TRICK OR TREAT?

Less than a week after Halloween, the American electorate is scheduled to make a decision about what vision they prefer for America for the next four years and beyond.

One vision is based on a trick; an illusion (verging on a delusion) that asserts that more government control; more government spending; in short, MORE GOVERNMENT CONTROL over all areas of your life is the cure for our rising debt; rising health care costs; a declining economy; and a declining relevance in world events.

This vision promises lots of free stuff to those who believe in it, and these believers are secure in the knowledge that the rich are not paying their fair share and when they are forced by Obama to do so, the free goodies will never ever run out.

The majority of Democrats have bought into this leftist utopian fantasy. Obama is betting everything on it and doubling down by using trickster rhetoric that divides Americans into rich/poor, black/white, Hispanic/white, religious/atheist; male/female; gay/straight--any possible division that he can come up with. His supporters may scoff at the idea that he is a socialist, but his rhetoric is Marxist to the core, and that is his plan for America.

Romney and Ryan, by contrast, are a relative "treat." Personally, I have no illusions about Republicans and debt--Republicans in congress are as much to blame for our situation as Democrats. Nevertheless, Republicans at least express a deal of shame about it; and Ryan has been consistent in his leadership of dealing with debt, entitlements, and the fiscal catastrophe facing this country. His selection as VP candidate by Romney, in my opinion, was genius for two reasons: first, it demonstrated Romney's committment to fiscal responsibility and entitlement reform; and second, it showed that Romney knows how to pick quality people who can get things done. Both Romeny and Ryan appear to clearly understand the impact the burgeoning debt and collapsing economy will have on the next generation of Americans who will inherit it; and on America's future as a world leader.

So, what will it be? TRICK or TREAT? The Night of the Living Dead..Economy; or,The Pursuit of Happyness ? The former being a horror movie and the latter being a tale of personal success (You DID build it!).

It's up to you. So make sure you get out and VOTE.


[Political cartoons by Ken Catalino]

IF IT'S YOUR FIRST TIME....

...GET FREE STUFF FROM THE BULLSH***ER IN CHIEF!

A RELIGION WITHOUT A SOUL

If you needed more evidence of the inherent hatred of humanity and life that is implicit (and explicit) in the religion of Islam, then read this article fron The Guardian:

The pickup halted in Kidal, the far-flung Malian desert town that is home to members of the Grammy award-winning band Tinariwen. Seven AK47-toting militiamen got out and marched to the family home of a local musician. He wasn't home, but the message delivered to his sister was chilling: "If you speak to him, tell him that if he ever shows his face in this town again, we'll cut off all the fingers he uses to play his guitar with."

The gang then removed guitars, amplifiers, speakers, microphones and a drum kit from the house, doused them with petrol, and set them ablaze. In northern Mali, religious war has been declared on music.

When a rabble of different Islamist groups took control of the region in April there were fears that its rich culture would suffer. But no one imagined that music would almost cease to exist – not in Mali, a country that has become internationally renowned for its sound.

"Music regulates the life of every Malian," adds Cheich Tidiane Seck, a prolific Malian musician and producer. "From the cradle to the grave. From ancient times right up to today. A Mali without music? No … I mean … give me another one!""Culture is our petrol," says Toumani Diabaté, the Malian kora player who has collaborated with Damon Albarn and Björk, to name but a few. "Music is our mineral wealth. There isn't a single major music prize in the world today that hasn't been won by a Malian artist."

And yet that is the bland reality dawning on this once joy-filled land. International observers claim the leaders of the three armed Islamic groups who now control the northern Malian cities of Timbuktu, Kidal and Gao are motivated by money and power rather the dream of a caliphate in the Sahel. There are strong ties between these groups and the less than holy interests of major drug-traffickers and arms smugglers.

But many of the mujahideen who have zoned in on the conflict from all over the Muslim world are fired by an unquestionable religious zeal. The same goes for Iyad Ag Ghaly, a Touareg strongman and born-again Salafist, who founded the Ansar-ud-Deen movement at the end of last year.
[...]
An official decree banning all western music was issued on 22 August by a heavily bearded Islamist spokesman in the city of Gao. "We don't want the music of Satan. Qur'anic verses must take its place. Sharia demands it," the decree says.

The ban comes in the context of a horrifically literal and gratuitous application of Sharia law in all aspects of daily life. Militiamen are cutting off the hands and feet of thieves or stoning adulterers. Smokers, alcohol drinkers and women who are not properly attired are being publicly whipped. As one well-known Touareg musician from Kidal says: "There's a lack of joy. No one is dancing. There are no parties. Everybody's under this kind of spell. It's strange."

It's not at all strange. It's the joyless existence that Islam wants to impose on the entire world--and if you haven't noticed, then you've been asleep for the last decade or more.

At The Corner, Andrew McCarthy weighs in:

The Guardian attributes the atrocious penalties to the “menace of al-Qaida”; it also notes, however, that the “ban [on music] comes in the context of a horrifically literal and gratuitous application of Sharia law in all aspects of daily life.”

Much as I hate to be the bearer of bad news, al Qaeda did not make up sharia law. Islam did. And in the West, it is a key tenet of due process that law is imposed literally — ambiguous laws violate the principle that people of ordinary intelligence must be on fair notice of what is prohibited. There’s nothing “gratuitous” about applying as it is written.

We can keep our heads tucked snug in the sand, or we can recognize the source of the problem.

Many people in this country prefer to keep their heads in the sand. Many people, including our current President prefer to talk about some ridiculous "war on women" that those eeeeeevilllll Republicans are waging. But it is Islam that is waging the real war on women, as Martha McSally reminds us:

I’m a woman warrior. I’ve been fighting for women’s rights and women’s equality my whole life.

You want to talk about a war on women? Walk in my shoes down the streets of Kabul. Walk in my shoes down the streets of Riyadh; where women have to be covered up. Where they’re stoned, where they’re honor killed if they’ve been raped , where they can’t drive and they can’t travel without the permission of a male relative.

That’s a war on women.

She is absolutely correct, but I would go even a step further: Islam represents not only an anti-woman agenda, it promotes a fully anti-human, anti-life, anti-joy and anti-peace agenda. The blood-thirsty god Islam worships thrives on human nisery,suffering and death; Allah revels in destruction and chaos, and his followers never fail to disappoint.

Anything that brings joy or that elevates the spirit, must be banned. Anyone who disagrees will be mercilessly killed.

I have already discussed how humor is almost non existent in the Muslim world ( except for the cruel and sadistic variety whose goal is to demonize non-Muslims).

