Obamacare is one of the worst policies that have ever been concocted by political statists. It should be rejected by everyone but the most destitute social parasites which this law is designed to promote. It is a severe infringement on human liberty and a detriment to successful health care advancement in the future. It is an attack on innovation and a promotion of lack-luster government bureaucracy. It is terrible law made by bad, corrupt politicians who hid their intentions of wealth redistribution through taxation under the cover of a holiday season and a nation filled with year-end compassion who didn’t read the fine print of a massive multi thousand page document. Obamacare was a Trojan Horse designed to wreck the American economy by progressives who hate the capitalism of the West.
To fathom what is in store for all of us in 2014 read the below report by a guy who took the time to write down his thoughts on the Affordable Care Act Facebook page. The guy tried to sign up for Obamacare, and then realized that he couldn’t afford the payments—and attempted to back out. This story has been floating around for a while and describes what will be a common for every American now that we are in 2014.
JIM MEIER OSP PROJECT ENGINEER Fort Myers Fl. 33903
RE: OBAMACARE A comment posted on the Affordable Care Act/Obamacare FB page:
“I actually made it through this morning at 8:00 AM. I have a preexisting condition (Type 1 Diabetes) and my income base was 45K-55K annually. I chose tier 2 “Silver Plan” and my monthly premiums came out to $597.00 with $13,988 yearly deductible!!! There is NO POSSIBLE way that I can afford this so I “opt-out” and chose to continue along with no insurance. I received an email tonight at 5:00 P.M. Informing me that my fine would be $4,037 and could be attached to my yearly income tax return. Then you make it to the “REPERCUSSIONS PORTION” for “non-payment” of yearly fine. First, your driver’s license will be suspended until paid, and if you go 24 consecutive months with “Non-Payment” and you happen to be a home owner, you will have a federal tax lien placed on your home. You can agree to give your bank information so that they can easy “Automatically withdraw” your “penalties” weekly, bi-weekly or monthly! This by no means is “Free” or even “Affordable.”
Obamacare not only infiltrates a major portion of the American economy, but it roots itself deep into the lives of every tax paying citizen and will remain there so long as people permit such an intrusion. Statists like Obama and his gang of government thugs are hoping and praying that they can get millions of people addicted to this new government “service” so that it can never be repealed. They do not care about the 6 to 10 million people who are losing their current plans so long as those people are forced under severe coercion to enroll in one of these government plans. Obama’s people know that all those people who have lost their plans will HAVE to sign up for their plan because they have the authority of law at their back and will take your driver’s license, they will take your house, they will fine you through payroll deduction and steal your money right out of your pockets—because they can—because they voted themselves the power to theft—to steal the money of American citizens and give it to drug addicts, fatherless homes bulging with welfare babies, and common criminals who otherwise would not have insurance. The federal US Government is promoting scum bags and harming the productive and they are doing it on purpose. Their attack on America through the medical insurance industry is on purpose—it is calculated and aggressive.
As it can be seen from the scenario illuminated by Jim Meier the affluent golf club member who has supplied excellent health insurance for his family for decades could suddenly be thrown in jail like a common criminal if he refuses to comply with Obamacare mandates purchasing insurance plans picked by the government designed to pay for abortions, and reckless living by people who intentionally make bad decisions in their lives. While those people thrive under government support stolen from people like the golf club member, the affluent man will rot in jail treated as a criminal because he dared to question the authority of a tyrannical government. If the man does not end up in jail he will be picked clean of his wealth through fines, fees, and insurance premiums because of his ability to pay.
Obamacare is socialism at best—but likely it would be communism if proposed under the U.S.S.R during the middle of the Twentieth Century. It is under tyrannical regimes that Obamacare belongs and is indicative. It has nothing to do with affordable care except for people who lack ambition to begin with and crave the security blanket of government built by stolen wealth. It is the creation of a little boy from Jakarta who grew up hating the West, raised by grandparents who leaned toward communism as a political philosophy, and was nurtured into politics by the American terrorist Bill Ayers. That little boy is now president rubbing the token of Lord Hanuman in his pocket, empowered by a slew of old hippies who now serve as congressman, and senators hiding the fact that Obamacare would be a new tax instead of an attempt to help equalize the medical insurance industry.
Obamacare is terrorism. There is no sugar-coating which can disguise the fact. It is an assault, and it is vile. It has no place in a free society—as it will be everything but a semblance of independence, free markets, or free will. It is thuggish coercion of the utmost imposition, it is dangerous, and it is designed to destroy America as a nation. It is the terrorism of Bill Ayers designed to implode the economy of an “imperialistic” nation as conceived by haters of America—of which Barack Obama seems to have a history of supporting.
That leaves the question………………why is it still a law?
If there is any wonder why this law is so bad, vile, and flat-out corrupt read the article at the following link for more information:
The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) is a labor union which represents workers in the electrical industry in the United States, Canada, Panama and several Caribbean island nations; particularly electricians, or Inside Wiremen, in the construction industry and linemen and other employees of public utilities. The union also represents some workers in the computer,telecommunications, broadcasting, and other fields related to electrical work. It was founded in 1891 shortly after homes and businesses in the United States began receiving electricity. Its international president is Ed Hill. The IBEW is affiliated with the AFL-CIO.
The beginnings of the IBEW were in the Electrical Wiremen and Linemen’s Union No. 5221, founded in St. Louis, Missouri in 1890. By 1891, after sufficient interest was shown in a national union, a convention was held on November 21, 1891 in St. Louis. At the convention, the IBEW, then known as the National Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (NBEW), was officially formed. The American Federation of Labor gave the NBEW a charter as an AFL affiliate on December 7, 1891. The union’s official journal, The Electrical Worker, was first published on January 15, 1893, and has been published ever since. At the 1899 convention in Pittsburgh,Pennsylvania, the union’s name was officially changed to the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers.
The fear over Smart Meters is that the un-holy alliance that these labor unions have with government will allow federal snoopers to study the patterns of a family’s behavior inside a home predicated off their use of energy on the power grid. That power grid is regulated by government for the benefit of government. When a storm comes through an area, thousands of customers getting their energy off that power grid must wait for the IBEW workers to hit the streets and get all the downed power lines operational again. The power grid system was solidified around 1900, with $150,000 (more than $3 million today; 51% from J. Pierpont Morgan) into a project that had a chance then to change the world for the better. Tesla began planning a spectacular tower called the Wardenclyffe a facility which was designed to beat Marconi to be the first to broadcast a radio signal across the Atlantic.[116]
To Morgan’s discomfort, the Wardenclyffe Tower was designed to not only beat Marconi, but to carry energy to every corner of the world which was the real aim of Tesla on the project. When Morgan realized that this was Tesla’s plan, he turned against Tesla as Morgan already had deals with Edison to use power in a grid system that was easy to make money off of. So long as energy could be brokered for sale, there would be a need to rent that energy from someone who provided it, someone like J.P. Morgan and his investors. Tesla later approached Morgan to ask for more funds to build a more powerful transmitter. When asked where all the money had gone, Tesla responded by saying that he was affected by the Panic of 1901, which Morgan had caused. Morgan was shocked by the reminder of his part in the stock market crash and by Tesla’s breach of contract by asking for more funds and the desire of the brilliant scientist to offer “free energy” to the world, so Morgan denied Tesla the request. Tesla wrote another plea to Morgan, but it was also fruitless. Morgan still owed Tesla money on the original agreement, and Tesla had been facing foreclosure even before construction of the tower began.[113]
In December 1901, Marconi successfully transmitted the letter “S” from England to Newfoundland, terminating Tesla’s relationship with Morgan. Over the next 5 years, Tesla wrote over 50 letters to Morgan, pleading for and demanding additional funding to complete the construction of Wardenclyffe. Tesla continued his project for another nine months. The tower was raised to its full 187 feet.[113] In July 1903, Tesla wrote to Morgan that in addition to wireless communication, Wardenclyffe would be capable of wireless transmission of electric power, which of course Morgan was against.[116] On 14 October 1904, Morgan finally replied through his secretary, stating, “It will be impossible for [me/ Morgan] to do anything in the matter.” The way power would be sold to the public had been established, and Tesla’s business format of free energy was not financially viable in proportion to the investment. That is how America—the inventor of electricity, formulated a relationship with every citizen in America to buy power in the form of rent as opposed to owning a share of it for their own use. The labor union of the IBEW formed along with the new technology to ensure that radical changes to the business structure, and their wage levels would never be put into jeopardy.
