Sandy Hook, Gun Control, Second Amendment, Patriot Act, Motor Vehicle Accidents and Partial-Birth Abortion

Posted by PITHOCRATES - March 13th, 2014

Politics 101

(Originally published January 10th, 2013)

The Social Democracies of Europe were all Oppressive Absolute Monarchies at one Time

What happened in Newtown, Connecticut, was a tragedy.  The shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary took 26 lives.  Including 20 children.  The most innocent of us.  Which has ignited a firestorm of debate over guns.  The Left blames these deaths on an epidemic of gun violence.  Caused by people having access to guns.  So the Left wants to have a real debate on gun control.  To stop this epidemic of child deaths caused by firearms.  By severely restricting access to guns.

Those on the Right, on the other hand, want to protect their Second Amendment right.  The right to keep and bear arms.  Which allowed the First Amendment.  Freedom of speech.  The British colonial governors tried hard to clamp down on the anti-British sentiment in their American colonies.  And to muzzle that anti-British speech.  They sent over British Red Coats to occupy American cities to keep order.  And to find and confiscate the Americans’ guns.  So the first few amendments of the Bill of Rights (the first 10 amendments) protected free speech.  Gave us the power to protect ourselves from future state oppressors.  And they even included the Third Amendment.  Which states, “No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.”  Again, further protection from state oppression.

The nature of states is to oppress their people.  Most have throughout history.  Even the social democracies of Europe were all oppressive absolute monarchies at one time.  Where kings could do pretty much anything they wanted to.  England changed that with representative government.  America expanded on these liberties in the New World.  And ever since has been very wary of government.  Until the Twentieth century.  When the growth of government began.  Transferring ever more power to the federal government.  Everything the Founding Fathers feared would happen without a Bill of Rights.

When it comes to Restricting our Constitutional Rights Liberals Trust Government while Fearing Republicans

Those on the Left say the Constitution is a relic of a different age.  That today’s government is a kinder government.  A more caring government.  One that just wants to take care of the people.  By providing generous benefits.  Of course this is how some of the worst dictatorships started.  Nazi Germany and the USSR both put the people first.  Or so they said.  Even their names said they were putting the people first.  The Nazis were National Socialists.  And the USSR was the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.  Socialism is all about taking care of the people.  Yet these nations had some the most brutal secret police that terrorized and oppressed their people.  For there is no easier way to dictatorial power than championing the people.  And once the people stop fearing their government is when the state can take away their guns.  To make that oppression easier.  The Syrian government is currently having difficulty oppressing their people because they failed to keep guns out of the hands of those they wish to oppress.

If you read a history book you will read a lot about state secret police and state oppression.  It’s more the rule than the exception.  When you grow up in a free country it’s hard to believe this.  And when you’re young you think whatever you know and have experienced is normal.  And that things have always been that way.  Which is why the younger liberals dismiss talk about the transfer of power to the federal government.  While the older conservatives who have seen great change in their lives and know history still fear their government.  While the younger liberals grow up believing that government is not to be feared but to be trusted blindly.  They even look at what China is doing with their economy with approval.  Where the government controls the economy.  They like that.  Because liberals believe we can always trust a government more than a private corporation.  Even if that government oppresses their people.  Like they do in China.  Where people still deal with famine in the country.  Rural workers are paid poorly and live in dormitories in the city factories.  And political dissidents are tortured in labor camps where they manufacture goods without pay.

So naïve liberals trust government.  Completely.  Unless it’s George W. Bush using the Patriot Act.  That they fear.  But when President Obama uses the Patriot Act liberals ask, “The Patriot what?”  When it came to secret wiretaps on people with known ties to terrorists the Left quaked with fear over where these abuses of power would end.  But when President Obama starts talking about gun control they haven’t a care in the world.  Because when it comes to restricting our constitutional rights liberals trust government while fearing Republicans.