Let me be clear: I do not believe that Muslims are bad or inherently evil. I believe they are every bit as human as Jews or Christins or Hindus or Buddhists. However, that reality has nothing to do with the supposed "wonderfulness" or "peacefulness" of the Islamic idology they embrace, which as far as I can tell caters to and fosters the absolute worse aspects of human nature.

The ideology of Islam has one purpose and one purpose only: to deny and ultimaely eradicate the essence of any human good. It is a religion that destroys the soul.

Amd. instead of standing up for the good and best within the human spirit; instead of standing firm for the values of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness; the current President of the United States is busy demonizing Republicans even as he accommodates and appeases the real monsters of the world whose nuclear dreams will enable them to facilitate the spread of their viscious misogyny; and to enslave the minds of everyone--whether female or male.



[Political cartoons by Gary McCoy]

IRAN IS VOTING FOR OBAMA ! WHAT A SURPRISE

And, sadly, the President actually thinks this will help him in the big debate on Foreign Policy tonight.

Ira Strauss comments on the latest October Surprise:

It’s from Iran again, an October move that could throw the election, and this time it’s for real. Iran is near to agreeing to hold direct nuclear talks with the U.S. It throws a big bone to Obama, on the eve of his final foreign-policy debate with Romney.

Plainly, it does not want to face a Romney presidency.

It’s not something dreamed up after the fact, as in the 1980s “October Surprise.” This time around, the story comes from the parties that stand to benefit from it, and it’s out there in real time — indeed, with exquisite campaign timing.

And, guess what! Israel is out of the loop! Just Us and the Iranians, all cozying up for yet another little chat.

Obviously, both the Mullahs of Iran and President Obama think the American public is pretty stupid. And they may well be right.

I've said it before on this blog, and I'll say it again: the Iranians have got all their religious ducks in a row to actually use nuclear weapons they likely already possess or anticipate possessing (remember Pakistan?).

That is my psychological interpretation and it dovetails with the arrogant, smirking demeanor that always accompanys the calculated baiting of the West by Ahmadinejad, the Iranian Psychopath-in-Chief. Just last month, that same psychopath made his apocalyptic intentions crystal clear to the world.

Whether it is making suggestive remarks about the state of Israel and its future demise; or speculating on the 12th IMAM who will usher in a New World Order (no wonder he wants Obama to win the Presidency!), Ahmadinejad always tries to appear to be a beacon of reason and nuanced diplomacy.

He reminds me a lot of many of the paranoid patients I have dealt with over the years.

All the behavior and rhetoric of the past five years strongly suggest that the Iranians will certainly use their nuclear weapons capability at a moment of their own choosing--negotiations and diplomacy be damned.

Of course, they would want that moment to be a grand, heroic, Islamic gesture. They would need such a gesture to maximize their sense of Arab honor while simultaneously shaming their hated enemy, the Jews. They would need for the gesture to come at exactly at the moment when they can most appear to be the enlightened purveyors of "peace" and "brotherhood".

The hapless intellectual leaders of the West will continue to bend over backwards and even engage in desperate contortions to appease and mollify the sociopathic bullies of Islam; but that will only escalate their violent behavior and give them the rationale they need to press on, more self-righteously convinced that they are superior. This is the completely predictable psychological response to appeasement, solicitation, and compassionate understanding. It's simple really.

Bullies will always push the envelope of bad behavior when they think they can get away with it. They think they can get away with it when Obama is the leader-from-behind of the Free World.

And they are getting away with it, aren't they? Remember the sense of relief and jubilation with which the recent NIE was received by almost everyone. Whew! We don't have to worry about Iran any more! Isn't that great? Except, we now know it was a lie.

Just as the latest manipulation 2 weeks before the election is a lie. Don't you wonder exactly who the liars are?

The whole October Surprise is designed to bring a transient sense of safety and security that is only possible with psychological denial. Osama bin Laden is dead and Al Qaeda is on the run! (escept they're not as 9/11/12 proves). Iran wants to negotiate! (except they really don't and have shown no motivation to actually negotiate ANY of the times they have agreed to sit down and talk).

No rational person wants to believe that Iran could be so crazy and suicidal that they would really try to "wipe Israel off the map." The 2006 NIE was tremendously reassuring because it suggested that the religious fanatics of Iran are really motivated by rational considerations, just like us! They abandoned the quest for nuclear weapons in 2003! They want peace, after all!

Wrong.

They clearly don't want something to happen that would interrupt or put a premature end to achieving their ultimate goal. And logically, rationally, they will do whatever they need to make sure of that. It's their ultimate goal that's the problem.

Don't forget that reason and logic can--and frequently are--used to promote the most illogical, irrational and insane of objectives. In the end, reason and logic are only intellectual tools and their usefulness depends entirely on the reality and truth of the premises for which they are being used. If the premises or objectives for which they are being used are bogus; or if they are not what you think they are; or the opposite of what your own would be under the circumstances; then it hardly matters that the Mullahs and Ahmadinejad give the appearance of being reasonable fellows negotiating rationally with the West.

I can easily imagine Ahmadinejad rubbing his hands together like The Simpson's Mr. Burns, cackling, "Exxxxcellent!" as they promise one thing even as they do the opposite--which logically and rationally proves to them the superiority of Islam and the inevitability of Allah's will.

It's no use saying that by pursuing the development of a nuclear warhead they would use against Israel doesn't make any sense and would be completely irrational, not to mention downright suicidal.

They have repeatedly stated they think it would be worth the human price.

Just think of Ahmadinejad as the ultimate, high-tech suicide bomber who has wrapped that nuclear bomb belt securely around his entire country.

I have said before that I hope I am wrong in this assessment, but all my psychiatric instincts continue to tell me that this is a situation where we are facing imminent suicidal and homicidal behavior. And, the lives of millions are in the balance....



UPDATE: And then there's this: Iranian media say that Romney will steal the election and that riots are expected....

And this, from the UN (guess who they want to win?):

The United Nations Special Rapporteur on Counter-Terrorism and Human Rights has warned Americans not to elect Republican Mitt Romney in next month’s presidential election, saying that doing so would be “a democratic mandate for torture.”

I can't think of a worse torture than to have to live under Obamanomics and Obama foreign policy for another 4 years.

I'VE GOT A LITTLE LIST (AND IT'S IN A BINDER)

Mark Steyn can't resist talking about "The Great Binder Blunder"--a critical issue for our times in which the Democrats have finally found their voice (or whistle, so to speak):

The women were chanting “Equal rights, not binders,” and they were protesting the following remarks by Mitt Romney at the presidential debate:

“And so we took a concerted effort to go out and find women who had backgrounds that could be qualified to become members of our cabinet. I went to a number of women’s groups and said, ‘Can you help us find folks?’ And they brought us whole binders full of women.”