The way to think about Zero-point energy is to consider it as a closed system of power within the body of a household, like blood in a human body. A battery that never ran down would run all the power needs of a home with a closed system that never depleted. The washer, dryer, dishwasher, televisions, heating system, refrigeration, everything would run off this battery in a circulatory system that would keep the power in a perpetual state of usefulness. The same basic ideal would be used for cars, trains, and anything else which needed power to operate. This was the basic ideal that Ayn Rand utilized as her primary plot point in the popular novel Atlas Shrugged—John Galt’s engine was essentially inspired off of Tesla’s inventions. Instead of the power being consumed by energy it would simply draw from the Zero-point which appears to reside within dimensional space within the quantum level—and simply never runs out because it is always present. Much the way water is a stable force in the world there is never more or less of it, but it can be used and recycled many times over in various forms, energy is much the same. The properties which energy is carried upon can change as the vehicle to deliver the power, but the energy itself is a stable force that can always be tapped in to.
Zero-point energy, also called quantum vacuum zero-point energy, is the lowest possible energy that a quantum mechanicalphysical system may have; it is the energy of its ground state. All quantum mechanical systems undergo fluctuations even in their ground state and have an associated zero-point energy, a consequence of their wave-like nature. The uncertainty principle requires every physical system to have a zero-point energy greater than the minimum of its classical potential well. This results in motion even at absolute zero. For example, liquid helium does not freeze under atmospheric pressure at any temperature because of its zero-point energy. Now you know why government schools want to keep people in a state of ignorance.
The concept of zero-point energy was developed in Germany by Albert Einstein and Otto Stern in 1913, as a corrective term added to a zero-grounded formula developed by Max Planck in 1900.[1][2] The term zero-point energyoriginates from the German Nullpunktsenergie.[1][2] An alternative form of the German term is Nullpunktenergie (without the “s”).
In quantum theory, zero-point energy is a minimum energy below which a thermodynamic system can never go.[12] Thus, none of this energy can be withdrawn without altering the system to a different form in which the system has a lower zero-point energy. One of the hypotheses that claims that zero-point energy is infinite is stochastic electrodynamics. In it, the zero-point field is viewed as simply a classical background isotropic noise wave field which excites all systems present in the vacuum and thus is responsible for their minimum-energy or “ground” states. The requirement of Lorentz invariance at a statistical level then implies that the energy density spectrum must increase with the third power of frequency, implying infinite energy density when integrated over all frequencies.[29]
According to a NASA contractor report, “the concept of accessing a significant amount of useful energy from the ZPE gained much credibility when a major article on this topic was published in Aviation Week & Space Technology (March 1st, 2004), a leading aerospace industry magazine”.[30]
The calculation that underlies the Casimir experiment, a calculation based on the formula predicting infinite vacuum energy, shows the zero-point energy of a system consisting of a vacuum between two plates will decrease at a finite rate as the two plates are drawn together. The vacuum energies are predicted to be infinite, but the changes are predicted to be finite. Casimir combined the projected rate of change in zero-point energy with the principle of conservation of energy to predict a force on the plates. The predicted force, which is very small and was experimentally measured to be within 5% of its predicted value, is finite.[31] Even though the zero-point energy is theoretically infinite, there is as yet no evidence to suggest that infinite amounts of zero-point energy are available for use, that zero-point energy can be withdrawn for free, or that zero-point energy can be used in violation of conservation of energy.[32] That is, until one looks at the work of John Hutchinson.
In the contrary of energy generation, a field of study where there is a somewhat realistic potential for the utilization of zero-point energy might be in the design of extremely small-scale devices like MEMS and NEMS or in distant futuristic propulsion technology of extremely long-distance space-travel.[12]
A document released by the NGIC shows there is ongoing worldwide research into zero-point energy, particular in China, Germany, Russia and Brazil. Some analyst of the DIA has indicated that research into successfully harnessing zero-point energy for energy generation purposes is a serious concern inside the intelligence community.[12]
The implication of Zero-point energy is that cars never need combustible gas, which would wreck the oil industry, homes would never need to be taped into a power grid, which would wreck the IBEW union and all its affiliates in government, every home in every corner of the world—even the most backwater spot on the planet could have a power supply equivalent to what is offered in big cities, and it would never run out, and would cost nothing to use. Energy could be broadcast across the globe to every point possible through towers like Wardenclyffe and would be as easy to use as cell phones receiving a signal in remote areas now. The power lines that litter roadways would go away, and power grid infrastructure would no longer be a concern. And politicians would no longer have poor people to exploit because the quality of life virtually everywhere would improve and the cost of renting energy from government controlled sources would be eliminated.
This is one of the premier reasons that John Hutchinson is a hated man at the center of conspiracy theories. Governments cannot control the kind of technology that Hutchinson is perfecting any more than they can control the Internet. They can monitor the information, but they can’t stop it as it is a free-flowing existence that now works inside of a new dimensional space called Cyberspace. To kill that space now would be to kill the communication network that it is attached to, and every device which carries that network. However, Hutchinson’s zero-point energy batteries will do for the power industry what the Internet has done to the telephone industry—who has a land line these days? Who pays for long distance calls when they can now Skype? Who needs a telephone line? The energy breakthroughs will be much more dramatic than these inventions once they take, and the only reason they haven’t yet is that nobody can figure out how they can make money off something that exists in the air and is as common as water—which is technically free to everyone. Government has learned to sell water to customers by offering a cleaning service, but every home could have its own well to draw from—if they wanted.
Zero-point energy is even more reliable than all these technologies because energy is literally all around us in virtually everything. Hutchinson built his zero-point batteries out of rocks he found around his home. But the reason we don’t have these things yet is because it has been accepted that energy delivery must come from the “power company” and that entity is usually publicly traded and tied directly to government—and labor unions, and neither want anything to change, because neither wants to give up any of the power they have currently over people in general.
One of the downsides to yesteryear which helped propel the destructive feminist movement in America was that men sometimes did not let their wives learn to drive a car. They did this because the men feared that the women would get jobs, get new boyfriends, and abandon their families. The men were afraid of giving their wives freedom for fear that they would lose them to the temptations of the world. Modern government is doing the same thing to people like Hutchinson. They are purposely black-balling Hutchinson through orthodox scientific institutional channels to keep his technology away from a public that they know wants to be free of a power grid and the enormous expense of renting energy from a government controlled entity.
