but if there is a peaceful wing of Islam, they are sure being terribly quiet about the excesses of their fanatical members. Silence is complicity, guys. When my church had an armed terrorist in our midst, we expelled him. He went elsewhere and wound up getting himself and 82 of his followers killed along with 4 ATF agents. The point is, we kicked him out from our midst once he revealed himself for what he was. If Islam is a religion of peace, it needs to expel their murderous members from their midst.


Every time one of my Paulista friends drops me a note to gloat about how Ron Paul was right, they call me a neocon and use all these talking point phrases over and over ad nauseum. The big killer argument is always that I'm a stupid neocon and can't see the truth (as revealed by Alex Jones, Ron Paul and Lew Rockwell) and if I'd just watch a few more Youtube videos, I'd understand and support Ron Paul. I've actually watched some of those videos and they are a hash of unsupported "facts" and wild speculation that works out to be about 90% uninformed speculation based upon ideology rather than an understanding of history as it actually happened.

It make me weary; it really does.  To believe all this "America is evil" crap and to think that peace and love will magically break out across the world if we just hunker down behind our borders and hide is the worst sort of stupid. It's not America's chickens that have come home to roost. It's the vultures created by an evil culture that treats women like cattle and unbelievers like dogs and dogs like vermin. And they are circling, waiting for America to lie down, nice and quiet-like in the sand.

My reaction to the tragedy unfolding in the Middle East is to offer up prayers for the thousands being slaughtered in Iraq. It's genocide and we are supposed to be against that. A Christian woman and her two children are sitting in prison waiting to be stoned because her father was a Muslim and she chose not to be one. Muslim warlords in Africa are suiting up children as soldiers to go and slaughter Christians for Allah.

I'm just about ready to declare war on Islam. It wouldn't take very many carpet bombings of ISIS army formations, SEAL team strikes to eliminate Muslim warlords and a few air strikes on the houses of terrorist leaders before the nations of Islam would decide to take the road to peace.

What Ron Paul, Alex Jones and Lew Rockwell do not understand (and apparently my Paulista buddies don't either) is that the Arab/Islamic culture only understands strength. The culture is a tribal culture. It always has been. Islam draws its DNA from those origins. Over the centuries European diplomats have despaired of making any real progress in Islamic/Western relations. Throughout Arab history a substantial majority of sheiks, caliphs, pashas, bashas, shahs, sultans and kings of Araby were strangled by one of their lieutenants fairly early in their terms of office. Few Arab leaders ever died comfortably in their beds. Any slight show of weakness in a leader virtually demanded that someone stronger kill him and replace him with someone stronger. Politics in places like the Barbary States was a bloody Darwinian business. The Arab cultures to this day see a nation that is hiding at home as being weak and unworthy. Steeped in the belief that strength is the most important thing, Arab/Islamic strong men feel duty bound to Allah to subdue the weak in Mohammed's name.

Modern historians like to pain Muslim culture, particularly where it existed in Spain as benevolent and tolerant.  A 13th century Spanish Grenadan Muslim general wrote, "It is permissible to set fire to the lands of the enemy, his stores of grain, his beasts of burden, if it is not possible for Muslims to take possession of them." This "peaceful and tolerant fellow advised his fellow Muslims to raze cities and do everything in their power to ruin anyone who wasn't a Muslim. So much for the religion of peace.

When the mullahs talk about subduing "the weak" - there talking about us, guys. As seen through Middle Eastern eyes, Bowin' Barak is the epitome of American gutlessness. And Ron Paul looks like a major wimp to the warlords and pashas over there too and not a whit of difference between the two.

More and more, I find that I really do miss Ronald Reagan. If we could only find someone like the Gipper, who wasn't afraid to tell the truth right out where people could hear it - advisors be damned, we might restore peace. Reagan was willing to be strong. He started developing defensive weapons against nukes and then had the stones to walk out on nuclear disarmament talks at Reykjavik. The result?  He got an entire class of the most dangerous nuclear weapons in the world eliminated. He publicly challenged Mikael Gorbachev to "tear down this wall" and down came the Berlin wall. When Mohamar Gaddafi bombed our soldiers and blew up a planeful of people, Reagan bombed his house and wiped out his anti-aircraft capabilities in one shot. Gaddafi was quiet for 30 years after that.