Yes!!!!!!! With one bound, Obama was unbound! Romney had just made the worst presidential-debate gaffe since Gerald Ford declared there was no Soviet domination of Eastern Europe. In the previous weeks, Obama had attempted to have a serious conversation with the citizenry, as befits the electoral process of a mature republic. He had raised the critical questions of our time — free contraceptives for middle-aged coeds, the outrageous right-wing Muppophobic assault on Big Bird — but the public had failed to bite. Now, in one fatal error, Romney had handed him the winning issue: binders!
[...]
On MSNBC, Chris Matthews and Ed Schultz deplored Romney’s descent into chauvinist “code words.” “To the sexist Republican base,” said Chris, “‘binders’ is a dog whistle.”

“A wolf whistle,” said Ed.

“Exactly,” said Chris. “It’s like asking for watermelon at the NAACP luncheon, not that I ever did that and it was a long time ago.”

“Or addressing the LGBT group and asking the guy if he’s got the new Judy Garland box set,” said Ed.

“That was you, not me,” said Chris.

“But underneath the code language we all know what’s really being said here,” argued Ed. “Send in the women, and I’ll get out my E-Z one-touch hole punch.”

“Okay, moving on,” said Chris, “here’s a leaked video of Romney addressing the board at Bain Capital while he was closing factories throughout the Midwest. It’s a bit muffled, but if you listen carefully you can hear Romney arguing that it would make more economic sense for him to give every American woman cancer and outsource matrimony to a binder full of mail-order brides from the Philippines.”

“Why do you think they call them Manila folders?” added Ed. “We all know the code words.”

“Why do you think he founded Staples in the first place?” demanded Chris. “What kind of a deal do you figure he’s getting on the binders?”

Sure, the Republicans still insist on bringing up trivial, peripheral distractions like Benghazi, Obamacare, multi-trillion-dollar debt, unsustainable entitlements, permanent long-term unemployment, and the looming January 1 “fiscal cliff.” But Democrats know that, if Romney gets his way, there’ll be nothing at the bottom of the fiscal cliff to break your fall except binders. In RomneyWorld, when the mullahs drop the big Iranian nuke, there’ll be nothing crawling out from the irradiated rubble except cockroaches and binders — or some hideous mutation of the two: bindroaches, vile creatures prowling the land on three pairs of jointed rings ready to snap shut on your daughters’ ankles as they attempt to access the last Planned Parenthood clinic in America.

Yes, folks, it has come down to the wire, and binders what the Democrats want to talk about. Binders are the "Outrage of the Day". This is the issue that can unite Obama's pathetic victimhood base, always searching for another reason to feel oppressed.

Personally I'm sick of it. A rare thing happened the other day--I actually agreed with Hillary Clinton on something: STOP WHINING

But you know they won't. So, in the spirit of Gilbert and Sullivan, I've decided to put all the whiners and profession victims and their enablers on a little list....

ME: The day has come, it's happened
There are victims all around!
So, I've got a little list
I've got a little list
of those purveyors of oppression whose stupidity abounds
And who never would be missed,
They never would be missed

There's the whiners of those women's groups who protest eveything,
Who want it all right now please, and they want it all for free.
All the jokers who want free phones and a mortgage paid by me!
(I hate that!)
All the food police and fat police who know what you should eat
(see what i mean? Tastes awful doesn't it? It's terrible, they think their tastebuds are morally superior, it's unforgivable)
And Mullah Omar, Reverand Wright and all fake religionists
They'll none of 'em be missed (Amen!)
They'll none of 'em be missed (Praise Allah!)

Chorus: She's got 'em on the list
She's got 'em on the list
And they'll none of them be missed
They'll none of them be missed!

ME: There's the laughing VP Biden, and the others of his ilk,
That happy snappy Colbert guy-
*HaHa*
I've got him on the list
There's the people who redistribute wealth while wearing ties of silk
they never would be missed
they never would be missed

The female UN diplomat who's lying through her teeth;
The spokesman just like Baghdad Bob who covers for The Chie;f
Utopian fanatics who when Barack Obama's heard
will faint and shriek and gurgle and then never hear a word
(it makes you want to puke)

And that singular absurdity the flukish Sandra Fluke!
I don't think she'll be missed
I'm sure she won't be missed

Chorus: She's got her on the list (la-la)
She's got her on the list (I do)
And I don't think she'll be missed (uh-uh)
I'm sure she'll not be missed!

ME: There's the liberals and leftists who want to live YOUR life
And make all you decisions, I've got them on the list
The ones who want to spread your wealth around and make all sorts of strife
they never would be missed
they never would be missed

Politician when campaigning who are such adventurous folk,
they flip flop like a fish, you see, its really such a joke
I have more empty spaces left but what is one to do?
the task of filling up the list i'd rather leave to you
But it really doesn't matter whom you put upon the list
for they'll none of them be missed!
They'll none of them be missed!

Chorus: You may put 'em on the list (You may)
You may put 'em on the list (Go ahead)
And they'll none of them be missed
They'll none of them be missed!
Little list!


Of course, the original is much better and can be adjusted to accommodate any cultural idiots:

DANCING ON OSAMA'S GRAVE, BELIEVING AL QAEDA WAS DEAD

In a column discussing the question that Obama never answered in the last debate about Libya and Benghazi, Charles Krauthammer notes that:

Unfortunately for Obama, there is one more debate — next week — entirely on foreign policy. The burning issue will be Libya and the scandalous parade of fictions told by this administration to explain away the debacle.

No one misled? His U.N. ambassador went on not one but five morning shows to spin a confection that the sacking of the consulate and the murder of four Americans came from a video-motivated demonstration turned ugly: “People gathered outside the embassy and then it grew very violent and those with extremist ties joined the fray and came with heavy weapons.”

But there was no gathering. There were no people. There was no fray. It was totally quiet outside the facility until terrorists stormed the compound and killed our ambassador and three others.

The video? A complete irrelevance. It was a coordinated, sophisticated terror attack, encouraged, if anything, by Osama bin Laden’s successor, giving orders from Pakistan to avenge the death of a Libyan jihadist.

Not wishing to admit that we had just been attacked by al-Qaeda affiliates perhaps answering to the successor of a man on whose grave Obama and the Democrats have been dancing for months, the administration relentlessly advanced the mob/video tale to distract from the truth.