Critics will say that John Hutchinson is crazy—that batteries do not have the ability to store such energy for a lifetime. They will say that everything pointing away from the current controlled system is wrong, dangerous and unstable—and they will do it for the same reason that Edison was terrified of Tesla—because they know they have an inferior product that can only maintain its monopoly on the public so long as people don’t know that there are any options. Well, now dear reader you know there are options, and it won’t take much to bring them about—and it all starts by reading articles like this one and taking the next step. For that next step, it begins with John Hutchinson and his experiments into zero-point energy. The step after that will be for a country to get behind his technology and begin introducing it to the world. It might be Japan, it might be China, and it might even be Germany. But because of the IBEW it won’t be The United States of America.
I am certainly no fan of Bill and Hillary Clinton. If either of them were to pass me in public I would not shake their hand or acknowledge them in any way aside from anyone else. They are both disgraces to America for many reasons. It does not surprise me that Bill’s mistress Gennifer Flowers claimed that Hillary was a bisexual. It would not surprise me if the Clinton household regularly participated in three-way sex and that Hillary actually found it appealing to learn of her husband’s multiple sexual liaisons with other women. Hillary obviously has a kind of voyeuristic lust for her husband’s sexual recklessness that is more common among women from her generation than many people care to admit. But what does surprise me is that Gennifer Flowers said she would support Hillary for president in spite of all the hard public relation battles that went on over the years between them, for the one all-powerful reason………………because Hillary is a woman.
This statement reminded me of the stupidity of the levy supporters at Lakota that tried to make me out to be a “sexist” because I called levy supporters “latté sipping prostitutes with asses the size of car tires and diamond rings to match.” My political opponents believed that all the women of my community would join their band-wagon against me for the one solitary reason, because they were all women. The suggestion was that being a woman trumped all logic and individual thought and that as a demographic group, they all stood together.
Several years ago there was a very distinguished family member who came to my home while I was at work to take my wife out to lunch—to supposedly touch base and see how things were going—to talk “girl talk.” I have discussed that my wife has never worked in a career and has been a housewife for most of our 25 years of marriage. It’s an arrangement that we mutually support and believe very passionately in. We rejected the social concerns of the 60s, of feminism, and diluted family relationships early in our marriage, and maintained that position even to the present. I even spent a considerable amount of time explaining that position in my novel Tail of the Dragon released last year, staying sold out during four fiscal quarters. My wife and I have always been staunch supporters of traditional families, and rejected many of the arguments made by feminists. At events, particularly where this family member was present, the first question they’d ask my wife is, “do you have a job yet?” Or, “you never want to be in a position where you have to depend on a man, after all, what if something were to happen to Rich.” This went on for many, many years, and we casually brushed off the comments after each engagement out of politeness. All the other women in the family however buckled under these types of elder statesman, and they were diminished greatly in my eyes by the influence of the bra burning exploits of the family feminists. Over the years, my wife began to stick out like a sore thumb at Holiday dinners and this really made some of the women mad, especially the aforementioned woman. This prompted the luncheon she invited my wife on out-of-the-blue, which naturally drew my suspicion. But I do not tell my wife where to go and where not to go. She is free to do what she pleases when she pleases to do it-which is my gift to her for being the centerpiece of our family, so my wife agreed to meet with the family feminist to…………..”touch base.”
The luncheon went the way I expected and over the next two hours migrated from small talk centering on all the family’s children to an all-out assault against my wife’s chosen way of life. The meeting ended by this family member telling my wife that “we’re going to get you if you don’t listen,” meaning that my wife was making the other women in the family question feminism, and that my wife needed to get on board with the collectivism of womanhood—otherwise there would be consequences.
Well, I don’t take threats well—in fact, I don’t take them at all—ever. Never have, and I never will. As close as that family member was to us, we have never spoken since, and that was over a decade ago. There are of course the casual hellos, and good-byes out of politeness, but never any discussions of a personal matter. But as angry as I was, I didn’t tell my wife how to feel and think about the situation—she arrived at her own conclusions, which were of course very similar to mine. After that event it left us both wondering who “WE” was. After a lot of time passed it became more clear who the “WE” were in reference. My wife was expected to surrender her loyalty to our family in favor of the collective whole of the family member’s suggestion. If she didn’t, there was a threat of action—either social castigation, or possible physical violence.
The result dramatically backfired. My wife and I haven’t been married for a quarter of a century because we don’t get along. She may not be as violent, and display such a vicious temper as I do at times, but she is every bit as vindictive when threatened maybe more so. A rift formed in our family from that point on that never recovered, and is why I can talk about the things I do here at Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom knowing full well that everybody reads it. That is because my life is aligned with my thoughts, and what I have said here in writing, I have said in person to many people to their faces. My wife was made to feel badly by other women for many years because she stayed home with our children and baked cakes for their birthdays personally instead of buying one from Kroger. When my kids wanted a drink, my wife was there. When they wanted help with their homework, my wife was there. When my kids wanted someone to drive them someplace, my wife was ALWAYS there. My wife was there every single day of their growing up years to cook them fresh food for every meal and teach them values as question arose. Because of my wife, my kids never had to rely on a third-party for instruction.
Of course over the years the roots planted in such times begin to yield fruit. The family member mentioned who threatened my wife found her existence plagued with social problems from her part of the line. All the women who bought into the feminist dialogue are suffering through various problems, such as financial stabilization, ethical conduct, and personal aptitude. My children have no such problems—zero and that is more than a proud father talking. It is everyone who meets them. The family member was wrong, and my wife was right. The implied threat backfired and caused rifts in our family that will last a lifetime because it is not the will of any group—even a group of women, to change the mind of a single individual. It was not my wife’s duty or task as a woman to yield to the pressure of a powerful family member who subscribed to the feminist arguments of her day. In my family, my wife and I agreed to reject those arguments in favor of tradition and the results are self-evident.
What Gennifer Flowers is talking about in reference to Hillary is virtually the same. She clearly resents that she is not married to Bill Clinton, and would love to have been the first lady of America if only she could have stayed with her lover. But she is willing to put personal issues aside in favor of Hillary for president not because she is a better person for the job, or has a proven track record as a politician. She stated that she would vote for Hillary only because they share womanhood in common, and that the sex or race of a candidate is the primary qualifier of their decision to vote for a so-called leader. Gennifer Flowers is talking about collectivism of the worst sort, and brings to light why Barack Obama is the current president not because of his skill as a politician, but because he is a man of color. People of color have voted for Obama nearly 100% of the time because of the color of the politician’s skin, not by the beliefs of the individual. Flowers is suggesting the same. Women should vote for Hillary forgetting the Benghazi debacle, the lies, the murders, he incredible deception projected by the Clintons over many years, because she is a women—and only for that reason.
The same ignorance has been seen in family politics, and even local politics where my opponents having no way to win an argument against me attempted to use feminism as a club to unify the women of all political types under common causes of sexuality—which is a dangerous assumption. It didn’t work of course, but did bring out the unusual amount of anxiety many men feel toward their wives fearful that they will turn against them and run toward the collectivist tendencies of group behavior, in this case feminism. The implied threat against my family seen many times is that if I or my wife did not yield to the power of the collective, then our individualities would be snuffed out. The same rational is being put forth by Gennifer Flowers toward Hillary Clinton, a rival for her affection toward the only man it sounds like she ever loved in Bill Clinton. Collective feminism takes higher value over individual desires, or as Spock would say in Star Trek, “The needs of the many would out-weigh the needs of the few.” Well, Spock is wrong, and so are the feminists. The many do not trump individual thought, yet those who allow for such possibilities find themselves in a life constantly in trouble seeking solace which never comes from the group. Women should vote for whom they think is the best person, they should not vote in a certain way because feminism demands it. So long as these elements exist in American culture, no amount of bright lights and academic progress can erase the fact that society is still functioning as a hunter and gather tribe stuck in a village mentality. So long as individuality is frowned upon and collectivism is championed, society will continue to be corrupt, stagnant, and morally lost. As far as presidential candidates who represent collectivism none is more positioned than Hillary Clinton who is a buffoon, and a woman of many secrets. Yet women will have to make the choice that is a hard one, one that my wife had to make many times over many years, to reject feminism for the thoughts of their own mind, and to be dedicated to themselves and their families and reject their collective associations for which they are members only because of their sexuality.