What we don't need is government by wimps. The Paul-bots* are going to get all over me about this, but I think GW was right. Preemptive action was the best way to bring peace to the Middle East. Obama's wimpitude confused them and the noise from the Paulestinians encouraged them. That's not George's fault. He did the best he could with the crowd of colossal wimps he had to work with.

Just my opinion, of course, but I'm right.  Feel free, however, to puff and sputter about the Illuminati, the Bilderbergs and tell me how steel doesn't melt.

© 2014 by Tom King

*That's equals exactly half of the total number of names I've been called by Ron Paul fans in just the last 4 emails I've received. I'll stop now, but don't make me do that again. I have more euphemisms and I'm not afraid to use them.

Friday, January 3, 2014

There You Go Again.....The Paulestinians Stretch Another Conspiracy Theory to Ludicrous Lengths

The rumors of Judge Napolitano's banishment from
FOX News have been greatly exaggerated.

The Paulestinians are at it again. Apparently, Judge Napolitan's show on Fox Business will be cancelled, although the judge will remain a Fox contributor. A recent bit of political conspiracy spam has popped up saying a specific speech more than 8 months earlier was the reason he was fired.

This is because someone found a Napolitano piece that mentioned Ron Paul favorably and tried to connect it to the cancellation of his show.  Never mind that Napolitano did this piece two years ago. Never mind that Fox was already planning a program shuffle before Napolitano did this report. Never mind that the Judge did a major piece on Fox News just last week. Never let a little thing like the truth get in the way of a good conspiracy theory.

The Paulestinian, conspiracy junkies, every ready to stretch a suspicion to ludicrous lengths, call an unrelated Freedom Watch segment the so-called "speech that got him fired" and run it as a breaking news story.  Since Napolitano was "fired", the Judge has been on Fox as a commentator and reporter so often most people didn't realize his regular show was gone.  It really seems unlikely that Fox would keep giving him feature stories for almost two years after they "fired" him for mentioning the almighty Ron Paul with suitable (for Libertarians anyway) reverence. And he's done some even more controversial pieces since then.

It looks like the Paulistas would get tired of this nonsense after a while. They really are starting to make conservatives look bad. Let me say this one more time and since the forces de' Paul seem to prefer to write in all caps let me as one of the Bible's minor prophets put it, "Write it with large letters so that he who runs may read it":

LYING DOES NOT HELP THE CAUSE. IT ONLY MAKES US LOOK LIKE..........LIARS!

Stop it, please.

Just sayin'

Tom King © 2013

Friday, April 5, 2013

One More Time.....A History Lesson About "The Rest of the World"

More unmitigated crap from the hate America first crowd.

Fred has a donor link called "Feed Fred" - Don't!

My good buddy, the Ron Paul Libertarian keeps sending me links to articles he thinks will convince me to support legalizing marijuana, bringing all the troops home and admitting that I should have supported Ron Paul after all.  This time it was an article by Fred Reed on the ever-doofy Lew Rockwell website. I should have known better.

Fred Reed comes off arrogant and elitist, looking down his sunburned nose at the rest of us from his hideout in Mexico.  I've read his stuff before and it's nothing but isolationist drive.  I have zero respect for him.   I won't include a link to his stuff.  You can find it easily enough, but I'd hate to be responsible for wasting your time that way.  Fred moved out of the United States and now lives in that bastion of freedom - Mexico, a fact that reveals a lot about how much common sense his writing is likely to contain.  His articles have this sneering tone of moral superiority common to Ron Paul libertarians.  The article this time was about how the United States is responsible for all its troubles with the "rest of the world".  Fred's position is like Ron Paul's (and Barak Obama's for that matter) is that it is bad that the world hates us so much.  We should, he opines, withdraw our troops from everywhere and squat behind our borders being nice to everyone since it's arrogant of us to suppose that we're the best place in the world to live.

Meanwhile Fred sits on his veranda in Mexico, living off money he makes here in the States writing anti-American drivel and calling those who pay for his cheap vino names. 


I could care less what the rest of the world thinks about us here in the United States.  If we're so bad, one wonders why the actual citizens of the "rest of the world" want to get here so badly they are willing to smuggle themselves across the border to do it.