And it wasn’t just his minions who misled the nation. A week after the attack, the president himself, asked by David Letterman about the ambassador’s murder, said it started with a video. False again.[Emphasis mine]

Indeed, it seems likely that President Bush, at least, came to realize that we were not just dealing with a bunch of criminals, but an entire culture and ideology determined to destroy the West. That could be the reason he stopped making Bin Laden's capture a top priority (for which he was mercilessly mocked by the left, BTW).

Obama, OTOH, has always been convinced that the threat of Al Qaeda and Jihadists is overblown and purely a criminal matter. That's why he focused on Bin Laden and why he and his leftist base were so jubilant that it was on his watch that the terror leader met his demise. Let me be clear at this point: I, for one, am VERY glad that particular monster is dead and in hell. But, you have to be completely clueless about what has been going on all over the world in the last 10 years to believe that the fanatical culture and religion that spawned Bin Laden somehow was going to magically disappear when he did. Ask Lara Logan, for example who makes lot more sense than anybody in Obama's Administration when it comes to the war on terror (otherwise referred to as overseas contingency operations).

So, when the gloating and dancing over the grave was interrupted by a little reality, what's a Democrat/leftist to do? After all, they've been lying to themselves about this issue for a decade now--why shouldn't they automatically go into lying mode to (1) preserve their precious narrative for as long as possibly; and (2) cover up their incompetence?

By lying to the American people about what happened in Benghazi, they preserved their "honor" and self-esteem.

This brings me back to the whole idea of the Democrat/leftist "shame culture", about which I have written before.

[M]any Democrats and certainly most leftists are completely shameless in the sense that they will never ever, for as long as they can possibly get away with it, going to admit to bad behavior. And in those rare cases where they simply cannot wiggle and maneuver and lie and deceive; or self-righteously tell you how wonderful they really are and all the wonderful things they have done; they will simply pretend they are still virtuous and have been victimized in some way.

This is, of course, typical of most narcissists; and without a doubt, narcissists and liars and cheats exist on both sides of the political aisle. But a narcissist in a guilt culture behaves somewhat differently than a narcissist in a shame culture.

If you recall, the other day I commented, while talking about the neo-Marxist economic modus operandi: "Conservatives believe they have better ideas. Leftists believe they are better people."

This is extremely relevant to a discussion about the differences between the Democratic Party culture (which has become primarily, though not exclusively, influenced by the political left) and the Republican Party culture (which is predominantly influenced by conservative ideas and values).

Eventually for the shame-avoidant person, reality itself must be distorted in order to further protect the self from poor self-esteem. Blaming other individuals or groups for one's own behavior becomes second nature, and this transfer of blame to someone else is an indicator of internal shame.

So, here they were dancing on Osama's grave, believing it was the end of Al Qaeda and all their problems with Islam. Sadly their--and our--problems with Islam are just beginning again.

For those not keeping track of the Libya timeline, here is a handy guide that will bring you up to date (except that new information just keeps coming out that that damns the Obama team)



[Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez]

AND HE'S FUNNY TOO!

I just watched Mitt Romney talk at the Al Smith Dinner and as a stand-up comedian, he did rather well and had a biting edge. If you didn't see it, check it out below. I particularly liked some of the self-deprecating comments, but his comedic attacks on Obama were PRICELESS:

OBAMA MEETS THE BITCH

Watch Biden, Axelrod, Gibbs, and Carney blame the State Department and the intelligence community for the failures that led to the attack and the conflicting storyline that emerged afterwards at the link.

This brings up the psychological phenomenon of deflecting blame, which is a form of scapegoating; and which, in psychiatry, is considered a form of projective identification and/or psychological displacement (see here for a discussion--both are types of denial).

In order to avoid feeling bad about something, a common defense is to transfer or displace responsibility and blame to someone else, or to a group. The most common example of scapegoating is "anti-semitism"; and blaming the Jewish people for all sorts of evils has become a well-established and psychological mechanism in the Arab and Muslim world to deflect awareness of their own cultural and religious inadequacies. It also allows them to believe they are "peaceful" and "loving" people with a "peaceful" religion, since all their own hostility and rage is displaced onto the evil Jew.

The definition of a scapegoat is "one that bears th e blame for others; one that is the object of irrational hostility."

Scapegoats are common when the psychological defenses of denial and projection are being used. Projection, to quickly remind you, is the psychological process of attributing one's own unacknowledged or unacceptable feelings, thoughts and behaviors to others.

The Arab world has this defense mechanism down pat. One of the expressions of a shame culture is the rampant psychological projection and refusal to accept responsibility for the atrocities committed in the name of Islam. Not only are we regularly subjected to imams, religious leaders, and leaders of Muslim states stating even now that 9/11 or the London bombings were not committed by Muslims; they also regularly blame the Jews for such acts. In this way they can avoid the shame of taking responsibility for evil.

Now, let's move on to the Obama Administration, and President Obama himself; who never met a bad outcome for his own beloved policies or ideology that he couldn't blame on someone else.

It is the same psychological mechanism as scapegoating.

Projective identification is the more immature (or primitive) aspect of the defense mechanism; one that children routinely use ("Not me!")



As you can see from the Family Circle cartoon, it's a way for a child to deflect blame and remain innocent of the charges leveled against him (or her) by an angry parent.

Usually, for a child, this is an unconscious process (and perfectly normal, I might add); but if it is observed in an adult, others may rightly begin to wonder if the person is out of touch with reality.

Adults are more sophisticated (unless they are also psychotic) and they tend to use psychological displacement , a more neurotic defense mechanism. It can be unconscious or done with full consciousness, since self-deception is a key feature of avoidence of responsibility and the assignment of blame to others.

Obama has spent the last four years blaming his predescessor for his troubles. He has spent the last four years blaming Republicans for being "obstructive" (despite the fact that he had a majority in both houses for 2 years; and despite the fact that he vowed he would "bring us together). Obama has found relatively willing scapegoats--i.e., people who would fall on their swords for his sade--in all those he threw under the bus along the way.

Now Hillary Clinton has taken "full responsibility for the security situation in Benghazi"; and thank heavens! a full investigation is ongoing, the results of which will be available sometime after November 6. But Hillary knows full well that "the buck" doesn't stop with the Secretary of State. It stops with the Commander in Chief, who was AWOL in Las Vegas (or was it on the golf course? I forget. I just know he wasn't attending his security briefings because they're such a drag to his superior intellect).

But I can say with full confidence after Benghazi and the death of our Ambassador and other Americans on 9/11/12, that Clinton and President Obama (her putative boss and the Commander in Chief where the buck ultimately stops) have had their 3 AM wake-up call; and they have been found unprepared and inadequate for the job. Think "deer in the headlights"....