As to the next question many reading this will ask, what does my wife do with herself now that the children are grown? How does she fill her days? The answer is she is free to do whatever she pleases. She is a free woman. She is not in service to an institution, a social obligation, or any family member. She can do what she wants when she wants to do it. And lucky for her, she likes to read, because I do too. That is the key to a long marriage, and really nothing else, shared common interest, and making sure that outside influences do not end up in the bedroom. Ladies, forget about Hillary Clinton or Opera. Strive for freedom and drop the concerns for inclusion in any groups of collective endeavor. Be individuals and strive every day to be free. You will be a lot happier if you do.
The Blaze Television is one of the most cutting edge programs produced today and is the latest project of Laurie Dhue. She left Fox News to work for her new employer Glenn Beck. Watch this stunning episode and share it with a friend on the extreme depth of the NSA and how it affects your life.
The level of domestic surveillance in the United States has reached such shocking levels in the post-9/11 world that people will find it hard to fathom, said Laurie Dhue, host of TheBlaze TV’s new investigative series “For the Record.” The show’s first episode, “Surveillance State.”
“I think this is going to open a lot of people’s eyes…people will be absolutely shocked to know that things have gotten even less transparent in the last 10 years — there’s even more surveillance going on than ever before,” Dhue told Beck on his radio show.
The show reveals how the National Security Agency transformed from its stated purpose of foreign intelligence gathering into an arm to listen in on U.S. citizens — all on the taxpayer’s dime.
“After 9/11 the spigots just opened, money continued to flow in the NSA. The NSA got everything it wanted, and the taxpayers basically just got taken to the cleaners,” Dhue said.
What information the government collects, they keep — including in a massive Utah facility slated for completion earlier this year, Dhue said.
“This is all being done in the name of protection, in the name of keeping us safe. But it’s scary stuff when you think about it,” Dhue told Beck.
Oprah Winfrey used the oldest trick in the book as far as promoting the latest “progressive” film containing her direct involvement. Her film The Butler already has Oscar buzz as a surprising summer hit and tells the story of a White House butler who served eight American presidents over three decades. The film traces the dramatic changes that swept American society during this time, from the civil rights movement to Vietnam and beyond, and how those changes affected a man’s life and family. Forest Whitaker stars as the butler with Robin Williams as Dwight Eisenhower, John Cusack as Richard Nixon, Alan Rickman as Ronald Reagan, James Marsden as John F. Kennedy. This is the same film where Jane Fonda played Nancy Reagan. The cast is a who’s who of the extreme political left, and primary spokesman of modern progressive philosophy. If Winfrey didn’t know how to use such tricks, she wouldn’t be one of the richest women in the world. But she does, and she did—one week before The Butler hit theaters she managed to say something that angered half of America and empowered the other half putting her name in all the news outlets ahead of the movie’s release. Her film which cost only $30 million to make pulled in nearly all that total during its opening weekend, an amount that was likely spiked 7% – 9% due to Oprah’s controversy.
In case you missed the inflammatory statements, Oprah’s played the race card one week before The Butler hit theaters when a trip to a Zurich shop ended in a supposedly disturbing racial encounter for the billionaire media mogul — a national humiliation that forced the Swiss tourism board to issue a public apology. Winfrey had said she was in town for Tina Turner’s wedding last month and stopped in the posh Trois Pommes boutique where she asked a clerk to see a $38,000 Tom Ford bag behind a glass case. Oprah claims that the clerk looked down on her assuming that she couldn’t afford the bag because she was a black woman. Pictures of all these characters and more about the story can be fond at the following link.
Oprah Winfrey has also chosen this past week to break her silence on the controversy surrounding her friend Paula Deen, the disgraced television chef’s use of the N-word in the past. “I think Paula Deen was sort of used as a symbol, but I think lots of people use the word inappropriately all the time,” Oprah said during a revealing interview on Entertainment Tonight Monday. The 59-year old television mogul says she’s very sensitive to racism — a major theme in her new movie, “Lee Daniels’ The Butler.” “I do not run in the circle of people who use the word loosely,” she told ET. “For me it’s out of respect to those people who it was the last word they heard while they were being hung, the last word they heard when they were being fired, the last word they heard when their house was being burned. “It’s the word heard every day when they were walking down the street and they had to step off the side-walk to let other people pass.”
I understand the use of playing such cards to promote works of entertainment, especially when in so doing it reveals what kind of person is really behind the image. I’ve played similar cards for similar reasons such as before the release of my novel Tail of the Dragon. I don’t see anything wrong with it so long as the advocate is being authentically revealing—standing up for what they truly believe in. That’s why it’s easy to see what Oprah was up to. She knew exactly what she was doing, and the results are in the box office of The Butler. And I also believe that Oprah believes she was a victim of racism at the Swiss purse store. I believe that Oprah also believes that when she heads a board room conference that the reason there are people jealous of her, as she claims, is because she’s a black woman—and that white men despise her for her role of authority. So for me, it is not surprising that she said any of the things she has recently. My sentiments about Winfrey reflect those of Glenn Beck in a recent radio broadcast that he gave on the matter declaring that Winfrey’s action disgusted him.
Behind the public image of Oprah Winfrey is a woman who was given a tremendous chance by Steven Spielberg after the release of the film, The Color Purple to launch a media empire, which she did. The doors were opened for her to take the wheel and steer herself to an unfathomable destiny, and she did not hold back once given the chance. Many “white guys” wanting to prove they were not racist or sexist were actively seeking a black woman to advocate progressive philosophy to mainstream America in the late 1980s, and Oprah was up for the challenge. The media got behind the effort for the same reason they get behind Barack Obama. Their public and college educations taught them that the civil rights issues of the 1960s were the most important historical aspects of America’s development and they all want to play a part in shaping that history for the better.
In spite of what public image Winfrey has been able to build for herself through aligning her career path with progressive politics, deep down inside she is still the same woman she was before she stared in The Color Purple, and that personality comes out when she is being candid. With her new film The Butler, as conservatives were angry with Jane Fonda playing Nancy Reagan, Winfrey did what progressives have done for years and that was disarm the critics and raise awareness for her film project by soaking up all the media attention with a blind accusation that could never be proven as millions of Oprah fans went to the theater to see her new movie—who otherwise would have passed. By choosing to see The Butler over other kinds of movies, like Kick Ass 2 or some other film, Americans felt that it would prove that “they” were not racist by going to see such a movie, a challenge that Oprah initiated with her statements about racism.