People killed 37 Kids with Guns in 2010 while Partial-Birth Abortions have claimed some 2,000 Lives a Year

President Obama’s former Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, said, “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.”  For the best way to advance an agenda (especially an unpopular agenda) was in the emotional chaos following a serious crisis.  Such as the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary.  The majority of Americans oppose gun control.  But in that majority are some people that they may be able to convince that some restrictions on the Second Amendment is a good thing in the emotional chaos following Sandy Hook Elementary.  Convincing them that guns are causing an epidemic of childhood deaths.  That without guns these kids simply wouldn’t be dying.  A powerful message during emotional times.  But if you remove the emotions and look at some facts you see something different (see 10 Leading Causes of Death, United States by the Centers for Disease Control).

These are deaths by unintentional injury.  Looking at the leading causes of death in 2010 (the latest year of data) for children aged 5-14 you see 1,643 deaths.  About half (809) of those are from motor vehicle accidents.  Drowning came in next at 251 (15.3%).  Then fire/burn at 135 (8.2%).  Then suffocation at 79 (4.8%).  You have to go all the way down to number 7 on the list to get to firearms.  Where we can see they killed 37 children in 2010.  Or 2.3% of the total number of kids aged 5-14 who died from an unintentional injury.  Based on an approximate population of 41 million kids aged 5-14 the total number of kids killed by firearms comes to about 0.00009% of this total.  According to the CDC’s numbers, guns aren’t killing a lot of kids.  Motor vehicles are.  But firearms are not.  So taking away our guns will probably not change these numbers much.  If at all.  So the motive can’t be saving children’s lives.  In fact, one can make the argument that there is a greater killer of children out there than anything on the above list.  Abortion.

It’s hard to get numbers on abortions.  But if you check various sources the number appears to be over a million a year.  Wikipedia shows 1,313,000 abortions in 2000.  Including 2,232 (about 0.17% of all abortions in 2000) that were partial-birth abortions.  Whatever your politics on the abortion issue are one thing regarding partial-birth abortions is clear.  These are human lives.  For the ‘partial’ part of these abortions requires terminating the life of the fetus while the head is still inside of the mother.  For if they terminated the life of the fetus outside of the mother it would be murder according to the law.  And you can’t kill something that isn’t alive.  In fact, an accidental wrongful death of a pregnant woman often results in two charges of manslaughter.  One for the mother.  And one for the unborn fetus.  Assuming there was no spike in partial-birth abortions in 2000 one can assume that number is representative of all years.  Which is far more deaths than by motor vehicle accident let alone from firearms.  Yet President Obama wants gun control to save kids lives.  When he could save even more by simply revising his stance on partial-birth abortion.  Something he argued to keep when a state senator in Illinois.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

FT204: “The young and dumb vote liberal while the old and wise vote conservative.” —Old Pithy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - January 10th, 2014

Fundamental Truth

Having the Ability to give Beautiful Young Women Nice Things helped Charlie Harper get them in Bed

On the show Two and a Half Men there was an episode where Charlie (played by Charlie Sheen) was having a conversation with someone where he was trying to defend himself and the choice he makes in women.  In broke off in mid sentence and said something like, “Yeah, you got me.  Young and dumb.  That’s how I like them.”  Or something like that.

Charlie Harper was about 40 years old.  Rich.  He drank to excess.  Smoked cigars.  Gambled.  Enjoyed strip bars and prostitutes.  And he womanized.  Getting beautiful young women back to his Malibu beach house for one night of passion.  Which was all he wanted.  One night.  The ladies thought he wanted more.  Because of the lies he told them to get them to his Malibu beach house.  And when they left in the morning they expected Charlie to call them.  But he never did.  Which is why he liked his women dumb.  For it was easier getting them into bed.  And out of it.

Charlie was skilled in the art of picking up women.  And what to do with them after picking them up.  Skill gained over years of experience.  And being rich helped, too.  Because being able to give beautiful young women nice things (expensive dinners, going to the best clubs, spending the night at a Malibu beach house, gifts, etc.) got their attention.  They liked that life.  And wanted more of it.  So they went to his bed with him.  Thinking that by doing whatever he wanted there would be more of this glamorous life to come.  But before that could happen Charlie was telling his lies to another young and dumb woman.