Instead of keeping America safe in reality; they are more concerned with appearances. "Bin Laden is dead" they proclaimed and the terror threat presumably vanquished. 9/11/12 just did not fit into either of their narratives. So what's a good leftist to do? DENY, PROJECT, DISPLACE! Anything but the truth; anything but accept the consequences. Move along, nothing to see here, and it's all Mitt Romney's fault for politicizing it all.

Reality is such a bitch.



[other cartoons by Paul Nowak here)

BEYOND THE RULE OF REASON

Here is Andrew McCarthy on the Obama Administration's denial of any wrong-doing or cover-up (the buck always stops somewhere else with Obama and his friends) on Benghazi:

The desultory vice-presidential debate underscored that, even if there were not a thousand other reasons for denying President Obama a second term, the Libya scandal alone would be reason enough to remove him.

By the time the ineffable Joe Biden took center stage Thursday night, Obama operatives had already erected a façade of mendacity around the jihadist murder of our ambassador to Libya and three other U.S. officials. The vice president promptly exploited the debate forum to trumpet a bald-faced lie: He denied the administration’s well-established refusal to provide adequate security for the diplomatic team. Just as outrageously, he insisted that the intelligence community, not the election-minded White House, was the source of the specious claim that an obscure, unwatched video about Islam’s prophet — a video whose top global publicists are Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton — spontaneously sparked the Benghazi massacre.

Our emissaries in Libya understood that they were profoundly threatened. They communicated fears for their lives to Washington, pleading for additional protection. That is established fact. Yet Biden maintained that it was untrue: “We weren’t told they wanted more security again. We did not know they wanted more security again.”

Shameful: so much so that even Jay Carney, no small-time Libya propagandist himself, would feel compelled to walk Biden’s denial back the next morning. But the vice president was far from done. His assertion that “the intelligence community told us” that protests over the video had sparked the murders of our officials was breathtaking, even by Biden standards.

Nevermind that Obama had better things to do than keep up with national intelligence or security; or that he had no time to meet with Israel's Netanyahu, because he was too busy being "eye candy" on The View.

When it comes to the fact that Islamic fanatics want to kill Americans and destroy our way of life, Obama simply puts his hands over his ears and refuses to listen. He killed Bin Laden all by himself, don't you know? And that ends the discussion.

Let's admit that reality can be a bit ambiguous and that there can be as many interpretations of it as there are people on earth. But, as Gagdad Bob points out, that fact

should not be taken as an excuse to believe that all interpretations are of equal value. Nevertheless, this latter belief is the hateway drug into the various pneumapathologies of the left, e.g., multiculturalism, moral relativism, the "living Constitution," etc.

Again, if there is no objective way to arbitrate between competing versions of reality, then it comes down to a matter of raw power.

And, as Dr. Godwin suggests, this behavior is literally what makes hell on earth, "...for hell is anyplace that is beyond the rule of reason -where reason, quite simply, does not apply."

Obama is all about the rule of appearances. His administration has been slowly and inexorably leading this country to a place beyond the rule of reason.

And his Administrations preference for appearance over reality; relativism over truth; and style over substance derives from postmodern metaphysics, which holds that there is no objective reality and my version of it is as good as yours so nyah nyah nyah (stick tongue out to indicate the conversation is over).

Metaphysics is the branch of philosophy that describes existence, and it leads directly to Epistemology, which concerns itself with knowledge.

METAPHYSICS (What is existence?)----> EPISTEMOLOGY (How do we know it?)

The answers derived from these two branches of philosophy lead directly to several other key branches of philosophy, including Ethics (how should we behave?) and Politics (what degree of force is permissable?). So you can see that one's metaphysics is a crucial foundation to how one interprets the world and how one behaves in it.

For those of you who think all this philosophy business is too abstract and irrelevant to your life; you are very very wrong. Catastrophically wrong.

These ideas have everything to do with your life and how you live it. They are also the crux of why the world we live in seems to be more and more incomprehensible and insane.

When you begin with the belief that reality doesn't exist outside your own head, then, it is just a very short--and minor--leap to accepting that words don't matter and can change meaning on a whim; or that it doesn't matter how you behave; that everything is relative anyway, including truth and morality.

But, just because reality is ambiguous and sometimes difficult to determine; it hardly gives someone carte blanche to say that every interpretation is of equal value and should be treated as such. That way lies madness...and madness is exactly what we are dealing with in today's world.

You can deconstruct it however you want, but ideas matter. Reality matters.

ONE GENERATION AWAY

The teenagers in this video can't vote yet, but they are very concerned about the legacy that is being left to them...



I found the video well-done and compelling, primarily because I have a daughter recently out of high school, and I fear for her future and the country she will inherit when this generation is through trashing it.

As the teens in the video make clear, Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction....

PROOF POSITIVE THAT WOMEN HAVE ACHIEVED FULL EQUALITY!

They are as deceitful, as moronic, as incompetent; and certainly as mendacious and as malicious as any male in an equivalent leadership position (Question: is it too politically incorrect to be astonished at the vapidness and stupidity of women in leadership today?)

PROOF 1 (Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, DNC Chair)



(h/t Belmont Club)

PROOF 2 (Obama deputy campaign manager Stephanie Cutter )



PROOF 3 (Susan Rice, UN Ambassador)



PROOF 4 (Hillary Clinton, you know who she is)



And, I don't need to post videos of
-Nancy Pelosi
-Barbara Boxer
-Cynthia McKinney
- the list goes on and on....

I AM WOMAN!...I weep for my gender. **





**NOTE: At least I never suffered under the delusion that women were superior to men and once women got into leadership positions the world would be a better place.

MORAL QUALMS---AND THE LACK THEREOF

TWith all the talk in the media about the political right's supposed "war" on women (AKA "being opposed to paying for Sandra Fluke's birth control pills"), there have been few articles and a lot less moral outrage at the Obama Administration's war on religion, specifically, the mandate to make everyone, despite their religious beliefs (and moral qualms) pay for Sandra Fluke's birth control options:

This is the same mandate that the president has bragged about, that his HHS secretary has referred to as a tool of “war” for suppressing the backward views of those who have moral qualms about abortion and contraception and sterilization.

This is not something this president should be allowed to get away with. Fertility is not a disease, as the “preventative” scenario and the regulation, under “preventative services” in the president’s health-care monstrosity, insists. And as was made even clearer when the Protestant Tyndale Bible publisher had to file suit in court over the HHS mandate last week, this is not just a “Catholic problem,” or a situation of bishops wanting to impose their views on America, but a simple matter of religious freedom: protecting our rights to live our faith outside of the walls of a house of worship — a fundamental right, and a good.