I don’t see Oprah as a success even though she is one of the richest people on earth. I see a highly paid progressive spokesman who has been given power to help re-shape the world—which she has done. No matter how much you dress up someone, and prop them up with photo shoots, films, and enamoring articles, they are what they are, and Oprah revealed what she was to the world during her press tour for The Butler. I don’t blame her for trying to boost her ticket sales with inflammatory remarks. But I do for being a phony all other times of her life and only revealing her deepest, darkest beliefs when it is financially advantageous to do so. She knows as well as anybody that she would not have gained so much global popularity uttering such things during her rise to the top in the 1990s where nearly every woman in America looks to Oprah as the tribal chief of their global village. But I do blame Oprah for being an inflammatory phony and seeking to use race as a way to prop up ticket sales and a possible Oscar nomination for her new movie purely out of fear of being called a civil rights violator. It’s not a free market of equal ideas that people like Oprah are after, it is in the use of guilt, fear, and scandal where advantage is gained through such methods and why people like her “are” the most powerful people in the world when they would otherwise be store sellers of used junk in a flea market.
Remember above everything, Oprah is an actress. She is paid to say what other people write for her. In her case, she is extremely well paid to act not only on the silver screen, but also in real life.
Recently I stated that I was in open rebellion against the “establishment” and felt that a real definition was required so that the objective can be known. We need to know what the establishment is exactly? When the “establishment” is identified as a villain what is it that we are considering? Who brings it forth, and why? Where does the semblance of impoverished drabness which always follows the establishment come from–the tired routines, the stagnant monotony of the so-called “cultured activities” from the movie screen, to literature, to the allegedly intellectual publications? Anyone is still free to say, write and publish anything that they please in America, yet men and women keep silent as their culture perishes around them from an entrenched, epidemic of institutionalized mediocrity. Why? That is what we need to understand before we can rebel against anything. I encourage you dear reader highly to watch every one of these videos. If you love yourself you’ll do it. If you love your children, YOU’LL DO IT!
In 1971 the National Institute of Mental Health granted Dr. B.F Skinner $283,000 to write a book called Beyond Freedom and Dignity. The book argues that entrenched belief in free will and the moral autonomy of the individual (which Skinner referred to as “dignity”) hinders the prospect of using scientific methods to modify behavior for the purpose of building a happier and better-organized society.
Beyond Freedom and Dignity may be summarized as an attempt to promote Skinner’s philosophy of science, the technology of human behavior. His conception of determinism, and what Skinner calls ‘cultural engineering’.
Skinner invented the operant conditioning chamber, also known as the Skinner Box.[7] He was a firm believer of the idea that human free will was actually an illusion and any human action was the result of the consequences of that same action. If the consequences were bad, there was a high chance that the action would not be repeated; however if the consequences were good, the actions that lead to it would be reinforced.[8] He called this the principle of reinforcement.[9]
He innovated his own philosophy of science called radical behaviorism,[10] and founded his own school of experimental research psychology—the experimental analysis of behavior. His analysis of human behavior culminated in his work Verbal Behavior, as well as his philosophical manifesto Walden Two, both of which have recently seen enormous increases in interest experimentally and in applied settings.[11] Contemporary academia considers Skinner a pioneer of modern behaviorism along with John B. Watson and Ivan Pavlov.
Skinner discovered and advanced the rate of response as a dependent variable in psychological research. He invented the cumulative recorder to measure rate of responding as part of his highly influential work on schedules of reinforcement.[12][13] In a June 2002 survey, Skinner was listed as the most influential psychologist of the 20th century.[14] He was a prolific author who published 21 books and 180 articles.[15][16]
The direct result of Skinner’s work was that it began to be accepted in public schools the tendency of some students to be “hyper active” in relation to other students and that this behavior should be identified and turned down so that the collective whole could function better as an institution. Skinner of course justifies this by his term ‘cultural engineering.’ Not many people read Skinner’s book at first except the “academic elite” who would then postulate politicians at charity events, fund-raisers, and other social occasions on the merit of the esteemed Harvard professor and his studies into social behavior, and how they could then be corrected in young people starting in public schools.
Eventually after a decade or two of such postulating the criteria for ADHD began to take root in public consciousness as “established practice.” After all the studies came out of Harvard! Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD, similar to hyperkinetic disorder in the ICD) is a psychiatric disorder[1] or neurobehavioral disorder[2] characterized by significant problems either of inattention and/or hyperactivity and impulsiveness. These symptoms must emerge before twelve years of age for a diagnosis to be made.[3] There are three subtypes of the disorder: predominantly inattentive (ADHD-PI or ADHD-I), predominantly hyperactive-impulsive (ADHD-HI or ADHD-H), or the two combined (ADHD-C), which shows all three difficulties. Often people refer to ADHD-PI as “attention deficit disorder” (ADD), however, the latter has not been officially accepted since the 1994 revision of the DSM. ADHD affects school-aged children and results in restlessness, acting impulsively, and a lack of focus that may impair school performance.
Inattention, hyperactivity (restlessness in adults), disruptive behavior, and impulsivity are common in ADHD.[19][20] Academic and social skills difficulties are also frequent.[19] The symptoms can be difficult to define because it is hard to draw a line at where normal levels of inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity end and clinically significant levels requiring intervention begin.[10]:p.26 To be diagnosed as ADHD, symptoms must be observed in two different settings for six months or more and to a degree that is greater than other children of the same age.[21]
The symptom categories yield three potential classifications of ADHD—predominantly inattentive type, predominantly hyperactive-impulsive type, or combined type if criteria for both subtypes are met:[10]:p.4
An individual with predominantly inattentive-type may have symptoms including:[22]
Be easily distracted, miss details, forget things, and frequently switch from one activity to another
Have difficulty maintaining focus on one task
Become bored with a task after only a few minutes, unless doing something enjoyable
Have difficulty focusing attention on organizing and completing a task or learning something new
Have trouble completing or turning in homework assignments, often losing things (e.g., pencils, toys, assignments) needed to complete tasks or activities
Not seem to listen when spoken to
Daydream, become easily confused, and move slowly
Have difficulty processing information as quickly and accurately as others
Struggle to follow instructions.
An individual with predominantly hyperactive-impulsive type may have symptoms including:[22]
Fidget and squirm in their seats
Talk nonstop
Dash around, touching or playing with anything and everything in sight
Have trouble sitting still during dinner, school, and story time
Be constantly in motion
Have difficulty doing quiet tasks or activities
An individual with predominantly impulsivity type may have symptoms including:[22]
Be very impatient
Blurt out inappropriate comments, show their emotions without restraint, and act without regard for consequences
Blurts out comments better left unsaid (not always innapropriate)
Have difficulty waiting for things they want or waiting their turns in games
Often interrupt conversations or others’ activities.
According to the “establishment” some children, adolescents, and adults with ADHD have an increased risk of experiencing difficulties with social skills, such as social interaction and forming and maintaining friendships due to impairments in processing verbal and nonverbal language. About half of children and adolescents with ADHD experience rejection by their peers compared to 10–15 percent of non-ADHD children and adolescents. Training in social skills, behavioral modification and medication may have some limited beneficial effects. The most important factor in reducing emergence of later psychopathology, such as major depression, criminality, school failure, and substance use disorders is formation of friendships with people who are not involved in delinquent activities.[23] At least, according to the “establishment.”
In other words the threats to the established order that the government paid “B. F.” Skinner to write about in his book Beyond Freedom and Dignity is children who have “compliance” issues as listed above in the diagnosis for ADHD. Psychiatric professors with grants of their own using Skinner’s work as their foundation proceeded to frame their work to fit their grant criteria, which was to nudge their testing results into the direction of Skinner’s work, which is proven to have the ability to obtain federal grants for their intuitions of learning.