Every Communist Dictator that promised a Utopia to their People made their lives Absolutely Horrible

Charlie was engaged a few times.  The last time he was engaged to Chelsea (played superbly by Jennifer Taylor).  Who was a little older than most of the women he took to his bed.  Smart.  And wise.  She had a career.  Though he had a long engagement (for him) it did not last.  Because she could do better.  Eventually leaving him for someone more mature.  In fact, every age-appropriate relationship he had failed.  Because he did not do well unless they were young and dumb.  As Chelsea said one time when leaving after a breakup, “We both knew you were going to blow it eventually.”

You can learn a lot by watching Two and a Half Men.  For the world is full of Charlie Harpers.  People that lie and manipulate people to get what they want.  Who depend on people being young and dumb.  This is how liberals have risen to power.  By selling their utopian world view to the young and ignorant.  Before they get old and wise.  And learn the truth of their liberal utopia.

There was an article in Rolling Stone saying what America needs is full-blown communism.  The author is a young guy.  An academic type.  Knows everything.  But has experienced nothing.  His head was filled with communist ideals from his leftist professors.

Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world…

But what John Lennon doesn’t sing about in Imagine is that every communist dictator that promised these things to the people made their people’s lives absolutely horrible.  Where people lived in fear of the secret police.  Were tortured at the hands of the secret police.  And died at the hands of the secret police.  Communism as an ideology has killed more people than any other dictator or ideology in all of history.  Yet college kids everywhere still imagine a world where all the people live as one.  Under the boot of an oppressive police state.  That forces the people to live in a brotherhood of man.  Or die.

Liberals are in a lot of ways like Charlie Harper because they like their Electorate Young and Dumb

Joseph Stalin terrorized his people with the KGB.  The East Germans shot their own people who tried to escape climbing over the Berlin Wall.  Cambodia’s Pol Pot killed a greater percentage of a nation’s population than any other dictator in history.  Cubans risk their lives to float from Cuba to the United States.  The masses in North Korea still suffer famine because of their oppressive Stalinist state.  Where it’s the military first.  Then the people.  And so on.  Yet college students still wear shirts with pictures of Che Guevara wearing his beret.  This hero of ignorant college students.  A guy who had urged the Soviets to launch their nuclear missiles at the United States during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

And when the secret police wasn’t killing their people the people were going without the most basic necessities.  For their planned economies could not keep their store shelves stocked.  So people went without many of the things people in Western capitalist economies take for granted.  Things even ignorant college students take for granted.  Things they just couldn’t get in their beloved communist utopias.  Ronald Reagan won the Cold War not by waging nuclear war.  He won it by creating an arms race that the Soviet economy could not keep up with AND feed her people.  Like the Americans could.  In fact, the American economic output was so great that they could feed all Americans with enough left over to export to the Soviet Union.  So the Soviet people did not die from famine.

All throughout history free market capitalism provided a better life than any planned economy.  Even in the United States.  When FDR increased government spending to end a recession it only stretched out that recession into the Great Depression.  Excessive government spending didn’t work in the 1970s for Nixon, Ford or Carter.  Nor did it work during the Great Recession for Obama.  But cuts in tax rates provided explosive economic growth for Warren Harding/Calvin Coolidge in the 1920s, JFK in the 1960s, Ronald Reagan in the 1980s and even George W. Bush in the 2000s.  Yet the young and dumb buy the liberal lie that government spending can provide a better life for all despite history proving otherwise.  And keep voting liberal.  Until they get old and wise, that is.  And start voting conservative.

Liberals are in a lot of ways like Charlie Harper.  For they like their electorate young and dumb.  So they can more easily lie to them.  To get what they want.  By making promises they never intend to keep.  Such as that brotherhood of man sharing all of the world.  For after a century or so of promising this the only people who ever enjoyed the liberal/communist utopia were those few in power.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Communists in Japan are targeting Young People to help them Transform Japan into an Oppressive Communist State

Posted by PITHOCRATES - August 10th, 2013

Week in Review

The former Soviet Union, the People’s Republic of China (back in the days of Mao), North Vietnam, North Korea and Cuba all have great police states.  Not to keep people out of their countries.  But to prevent the people inside their countries from escaping to the capitalist West. Why?  Life was better in the capitalist West than in the communist East.  Where nations in the capitalist West didn’t need a secret police to keep their people from escaping.  But needed strong immigration controls to keep their countries from being overwhelmed by refugees trying to escape to their lands.  Yet despite this history of communist failures there are still communist parties in countries trying to attract voters.  Preferably the ones who don’t know about that history of failure (see Communist Party makes a comeback … in Japan by Gavin Blair, The Christian Science Monitor, posted 8/5/2013 on Yahoo! News).