There's a reason why America has done so well.  It's because we're NOT like the rest of the world.  We've looted the best and the brightest from all those so-called civilized countries in the "rest of the world" because they were pretty much crappy countries.  They were dictatorships, monarchies and repressive societies.  Britain had a worldwide empire and still hangs on to a large chunk of their old empire, but if you weren't part of the gentry, you had little opportunity to rise in the world.  The Brits exploited everybody they conquered and felt they were perfectly justified, as did France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Portugal and God help us, even Belgium, which took a crack at empire-building.  Even Argentina tried to pick a fight over land with Britain because they looked at them with that Latin macho eye and though that with that Thatcher woman in charge, Britain looked soft.

The Muslems have repeatedly tried to conquer Europe.  Turkey sided with Germany in World War I and the Muslims were great admirers of Hitler back in the day.  India tried her hand at conquest as did China, The Soviet (We will bury you!) Union and even several African nations tried their hands at it.  Syria, Jordan and Egypt tried to overrun Israel several times in the past 60 years and got their fuzzy butts kicked for it.  They blame us for providing Israel with weapons.  Sure they are mad at us.  Fred's right about that.

Despite the mess the rest of the world keeps trying to make of things, the United States has kept its hand remarkably out of the nation-conquering business.  We've protected our business interests as in "to the shores of Tripoli" where we cleaned out some pirates with the old "big stick" - in the early 1800s and again under Teddy Roosevelt when they decided to start up their nonsense again.

Yeah, they hate us.  We took their best people and created the richest, most powerful nation on the planet.  We don't understand what the REAL world is like, Fred says.  True.  We've never had extermination camps, gulags and musical governments.  Why would we even WANT to understand that.  We make all those movies and the "world" thinks they know us and so they hate us.  And Fred thinks we ought to study the rest of the world so we understand them.

Why should we work so hard to understand the rest of the world when they exert so little effort to understand us? We're wealthy and in "the rest of the world" you get wealthy because you cheated or stole or exploited someone.  So they assume we must have gotten wealthy the same way and so they can safely hate us. Besides it helps distract the attention of the masses from the fact that they are being exploited by their own governments and elite classes.

We have big guns and big ships and nobody gets to mess with us.  If most of them had big guns and big ships, they'd be off on wars of conquest, but they can't because we keep getting in the way with our bigger guns and planes and ships.  Now we've even taken to stopping nations from running over each other and supporting folk who are attacked.  I think that's a GREAT thing.  If we aren't the world's cops, who will be.  Russia?  China?  Hell, I wouldn't trust Britain or France with the job (the foreign legion ain't what it used to be).

When somebody gets big and bad and starts threatening or actually attacks their neighbor, who do they call?  When Cuba decided to take over Granada, who did the Carribean nations call to liberate Granada?  It sure as hell wasn't Brazil or Venezuela or France. We get called on to play cop because we have a nice, rich stable country (and it's rich because it IS stable) and we can afford to play cop.

But nobody likes cops unless they are in trouble.  And cops don't like to go back to the station house and let the bad guys run amuck until things get so bad we have to go clean it up.  We've taken to pre-emptive patrolling and intervening earlier and harder than we used to.  People in the rest of the world don't like that because in their own countries, powerful nations always want to take over less powerful nations.  They are suspicious of our motives so they hate us.

But every time someone else actually does attack them, who does the "rest of the world" call?  When Iraq and Afghanistan began threatening their neighbors, nobody liked that.  Saudi Arabia about crapped its pants when Saddam overran Kuwait.  And who did they call.

Ruyard Kipling wrote a poem about soldiers.  The chorus went something like this....

O, it's Tommy this and Tommy that
And chuck him out the brute.
But it's "Saviour of his country"
When the guns begin to shoot.

They all hate us the way people hate cops, occupying soldiers and big brothers.  They hate people who are stronger than they are.  They see us through their own filters, their own paradigm.  They assume that we are like them, despite evidence to the contrary.

Well, I don't give a damned what the rest of the world thinks.  I don't care if they like us. We can take our toys and go home like the Ron Paul people believe we ought to, but that will not relieve the hatred. Nobody's going to love us for that.  When it all goes to hell, they are probably going to hate us even more for abandoning them.