Very indirectly, the statist federal government has shaped and created “established” thought about the roles that government schools should have in superseding parental authority into making children into subservient within the schools of which the education institutions have a monopoly. In just a few short decades using the grant system and federal funds to gain power over local authority, the federal government has shaped the thoughts and minds of an entire American population into believing that their hyperactive, imaginative child fidgeting in their chair day-dreaming too much is actually sick, and needs to have their minds turned off so that the entire school can function better under rules of statism established by college professors eating out of the palm of the federal government with $283,000 checks to write books for the academic class to slowly, surely, become the new generational authority from which everything else will follow. This is the process that creates “the establishment.”
That is what I mean by rebellion and what the target is. It’s not people, political parties, or even buildings in Washington. It’s the philosophy that supports them all with beliefs that are detrimental to the cause of liberty and desire for every living life to function from free will.
If you want to hear some absolutely hilarious radio commentary, listen to the clip below, it is well worth your time. Doc Thompson and Skip LeCombe during their usual Blaze Radio Network show from 6 AM to 9 AM broadcast all over the world twice a day blasted the IRS for the recent issuing of over $70 million dollars in bonuses to their unionized employees. Many people do not realize that the IRS is unionized work force under the National Treasury Employees Union otherwise known as the (NTEU). So even though there is government furloughs and closed tours through the White House due to financial constraints, the IRS regardless of performance by its employees through their ridiculous collective bargaining agreements are receiving bonuses of an extraordinarily high amount. Doc breaks down the math in the broadcast below, about 5 minutes into the segment. But first Doc and Skip bring news of a terrorist summer camp that is quite serious, but is delivered with the usual Doc Thompson ability to make even the most sinister concepts more digestible with his rambunctious sense of humor. For long time readers here who remember Doc Thompson when he was on 700 WLW, he was functioning under severe handcuffs. Now that he is with The Blaze and reporting to Glenn Beck at Mercury Entertainment, he has freedom that any radio personality would love to have, which is to the benefit of listeners everywhere. The Blaze is available 24 hours a day through streaming audio, and is an experiment from Glenn Beck which broadcasts like any other radio station with news at the top and bottom of every hour. So enjoy this small sample from Doc’s recent show about the IRS bonuses that will make you laugh, but at the same time make you extremely angry.
Doc and Skip were one of the first news outlets to break the IRS bonuses story, but Forbes had a wonderful article about it written by Kelly Phillips Erb which can be seen in its entirety at the link below:
I included this link not just because the article was good, but the comments at the end were fantastic. One comment summed up the situation at the IRS remarkably well, even though I don’t agree with the writer at all—the comment reminded me of the same types of diatribes that were uttered when we begin to analyze collective bargaining agreements among public school teachers as being the cause of continuous tax increase requests. The comment from Peter Reilly shown below made the argument that the IRS needs incentives like great bonuses and pensions to attract “top talent.” This brings up a whole list of problems. But before getting into them, have a look at what he said:
For its top people the IRS has to compete in a labor market that pays much better than the IRS. There was recently published list of the top 1,000 paid federal employees. Number 1000 made just over $200,000 per year. Nobody on the list worked for the IRS.
In a regional accounting firm I know of there was a term for partners who made around $200,000 – the bottom quartile. The top quartile probably made about what the lowest paid partners in national firms make. And this is mere CPAs, never mind tax attorneys.
I think very few people go into tax work of any sort based on the sort of inner call that might lead someone to be a physician, a priest or a soldier. It’s clean work with no heavy lifting that pays pretty well. You’ve got to do something to feed your family.
Part of the tax profession is an arms race between people gaming the system and people trying to keep the gaming with reasonable bounds. Both sides require the same knowledge base, education and some common skill sets. In a free democratic society the top gamers will always make more money than the other side.
Working for the IRS might get you a better life work balance and a pension which might make it a better deal at the lower and middle levels, but the Service is at a huge disadvantage in retaining top talent.
For those of us who want a smaller, and more efficient government no matter if the employee is a local school teacher working in public school, or an IRS agent, when the pay and compensation to government work is equal or better than private sector work, then top talent will seek the government job. Reilly’s comment assumes that the IRS needs to have top talent in order to function efficiently. Without question, the NTEU union has made the same argument for its union members that the school teachers, police departments, and other unionized federal workers have made, that the service they provide is important, and that only through collective bargaining does America get the highest quality product.
Well, anybody with a brain knows this kind of thinking is ridiculously foolish, and the fun that Doc Thompson and Skip had in picking the theory to pieces was well justified. The way the system works now is that top talent is seduced to work for government because the pay is so good, and the retirement packages are better than anywhere in the world. That top talent is ruined in the non-competitive government environment where collective bureaucracy rule and individual achievement is frowned upon. Even the best top talent in the world will never make a collective oriented organization function miraculously well when all individuals serve the system of employment rather than the system serving the individuals that make it work. Within a few years of employment, most of the bright-eyed top talent which is employed by the government learns their place in the pecking order, and stop trying to be ambitious, and instead just bide their time, collect their paycheck, and prepare for their retirements, and eventual deaths.
The way things should work is that no federal employee should be unionized. Government also should not pay more than the private sector. Government work offers a security that is not duplicated in private sector work, so the pay should be much lower. Pay should be assessed based on risk level, not statist power. In this way, the private sector should pay a lot more than any government work so that those who wish to make more money will leave government, not join it. If any worker wants to waste their life as a government employee, they should be paid a bare minimum wage in trade for the security of the job. Then and only then will government ever get smaller, and government workers will vote with their minds and not their pocket books. It is the government type employees who vote to keep people like President Obama in power not because they like his socialist policies, but because he is their boss. So long as big government politicians are in office in Washington, job security is ever-present in their positions. And so long as government employees are in a union, they can act as a socialist collective to get bonuses, pay and pensions that they do not deserve. There will always be apologists like the commentator Reilly who believe that the IRS needs top talent to function—to catch those who are “gaming” the system. Well, this isn’t true. Turn the tax collecting system to a flat tax, and simplify the code, and suddenly sophisticated accountants with a broad knowledge of the complicated tax code wouldn’t be needed.
I was at a dinner event recently where a retired FBI agent was attempting to grab the same bottle of wine that I was out of a chilled bucket. I wasn’t in the mood for beer, or any kind of soft drink and the food was too good to just have water with it, so I wanted wine. The agent pointed at the bottle I had in my hand and asked, “Is that Chateau d’Yquem Sauternes? Here let me open it for us.” I looked at the label and tried to identify the label which was written mostly in French and replied, “Here’s your crushed grapes. You tell me.” The old federal worker of course wanted to display to me his knowledge of wine, and inform me of his extensive knowledge of them gained from around the world. All he succeeded in doing was reminding me that he came to such knowledge not by the merit of his work, but by years of kissing ass to work his way up the FBI chain attending little gatherings where expensive wines were tossed into chilled buckets like water bottles in a cooler for a picnic. That mentality does not make the people individually evil, just instruments of collective statism. I felt sorry for that particular FBI agent. His years of work had brought him to a retirement where he knew the names of French wine, but was unable to help a child thread twin string through a kite. He was very happy to joke about his lack of aviation knowledge declaring that such an endeavor required the services of an engineer, not an old FBI agent—then everyone laughed, except for me.
I have seen the same behavior in retired school teachers, retired military personnel, and especially retired bureaucrats. They want to feel that their life has some meaning, especially at the end of it, because their careers offered them nothing of any intellectual substance. They simply showed up at work every day and their labor union did all their fighting for them, so all they had to do was collect their pay, and plan social events with their co-workers using their discretionary income to purchase bottles of wine that other people didn’t have access to–get drunk and reminisce about their wild and crazy days during high school. Those same federal workers plan their vacations each year to Key West where they attend Fantasy Fest living out their most pent-up sexual fantasies. Walk Duval Street every October and interview the topless 50-year-old women, or the pot-bellied IRS cubical worker of 30 years who has traded in their suit for a woman’s dress and wig pretending to be a girl during the famous parade.