Founded in 1922, the JCP is the oldest political party in Japan, and has enjoyed constant representation in parliament for longer than any other. But until recently, its image was one of older activists and it struggled to attract younger voters.

July’s elections were the first in Japan where online campaigning was permitted, and it was the JCP that is widely seen as having made best use of it. As well as savvy leveraging of social networks and video streaming platforms, the party created a series of online mascot characters that addressed individual issues such as the planned consumption tax hike, shady business practices, the heavy US military presence on Okinawa, and constitutional change.

“We were able to use the Net to reach out to younger people, many of whom don’t read newspapers or watch TV much. Through the characters, we could communicate issues simply and appeal to young voters,” says party spokesperson Toshio Ueki, who reports that the characters’ webpages got 1.5 million hits in the weeks before the poll.

Sound familiar?  That’s how President Obama won election twice.  By reaching out to younger people.  The people who probably know the least about economics.  And history.  That’s how people who want to change a country do it.  By getting people who don’t have the foggiest idea about what happened in the world in the last century or so.  Who simply don’t know of what people tried.  And what has failed.  With communism pretty much at the top of the list of things NOT to do based on past history.

If we did take power, the JCP wouldn’t try to implement a Communist economy immediately. It would require huge changes and we would seek the support of the people for each step,” Kira says. “And we would want to use the best parts of the current economic system, too.”

Japan is pretty close geographically to some of the great communist failures.  The former Soviet Union.  The People’s Republic of China (PRC) back in the days of Mao.  Vietnam.  And, of course, North Korea.  Places that have all gotten better with a move away from communism and towards capitalism.  Except North Korea.  Which is pretty much unchanged.  And the former Soviet Union.  Which is no more.  But the biggest part of the Soviet Union lives on.  Russia.  Which had moved towards capitalism.  But now is drifting back a bit.

History has shown where there is unfettered free markets life is better.  For this is the direction of all immigration.  From countries with highly fettered markets to countries with less fettered markets.  Older people know this.  People who read history know this.  Or lived it.  People who understand classical economics know this.  But young people?  They haven’t a clue.  Which is why all candidates who want to expand the power of the state over the people target young people.  For with them all they have to do is to promise more stuff and more freedom.  Even if they promise to deliver these with policies that have throughout history done anything but.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

FT182: “Obamacare will do to health care what the Soviet Union did to their economy.” —Old Pithy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - August 9th, 2013

Fundamental Truth

The whole East versus West Cold War Showdown was a Battle between Capitalism and Socialism

If you’re not old you may not be familiar with the Soviet Union as it no longer exists.  The Soviet Union was also known as the USSR.  The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.  And in that full name lies the key to understanding what the Soviet Union was.  That socialist part.  For the USSR was socialism on a grand scale.  Formed following the Russian Revolution of 1917.  Also known as the October Revolution.  When the revolutionaries toppled the Russian monarchy.  And set up a communist state.  Which spilled over in counties surrounding Russia.  And by ‘spilled over’ I mean they conquered those surrounding countries.

People like to make distinctions between communism and socialism but they’re the same thing with a little different window dressing.  Central to both ideologies is a hatred of free market capitalism.  And that enlightened state planners can do everything better than unfettered free markets.  For in socialism they put people before profits.  Whereas in that evil, greedy capitalism they put profits before people.

The whole East versus West showdown of the Cold War was about settling that question.  Which system of government was better?  The free market capitalism of the West?  Or the state planning of the East?  And for a clue to that answer go back to that first sentence.  Where I noted that the Soviet Union no longer exists.  In fact when that socialist utopia did exist those people on the inside dreamed of one thing.  Getting out.