Fortunately, there is bipartisan support in this country for freedom of religion, one of the most basic American rights and one on which this country was founded.

My guess is that Obama feels he can get away with restricting religious freedom because of polls like this one.

The indifference that Obama displays toward Christian religious values, however, does not seem to apply in the case of Islam. This Administration couldn'tseem to restrain itself from blaming and demonizing anyone who dares question the religion of Islam, a religion America has come to know as loving, compassionate, and tolerant:



(In place of "Afghanistan" in the above, just substitute "Islamic" and you will be still be accurate).

So, on the one hand, we have an all out "'war' for suppressing the backward views of those who have moral qualms about abortion and contraception and sterilization"
; but remarkable silence and certainly no moral qualms on the part of the administration at all for blaming a you tube video and its maker for the murderous intolerance of Islam, whose views apparently are not "backward" at all in the opinion of key Administration official.

Don't you think this is extremely strange behavior, even for Obama? On the one hand to politically persecute Christians who possess moral qualms about killing innocent life; on the other to give a free pass to religious fanatics who have shown repeatedly their contempt for the value human life and have no moral qualms at all about extinguishing it.

DARK CAVES OF THE MIND

The economy obviously matters a lot; and for some people, it's all that matters with regard to the upcoming election. But, in my humble opinion, the BIG PICTURE, even more important than the economy, is the world crisis whose focal point is in the Middle East. This is the crisis that must be solved--philosophically, ideologically, and politically--because, in the long run, it is critical for the survival of western values; for the survival of America and for our children.

Yes, there are two basic economic philosophies to choose from in the Presidential race: the free market and economic liberty vs the stagnant policies of socialism, symbolized (however inadequately) by Mitt Romney and Barack Obama respectively.

But the key battle in this fight is the one that is being fought between Western values (with the concept of America as the beacon for human liberty) and Islam, the latest historical iteration of the anti-freedom, soul-killing, anti-human evil that has plagued the world since the beginning of time.

I got into blogging in the first place because of 9/11. That horrific act of Islamic fanaticism is what drove me into political activism, and changed my life forever. I will not forget it, nor can I; particularly when 11 years down the road we are still in grave danger of losing the philosophical and military battle to the jihadists.

Osama bin Laden may be dead, but Al Qaeda is alive and kicking--and so is Iran; and so is the Muslim Brotherhood; and so is Hezbollah, and so is a thousand other off-shoots of Islam's murderous and soul-crushing ideolgy around the globe.

On 9/11/12 the United States was attacked once again by religious fanatics who submit to Allah, the bloodthirsty and vile god of a medieval and backward religion determined to take over the planet. The highest vision of humanity embraced by the adherents of this religion is to take all humans back to the cave and let loose the savagery that humanity is quite capable of exhibiting, were it not for the God of Abraham and the rise of civilization. If we refuse to enter the dark caves of the mind that Islam has prepared for us, they intend to kill us all.

For me, the absolute worse aspect of the Obama Administration has been its conduct of foreign policy and its submission to evil. Obama and his minions have definitely "re-set" the button all right, and practically ensured American decline and irrelevance to the major events that will determine the future of the world.

It seems to me that our position could not be much worse off than it is now--except that I keep finding out new and improved ways this pathetic Administration seeks to make America weak.

It is said that you should never attribute to malevolence what can be attributed to incompetence, but it is hard to see mere incompetence in the way Obama and his faithful leftist base have conducted international policy over the last 4 years. Indeed, there is a obvious malevolence in Obama's consistent disdain for American values and exceptionalism; in his outright hatred of Israel; in his submission to Islamic thugs; and in his indifference to American interests and exertion of military strength.

Obama, and to some extent Bush before him, have strangled our military might in the name of the gods of multiculturalism and political correctness. It seems impossible under multicultural rules of engagement to ever win a war again; and thus, the battle is ensured to continue indefinitely; slowly with the minimal level of attrition necessary to keep it out of the public awareness. Islam has a name for this strategy. It is called hudna, and it is why Iran will get nuclear weapons; why the West will be overrun with Sharia, and why freedom and the U.S. are in decline.

Both the incompetence and the malevolence come as a direct effects of Obama's overweening narcissism, which has been fed and nurtured at every turn by his adoring sycophants in the media and intellectual community of the left. If Obama were half as smart as everyone there thinks he is, we'd all be a lot better off. But sadly, he is not even half as smart as he believes he is.

And if you want to see what I mean by his overweening narcissism, then consider that not only does the Executive Branch now encourage people to break laws that the branch is supposed to enforce; but the Administration is now trying to cover up the extent Iranian influence among jihadi groups in North Africa so as not to undermine what Obama considers his major foreign policy coup: the killing of bin Laden.

The administration, in particular, wants to keep hidden solid intelligence showing that the terrorist group behind the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks that killed nearly 3,000 Americans is now flourishing under the Muslim Brotherhood regime of Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi.

Egypt was among the locations of Obama’s 2009 so-called “apology” tour, when the president criticized past U.S. policies based on what he said was “fear and anger” that prompted actions “contrary to our ideals.” He also promised “a new beginning” for the U.S. and the world’s Muslims and a radical shift in U.S. policy.

In other words Obama in his vanity handed over America’s one of America’s most important allies in the Middle East to its most deadly enemies. Osama is dead! Al-Qaeda is very much alive.

Gertz’s reports do not yet rise to the level of highly probable fact. But they do rise to the level of “let’s look under this rock”. If even half of what Gertz suggests is true — and in his defense I anticipated most of it — then the Obama administration has been either been out to lunch or in cahoots.

Wretchard then asks and gives a plausible answer to a very pertinent question:

Why send half a billion dollars to the enemy? Well the other idea I had right after the embassy attacks was in a post called Precursor....
In other words is this is part of a combination of punches? If so the haymaker is still to come, just like Sept 11, 2001. What is the haymaker? And if the administration doesn’t want to see it coming because it will damage the precious re-election bid of the President then how can we dodge it?

I think the payoff to the MB is in the hope that we can purchase peace. Or delay things until after the November elections. Personally, I’m not sure that’s going to work and even worse if it does. In fact it may turn out to be just like Fast and Furious. We may wind up shot up by our own guns.

We ARE being shot by our own guns, for what is this bizarre tolerance and submission the political left and its postmodern ideology impose on America, even when dealing with evil?
--We are to abandon free speech because it might hurt the feelings of Muslims
--We are to ignore the persecution of other religions because it is Islam that is persecuting them
--We are to ignore the subjugation and humiliation of women under Islam because multicultural dogma dictates that it is OK as long as Islam does it
--We are to ignore the religious motivations of terrorists because we want to be seen as tolerant and inclusive of Islam

And on and on and on.