Check it out for yourself at the following link. The people who attend that event are upper middle-class types—and those are a creation of government, former FBI agents, school teachers, cops, IRS employees, politicians, adults who spent their entire adult lives adapting to a collective hive who can retire at age 55 and have money to spend because tax payers gave it to them through their labor unions. If I had to bet, I would say the number of people attending Fantasy Fest in Key West were just over 80% government employees.
The situation is endemic in all federal agencies, but is especially prevalent at the IRS which should be completely dismantled and replaced with a flat tax. But it won’t because the NTEU union has too much power, including organizing a campaign against the Tea Party from The White House. The next step with these types is to get together over sundown meetings in each other’s back yards and squabble about what bottle of wine to pull from the wine bucket, as such trivia is all that matters to their bureaucratic mindsets after a dozen or more years of employment by the federal government. Just think how many bottles of Chateau d’Yquem Sauternes the IRS workers will be able to purchase with their $70 million dollars in bonuses on top of a salary that is already pushing six figures.
If it’s not evident why the Tea Party wants to reign in the costs of the federal government it is to get control of this kind of statist mentality from employees who should be working for the private sector instead of government. The only beneficiaries to such unionized arrangements is the political machine of Democrats (socialists) who collect the union dues for the re-election of statist candidates, the union workers who get paid a lot of money to do very little, and the wine makers in France who sell most of their stock to retired federal workers because that’s who buys their product. It is in times like these that we should all be thankful that there are people like Doc Thompson on the radio to bring stories about such abuses to light, because without such a radio personality, the abuse would continue on unreported.
I don’t even take the Lakota School System serious any more. Since January of this year, a group of residents, teachers, students, administrators and school board members have been working together to form a strategic plan that will help guide the future of the Lakota Local School District. The result of this so-called first phase, which covers the strategic areas and goals identified by the mentioned “group,” is now available for the Lakota community’s review and comment, before the board considers adoption of the recommended plan next Monday, June 24. You can see that plan for yourself at the link below, but let me save you some time. The intent of the whole “phase one” strategy is listed on page four, after all the flowery details in the preceding pages. Lakota, after all the discussion we’ve engaged in and the millions upon millions of dollars in salary that has been spent on these people, have come up with a brilliant strategy…………..to simply ask for more money. Here are “their” words. They want to “transition Lakota to an organization with sustainable resources and funding to achieve its goals and mission.” They want to “build a financial plan that merits continued public investment and will sustain the mission.” They want to “develop a resource plan that will help sustain the mission.” Then they want to “communicate the financial status to increase understanding and support.” In short what that means is they want to find a way to pass more school levies then find a way to use the West Chester Community Foundation to get a few business owners to turn the other way and cough while they raise taxes on their properties, putting pressure on other businesses to do the same with peer pressure. Lakota hasn’t learned a thing.
If it were me and I had given Lakota schools a business assignment to provide a financial sustainability analysis of their future needs and they got together in a group of the mentioned patrons from January 2013 after spending thousands upon thousands of dollars in 2012 and 2013 on the “Community Conversations” program, and 5 months later presented me with that PDF file in a presentation, I would have fired every single person who worked on it. The work they presented is an insult to the intelligence of anyone reading it. It is a scam at best, and then to write “draft” in the background of the document attempting to make the gibberish look more important is just rubbing salt into a wound cut open by such a ridiculously camouflaged levy request. They might as well have said, phase one, we want to find a way to ask for more money. Phase two, we intended to propose another tax increase trying to make it look like we did a whole lot of thinking before putting the issue on the ballot. And Phase three, we spend the money we get from the tax increase on new union contracts which are up in the summer of 2014 for renewal.
I am convinced now more than ever that all government services from schools to the police and EMS services are designed by statist supports for aims that were constructed by the 1958 book, TheNaked Communist. CLICK HERE TO REVIEW. That is the only reasonable conclusion one can make when the end game to a parade of never ending tax requests are made by government organizations is analyzed. Just in my local area alone, the below tax increase requests are listed for the August and November elections of 2013. Many of these communities just passed similar taxes just a few years ago, so there is no plan on how to sustainably grow a community. There is no care given when one branch of government such as police and fire services ask for property tax money for their needs then a few months later a school asks for another levy on the same property tax. They are all government yet they all want to be treated individually as they do not share their funding. For instance if public education operated with a surplus, they would never think to share the money with police and fire services. They simply give their unions pay increases then ask for more money. The police and fire fighting unions do the same, but they all take money from the same pot…….property ownership.
Issues filed for August 6, 2013 Special Election
Filing deadline is May 8, 2013
1 Deerfield Twp Replacement & Increase 4.0 mills, Police & EMS continuing period of time.
2 Franklin City School District Additional 7.92 mills, Current expenses continuing period of
time.
3 Lebanon City School District Renewal 2.0 mills, Permanent Improvement 5 yrs.
Issues filed for November 5, 2013 General Election
Filing deadline is August 7, 2013 4:00 pm
Lebanon City Additional 7.0 mills, Fire & Ambulance 5 yrs. Franklin Public Library Additional 1.0 mill, current expenses continuing period of time. Washington Twp Additional 3.0 mills, Fire & EMS continuing period of time.
The only thing that makes sense when viewing the public behavior of these government workers is that they are paid so well that they don’t question the statist strategy that they inherited from the “feds” but are simply doing their jobs. Those jobs were designed by radicals in the far away land of Washington with the intentions against America that were outlined in The Naked Communist. There simply is not another explanation for the lunacy that government services continue to offer as reasonable justifications for their absurd fiscal policies. At some point in time property ownership gets taxed to a saturation point, and then it’s over. Government buys up the defaulted properties through government backed loans, and a free society is nudged into a statist one with the corrosive, incremental votes of a naive public.
I wish I could say that the latest drivel coming from my home district of Lakota was a surprise, but it’s not. They are like virtually every public school in America. They were designed by statists in the Department of Education to destroy property ownership by tricking Americans to vote their rights away through the free babysitting service that is public education. The employees involved if they worked for any competent employer would be fired on the spot for presenting such ridiculous justifications for their ineptness. The people who put together that document for the Phase One development of levy request at Lakota are in denial on two fronts. First is the real intent of public education which they don’t want to consider since they are so well paid as government workers. Two, that a community will be willing to always support an institution of learning that has no control over its finances—no control over the collective bargaining agreement with its union. They expect that taxes can always go up and that there is no limit. That is the essence of what their Phase One presentation defines as their objectives after a lot of money was spent formulating it, and time consumed which can never be redeemed. For those reasons, I would terminate all employees involved and turn the document over to some first graders, who could surely do a better job. If that is all the highly paid administrators can come up with at Lakota for dealing with their financial situation, our community could do no worse, because the proposal of Phase One is simply pathetic.
Man In The Moon is the exciting new stage spectacle by America’s premiere storyteller—Glenn Beck! On July 6th, prepare yourself for a truly once in a lifetime experience. Under the stars in Salt Lake City, Utah’s USANA Amphitheatre, Glenn will present his “moon’s eye view” of the building of America. It’s Glenn Beck’s imagination come to life. It’s Man In The Moon, a story like no other from the creative mind of a storyteller like no other—Glenn Beck.