If we retire from being the world's cop, the world will just find a new cop, and pay that cop whatever it's asking price is.  And we probably one we won't like the new cop because whoever it is probably hates us if you believe the Paulestinians.

What the folks that run the "rest of the world" really want is to have what Pope Benedict called "a world government with teeth" that can chain up the big dog (us) and make him obey.  The Old World wants to call the shots once again.  They have not forgotten that they once had empires and they are jealous and suspicious of any nation with as much power as we have who doesn't go out conquering.

Europe hasn't had a nice all out war since 1945. These are people that once had a war that lasted 100 years.  Thirty years was a piddling little spat.  The reason the Europeans haven't had a major squabble since is because American soldiers are sitting in the middle of Germany with nukes and the American guard dog kept the Soviet Union at bay for the better part of 4 decades.  The Europeans really don't want us to go because then they'd have to pay for their own defense and they aren't sure Russia is really tamed and the Muslims are making jihad noises these days.  The Japanese and Koreans enjoy a busy world trade and even China has been pretty peaceful and content to let the US patrol the waves and protect trade. 

When the Somali pirates started raiding, everyone expected the US to go in and fix the problem but with our hands tied behind our backs.  Even the Russians have been enjoying not having to have all that massive military - spending their money on MacDonald's franchises instead of leaky submarines.

You want to see it get violent in short order out there in the "rest of the world", go ahead and turn the cop duties over to people for whom war is a blood sport.  Without America the teacher in place, the nukes would eventually fly and fallout doesn't discriminate - it goes wherever the wind blows and the currents flow.

America was settled by intelligent, hard-working peace-loving people looking for a chance to live in peace and prosperity.  We did it too - made a prosperous home for ourselves and went a long way toward creating a classless society.  Now we've got Americans longing for European style everything - military, government, economic system.  Well let 'em go live out there in the real world.  And when all hell breaks loose and you call for help, never fear.....America is here, ready, willing and able to cover your lily white arrogant, elitist, racist, egalitarian, socialist butts.

And yes, the United States picked a war with Mexico.  Fred Reed is right about that. A century and a half ago we fought a war that we shouldn't have.  It was unjust.  When it was over, we took some of their land which had been ruled by the Dons and upon which the peons were worked brutally by the rich nobles. 

And we PAID FOR the land they ceded us and turned them into states and made free American citizens of the peons.  I know we still hadn't quite beating up on the Indians, but then, they weren't always very reasonable either.  The English may have invented scalping, but the Indians made it an art form.  And we feel terribly guilty about beating up on native Americans - so much so that hardly a spending bill gets passed these days without substantial earmarks for the tribes in it.

Also, when we bought New Mexico, Arizona and California, the Mexican government at the time really needed the money.  Also we drove the final nail in Santa Anna's career and by all accounts, he wasn't through beating up on Texas yet despite having signed a treaty to save his worthless life.. 

And Texas had every right to rebel.  The idea that Texas is stolen property is balderdash.  The colonists began by demanding only that Mexico abide by its own 1824 constitution that the colonies had been established under instead of under the repressive new government that Santa Anna established to tax the crap out of Texas for his planned wars of Central American conquest. 

Running that evil little man out of office was NOT a bad thing in the same way that running Saddam Hussein out of office wasn't a bad thing.  Probably the only way to settle the issue was to win a war with him decisively.  Santa Anna had no intentions of ever giving up his dreams of conquest until he was thoroughly beaten. And beaten he was and by an army less than a third the size of his own.  Scared the hell out of him and he was peaceful ever after.

I'm glad Fred Reed likes Mexico, though.  So long as he doesn't piss off any drug cartels by telling them he wants to kill their business by legalizing drugs in the US, he should be okay.  Mexico is the perfect place for someone like Fred.  Servants are cheap, prostitutes almost free and eventually your immune system gets strong enough to handle the dysentery.


And they've done it to me again.  Pissed me off and got me to waste an hour writing all this stuff in answer to someone who thinks I'm an idiot and is so firmly wedded to his ideology as to be hen-pecked by it.

God save us from the intellectuals......

Tom