We have seen this bizarro attitude play out in the microcosm of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Ask yourself how it has worked out for the Israelis, the only free country int he Middle East that shares Western values.

Year after year, Israel has attempted to bargain with the irrational and rage-filled jihadists who have NEVER sought peace at all (as evidenced by 60+ years of history); and who are always willing to bargain for new treaties and agreements, even as they break the old ones. They have never been reticent about their primary goal: the elimination of the Jewish people and the incorporation of the small Jewish state into the caliphate.

Yes, we will send Egypt and the Muslim Brotherhood half a billion dollars for peace. But we will not get any return on our money, and I think Obama knows this. If we have ever had a President who understands the Islamic mind, it is this one who actually WAS a Muslim growing up (NOTE: I don't discout the possibility that Obama still harbors Islam's fundamental worldview for all his talk of "finding Jesus" in the sermons of the Reverend Jeremiah Wright. Anyone who "finds" Jesus through a race-baiter and malignantly charismatic preacher like Reverend Wright is just as likely to be worshipping any false prophet that might come along).

All this leads up to why America should elect Romney. Wretchard put it best in a long comment he makes on one of his posts:

What of the rest of the world? By simply governing competently a ‘President Romney’ could set the stage for new American century and in the process, save the world from catastrophe and midwife a resurgence.

The world is now in the throes of a crisis. Without a center there is a real danger that it will collapse into conflict and chaos instead of overcoming it. For you need a center in which to preserve what is precious and from that vantage to rebuild.

And where could that center be? Not the Middle East, which will be convulsed with upheaval, demographic crisis and a collapsing economy. Israel will be lucky to survive in a purely defensive mode in that soup

It will not be Europe. It’s southern half threatens to collapse and the trouble will spread north. Europe will survive and in the long term it will be renewed but only if it is not completely burned out by the storm from the southeast. Much that is valuable is in the old continent that must not be lost. Europe is at the bottom of its historical cycle. One day it will re-emerge in greatness. For now it is helpless.

Russia cannot hold things together. It’s power potential is too diminished. Nor can China, itself about to be overtaken by events. Japan, India and Australia by themselves are too weak. By themselves they can have no decisive influence on events.

That leaves North America as the hinge of fate. Properly run it could provide the anchor around which the world will eventually recover. But only if it is properly run. The real danger posed by the Obama administration is that it threatened to destroy the “last best place on earth” and leave the world with no unburned core from which to regenerate.

He was going to screw the pooch, fritter away the last reserve; cast it aside simply because he did not know the value of anything. It could have been so different for him.

This was Obama’s historical opportunity to seize. He could have been the greatest American President of the last 150 years if he had only been big enough to see his chance. All he had to do was govern halfway decently and the natural advantages of North America would accrue.

But he grabbed at baubles, speeches and glitter and his moment passed him by. He canceled pipelines. Blockaded energy development. Sank the economy in debt. Put an American Army in a dusty, landlocked place. He wrapped everything in red tape. He was too small a man for the ball history pitched at him.

I do not think Romney has that sense of potential destiny, but he will fulfill it simply by being halfway competent. He’ll do it simply by showing up and fielding things as they come. He’ll hit the ball, even if only a single because he knows what the game is.

Romney’s challenge is threefold. To throw off the chains which shackle the US economy; to keep the nation together after it emerges divided from a traumatic 2012 presidential contest; and lastly to use American power to keep the world from completely shaking itself apart. There is not enough power to quell every disturbance. But properly used there is enough American power to preserve the core functions of the world.

Romney will see this because he can’t help but see it. He’ll do the uninspired but the logical thing in response to it. And that’s all you need to do. That’s all Obama needed to do. How he missed doing it will puzzle historians in future decades. But the obvious is not always obvious in contemporaneous time.

Not only is the future of America at stake in this election, but the future of the world. The choice for me is clear: A bright, shining city of freedom and prosperity on the hill which will stand as a beacon of liberty for the rest of the world; or, the dark caves of Islam, within which, the human mind will forever be chained.

UPDATE: It's about leadership.

BOOM!

Romney comes through and dominates the debate.

The booms you are hearing are leftist heads exploding as they come to grips with the myth they manufactured about their messiah.

Facing an unpleasant reality is always painful.

Perhaps now they can begin to face the degree of devastation the One has left in the last four years??

Nah....in a few days they will go right back into denial and have devised a rationalization for Obama's performance--or should I say, found someone to blame for it.

Watch and learn, kiddies, about supremehypermegadenial....


[political cartoons by Gary Varvel]

UPDATE: The political right definitely should not gloat at last night's exposure of Obama's mediocrity and fecklessness. Considering what is happening all over the world today with wars and rumors of wars (in Syria, Turkey, China, Japan, North and South Korea etc. etc.):

Someone at another site pointed out that the American public just saw the President Obama that Putin and all the other bad guys knew about all along. Now we know why they were kicking him around. But if he was weak then his recent public humiliation has made him even weaker now.

Nobody should gloat because he’s still the President until January. And in the meantime, every shark within miles is going to be homing in on the scent of blood. They will emboldened to try a stunt because they think they can get away with it.

The NYT has it right. Obama’s caught between looking weak by not striking back and lighting a fuse to a bomb that may blow up in his face. What can the President do? What all Presidents have done before. Ask for help both within the his own party and across the aisle.

I know what I think is the likely scenario that Obama and his handlers will choose and it is unlikely to be a sudden outbreak of bipartisaship for the good of the nation....I hope I am wrong.

THE VINDICTIVE TRUTH

Wretchard has a great post talking about "The Fifth Kind of Man":

The problem with an administration that relies upon spin is that it forgets how vindictive the truth can be. The truth bites back — and hard. But in an environment where politicized media and bureaucracy will tell its masters only what they want to hear the truth is concealed beneath the talking points until it is too late. In that regard, perhaps the Iranians should have the last word. A thirteenth-century Persian-Tajik poet, Ibn Yamin wrote that there were four types of men.

One who knows and knows that he knows… His horse of wisdom will reach the skies.
One who knows, but doesn’t know that he knows… He is fast asleep, so you should wake him up!
One who doesn’t know, but knows that he doesn’t know… His limping mule will eventually get him home.
One who doesn’t know and doesn’t know that he doesn’t know… He will be eternally lost in his hopeless oblivion!

And then there’s the fifth type of man. The man who doesn’t want to know because he thinks it doesn’t matter.