Man In The Moon will excite and engage all your senses. At times, it will seem to defy logic. The visual spectacle will be beside you…in front of you…behind you. You’re not just watching a show—you’re inside the show. You’ll be swept into a world of mesmerizing creations. Everything will be larger than life, and the moon itself will be there, shining bigger and brighter than you have ever seen it. The moon reminds us of how small we are, and how infinite the universe. The moon has been there from the beginning, reminding us that there is something bigger, something greater than us.
If you’re ready for the ultimate Glenn Beck experience, you’ll definitely want to take advantage of a Gold, Silver or Bronze VIP ticket package. Not only will they treat you to “can’t get ‘em anywhere else” collectibles, but you’ll also slip behind the velvet rope and get to enjoy a weekend full of activities, including a special breakfast speech, a Q&A session, a delicious BBQ, an exciting and informative FreedomWorks event, and an up-close-and-personal meet and greet with Glenn himself! Of course, if you just want to see this incredible show, the Preferred or General Admission Lawn seating are fantastic options as well. As long as you’re there, you’re in for a night you’ll never forget.
This show that will help you see our history from a completely different point of view, one that will give you hope. Glenn has created an experience that will lift up your family, bring you closer together, and forever change the way we all look at ourselves and the Man In the Moon. We were always the people who believed a brighter future was just about to dawn. On July 6th, Glenn Beck will make you believe that again.
This whole show is about magic and hope…light and dark…family and God…history and the future. It’s a story of struggle and triumph, good and evil, and simple people finding a better way. It’s about what millions of Americans want: Hope, and to believe in goodness and our country again. Make a new American Memory with your family that none of you will ever forget. Believe In America…believe in us again! Remember, as long as you buy your ticket, you’ll get to say that you were there to see Glenn Beck’sMan In The Moon!
Many of the failures experienced in modern society are the improper understanding of how to create a proper epistemology for the philosophy of their lives. By epistemology it is meant to know what sort of things we can know and how we know it. Most people these days are so uncertain of themselves, lacking self-confidence that they are unable to properly think and this is due to the notion that they have been taught by their public education institutions that nobody can know anything unless a professional tells them first what to think and how to think it. This is why government schools are so terrible for our present society. It is because they are providing generations of people an epistemology that is wrong, deliberately not teaching people how to think, but instead regulating their thought to “professionals” who can provide those epistemologies for the masses as centralized leaders of collective sacrifice.
This is a big problem. Human beings in the year of 2013 seek with mind numbing tenacity to continue a destructive practice of mental evasion. For instance, when it is asked what a particular person is going to do over the weekend, and the person responds, “I’m going to get ‘shit-faced’ drunk,” the person is really saying that not thinking is more preferred over a “thinking” exercise. They wish to get drunk so that they can escape the process of thought. This mentality was given to them by public education laying a foundation of philosophic epistemology that dictates surrendering thought to government employees who know better. The conflict in the individual who wishes to get drunk comes from the persistent thoughts which come to their mind telling them that the world is different from the one they are living. So for them, to get “drunk” so that they can be eased of the burden of thinking it is a vacation from their conflict which is highly desired.
Identifying this failure in epistemology can than explain why so many teenagers drink so heavily as part of their assimilation to the adult population. It is expected that young people will between the ages of 15 to 22 drink themselves into mindless bliss, and this is a direct result of the public education system providing a philosophic epistemology that states thinking should be done by “the experts” and not individual citizens. The result is that culturally, society must develop a method to turn off their minds to escape thought—because their minds tell them that what they are learning is wrong. So drunkenness is their only escape.
Public schools do not preach drunkenness, but it is the result of their failed epistemology which creates the problem in the same way that public schools do not preach sexual deviance, but it is the direct result of their teaching as the epistemology is created by a curriculum designed to place no responsibility on individual behavior. Such a system was designed by statist governments to advance programs for the working poor, welfare recipients, and down-trodden who are secretly desired to remain in such a state forever, for the benefit of the state. In a state-run school, a public education curriculum cannot make the people it wishes to target for state supplied services feel bad for their bad decisions in life, so the goal of school curriculums is to make all right thinking people think like the bad ones and preach that sex has no consequences, and is not the responsibility of the participants. The epistemology that is taught is a kind of Kantian remoteness, which sex just happens biologically without the thinking participants having any say. The epistemology that is given to the students in public school then has the unintended consequences of sexual promiscuity that lasts their entire lives. The teachers did not teach children to have reckless sex in their teenage years, but were socially unable to condemn the behavior that is conducted routinely in poor communities so that food stamp qualifications can be enhanced. So the teachers instruct an epistemology that destroys the lives of all students in every community because their instruction does not teach that personal responsibility is the key to life success, planned families, and a healthy existence.
A proper epistemology is the key to living a successful life and if the education system creates an improper philosophy, then failure is imminent. Government workers, political theorist–particularly those who wish to believe that communism is viable to the human mind, believe that any kind of politics can work so long as a society believes something. This is simply not true. That “something” must be good, and goodness is determined by a proper epistemology. If the epistemology is bad, then the philosophy of a person and thus the society will also be bad. There is no way to avoid the catastrophe of a bad epistemology. In this way, public education institutions are bad for the human race not because their intentions are not good—they often are, but the epistemology of what they teach is terribly insufficient which makes them detriments to the human condition. Methods of philosophy cannot be changed in and out of a person’s life like socks on the feet of a human being each morning before they are placed in one’s shoes. A personal philosophy is the most important part of anyone’s life, for if one does not believe in anything, they will fall for everything. But due to the catastrophe of a thinking mind being in drastic contrast to the types of epistemology that have been taught to it by institutions of modern learning, drunkenness is pursued to escape from the duality of the thinking mind being required to not think in order to survive the political stresses of the day which inform the world of an epistemology that is faulty.
When one considers what makes a person become an alcoholic, or a drug abuser this duality is always at the core. A weak mind is the first step to not surviving the duality of an improper epistemology that is in conflict with one the thinking mind wishes to live by. The weaker the mind, the easier it is to surrender mental evasion to alcoholism and other forms of intoxication. This is the product of our modern institutions and why many consider drunkenness to be a vacation worthy of pursuit in their leisure time, because they wish to be free of the epistemological conflict given to them by a society which seeks to impose on the mind a system of thought that is not productive to individual welfare.
Solving the problem of individual epistemology is the key to solving many of the social ills our society currently suffers from. Identifying a proper epistemology is the first step to solving all social problems. Problems do not happen to people’s lives like some mystical voodoo card of chance happening. Everything starts from a source and like simple addition and subtraction, one thought leads to another, then another. If a person has a bad life, if they are poor, if they are jobless, if they are alcoholics, drug abusers, bad parents, bad people, the failure comes from their poor epistemology. The fault is theirs for not living their lives with values that their minds agree with. Surrendering their thoughts to others who create their epistemology for them will not improve their life. “Getting drunk” will only exasperate the situation further and cause failures in life instead of giving the relief a mind in conflict with itself has from an epistemology that is imposed upon it from sources that are not from one’s own mind. Until individual people realize that the source of their failures are their trend to not take responsibility for their own thoughts, then misery will continue to riddle their life with duality. No individual can make the society happy with their collective desire, and yet make themselves happy. When the decision to make society happy supersedes the individual then a crushed, suppressed and miserable life ensues. And to date, it is public schools that most create the epistemology of the greatest number of people, and for that, they are in drastic fault.
The Overmanwarrior 