I differ a little from Wretchard on the last: it's not that he thinks it doesn't matter as much as it actually matters so much--and that is precisely why why he doesn't want to know about it.

The truth is indeed vindictive--but in a horribly passionless way. Likewise, reality, the space where truth resides, has a calm persistence and patience that is unmatched by even the most desperate attempts by the human species to avoid it.

Nevertheless, human ingenuity has discovered many ways of temporarily hiding from the truth; obscuring the truth; and when necessary, lying about the truth in order to avoid reality and its consequences.



I have written extensively on the pervasive psychological denial of the political left (see here, here , here, and here, for example). And, I frequently point out that denial is an "equal opportunity" defense mechanism engaged in by all human beings; it is an involuntary, built-in psychic response designed to protect an individual from precipitously having to face unwanted, unacceptable or threatening feelings, thoughts or behavior. The mind simply blocks out reality and truth--and sees what it wants to see or becomes blind to reality.

The consequences of denial can vary from extremely mild to extremely extreme. It depends entirely on what aspect of truth or reality is being denied.

Let's consider some of the more negative consequences of psychological denial:

• In the longer-term, denial requires a continued compromises with reality to maintain the pretense that "Everything is fine!" or "Nothing to see here, move along!" Eventually, delusional thinking, along with paranoia and its inevitable conspiracy theories begin to take the place of rational thought in those who deny reality for long periods of time. (see all the 9/11 conspiracy theorists for examples in our own country; or the more recent comments of former President Clinton--once considered a "moderate" democrat, who now fully adheres to the model that the Republicans have manufactured a culture of fear in order to fool the American public into thinking we are at war (read the transcript linked below). See here and here for some examples in the Muslim world, which is rife with conspiracies and which could not exist as a cohesive society without them).

• The denier must then place the blame for the unacceptable reality on someone else and that leads to increased conflict between those who are in denial and those who aren't. Efforts to maintain their denial consumes them and will lead them to escalate their anger, rage and attempts at external blame the denial becomes untenable and ever more obvious.

• The denier will begin distort language and logic to rationalize and justify their behavior(examples of this are too numerous to mention, but I have discussed it here , here and here) . Eventually, cognitive strategies and rational argument will be abandoned altogether by the denier, because those strategies are not sustainable and are unable to convince others; at which point the person in denial will simply refer to his feelings or emotions as the sole justification.

• The denier will feel justified in acting out against those who threaten the peacefulness of their fantasy (just ask Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, the filmmaker behind "Innocence of Muslims"). Remember, for example, the attacks and attempts to silence authors like Mark Steyn because his book , America Alone, discusses the genocidal demographic trajectory of Europe as they refuse to acknowledge or deal with the reality of Islamic immigration.

Nevertheless, the degree of denial engaged in by the the Obama Administration and their supporters on the political left has been boundless and very creative.

Usually, I give the political left and its more clueless adherents the benefit of the doubt, and assumed that their unwillingness to face reality was unconscious; and was so pronounced and pervasive because they could not accept the truth that history and the real world had revealed about their beloved and bankrupt ideology. That ideology, whether it is called Marxism, communism or socialism is fundamentally anti-human .

What happens when psychological denial ceases to be unconscious and becomes a deliberate, willful, and consciously evil behavior-- in spite of all the accumulated evidence of its malignant impact on real people in the real world?

At that point we can safely assume that we are no longer dealing with a purely defensive structure in the psyche; we are dealing with aggressive, unadulterated sociopathy.

I believe that last statement accurately describes the Obama Administration.

The traditional definition of sociopathy is a personality disorder characterized by a lack of social responsibility and failure to adapt to ethical and social standards of the community.

If we think about that definition for a moment, we can perhaps begin to understand what is going on in our world today; and the reason that a huge number of people have embraced a sociopathic lifestyle.

Under the pervasive influence of postmodern philosophy and rhetoric, the ethical and social standards of the community have, unfortunately, been slowly evolving and eroding.

In western culture, ethical and moral standards used to be anchored to the real world (i.e., to reality); but in the postmodern wilderness in which the political left and most of its most visible spokespeople--i.e., leaders in the Democratic Party-- wander aimlessly, ethics and morality are relative and "anchored" to feelings and whim; which inevitably unleashes the baser and more vile aspects of human nature.

The 20th century became the playground (and litter box) for the narcissist; and by the time the 21st century rolled around, malignant narcissism was not even considered deviant, it had gone mainstream. Since psychopathology continually evolves and worsens if it is not confronted and dealt with, what we have now in our culture, particularly the political system, is the endstage of psychological evolution under postmodernism: the sociopath who disguises his or her sociopathy by selflessness (it used to be marketed as "Hope and Change", now even that has been changed to "[Ignore the truth and reality of what my policies have brought about in the economy and the world, and let's just move] FOWARD!"

These selfless sociopaths are people who couldn't care less about the individual human being. Individual human beings are expendable; even vast numbers of them--as long as they stand in the way of the implementation of the sociopath's great ideas and compassionate execution of those ideas. They are the fodder that can be used to build "great" societies, utopian fantasies and collectivist wet-dreams.

It used to be that with the rise of civilization, political sociopaths--both selfiash and selfless-- were (thankfully) few and far between. Even so, when they appeared in history, they wreaked havoc and destroyed lives with great abandon for "the greater good". Needless to say, a central aspect of the 'greater good' was always the advancement of their own glorious self and their ideas.

We can thank primarily the political left and its useful idiots for the persistent, unyielding, and willful celebration of--and ultimately mainstreaming of--malignant narcissism. We have entered the age of postmodern sociopathy and nihilism.

What does it matter if the lives and freedoms of so many individuals are sacrificed to the murderous oppressors of the world? If you "kick out the wealthy" then you have the wonderful socialist paradise of Cuba; or the magnificent utopia of North Korea with all their misery, poverty, oppression and leftist enlightenment! We will all watch with wonder and awe as France implements the ultimate redistributionist fantasy of a 75% tax on the "wealthy". Is there anyone who can possibly believe that this will solve France's financial problems? Believe me, the next phase will be the demands for a 100% tax on those evil rich people who cause all the worlds problems with their wealth.

Under the "enlightened" and "progressive" left, wealth will be redistributed until there is nothing left to redistribute; at which point the human mind will be completely enslaved and even more scapegoats will be deivered to the altars of progressivism--but so what? As the eminent leftist and quintessential nihilist Joseph Stalin once remarked, "Death solves all problems - no man, no problem."

In the long run we are all dead anyway, right? Now there's a vindictive truth for you....