Socialist States use Secret Police to coerce People to Stay and Work for the Greater Good

So why did the people want to get out of their socialist utopia?  Two reasons.  The first was the economy.  Which was horrible.  With state planners managing the economy people waited in line at stores for the things they needed.  Staring at empty shelves where those things should have been.  And seeing shelves full of stuff they didn’t want.  East Berliners risked their lives to climb over the Berlin Wall to get to West Berlin for a better life.  And to go to those stores full of wonderful Western goods.

This brings us back to that other reason.  Which ties into the Berlin Wall.  Which East Berliners risked their lives to climb over.  Why?  Because they couldn’t walk across the street to get to West Berlin.   Or drive there.  And why couldn’t they walk or drive to West Berlin?  Because the East German government wouldn’t allow them to.  The communists built the Berlin Wall because the best and brightest were leaving East Berlin for West Berlin.  And East Berlin, as well as East Germany, couldn’t survive if that brain-drain continued.

Given the choice the people would leave.  If they all left there would be no doctors, scientists, engineers, etc., required in a modern state.  And if they didn’t want to stay and work for the greater good the state used a secret police force (the Stasi, in East Germany) to coerce them to stay and work for the greater good.  To make sure people had the right attitudes and the right thoughts the Stasi spied on people.  Turned people into snitches.  Jailed people.  Tortured people.  And simply made people disappear.  By killing them.  And expunging them from the public record.  As if they never existed.

Liberals in the West loved the Soviet Union and National Health Care

Growing up in the West it’s hard to comprehend life in these socialist utopias.  Thankfully, there are some good movies that bring the fear and loathing of living in a socialist utopia to life.  There’s V for Vendetta.  And Nineteen Eighty Four.  Both set in a futuristic socialist Britain.  If you’re interested in seeing actual life in the former East Germany there’s The Lives of Others.  A movie everyone should watch.  As it is the inevitable destination of creeping socialism.  Life gets worse, not better.  People have less, not more.  And the further we creep towards socialism the worse things get.  And the less we have.

The Democrats passed Obamacare into law on strict party lines.  No Republicans voted for it.  Because history has shown that when the government manages things life gets worse, not better.  And people have less, not more.  This is the basis of the Republican opposition.  On Monday (8/9/2013) President Obama held a rare press conference.  Where he said the holy grail of the Republican Party is taking away health care from 30 million people.  Not their fear of creeping socialism.  Of their fear that health care will get worse, not better.  And that people will have less, not more.

The Soviet Union had national health care.  Liberals in the West loved it.  As they loved the Soviet Union.  College professors.  Public school teachers.  Hollywood.  Even the mainstream media.  Who were (and are) liberal Democrats.  Who all wanted what they had in the Soviet Union.  At least what they believed the Soviets had.  Because the Soviet press wrote glowingly about the Soviet economy.  And the high quality of Soviet health care.  Because enlightened state planners made things better.  Despite the Soviets and the eastern European countries having to use secret police to keep their people from escaping their socialist utopias.  Even with that free high-quality health care.  Because for those living in those utopias it wasn’t everything the liberals in the West thought it was.  Instead, for them, life got worse, not better.  And they had less, not more.  While suffering the brutal oppression of the secret police.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Muslim Brotherhood is out in Egypt for Ruling against the Will of the People

Posted by PITHOCRATES - July 4th, 2013

Politics 101

The Muslim Brotherhood did not like Hosni Mubarak or Peace in the Middle East

President Mohammed Morsi is no longer president of Egypt.  Thanks to a bloodless military coup.  Why did the military do this?  Is there some power-hungry general that wanted to become dictator?  No.  The army stepped in to prevent the country from degenerating into civil war.  As the people were unhappy.  And angry.  Filling Tahrir Square.  Protesting the rule of President Morsi.  Just as they protested the rule of Hosni Mubarak.  Back during the Arab Spring.  When democracy was flowering all over the Arab world.

The people were unhappy with Hosni Mubarak because of soaring unemployment.  And his oppressive police state.  To name two things.  The people wanted jobs.  And liberty.  So they demanded democracy.  And got it.  They had free elections.  And the people chose their new leader.  Mohammed Morsi.  Who since becoming president did nothing to improve the employment picture.  And seemed more interested in imposing Sharia law on the Egyptian people than liberty.  In fact, he seemed more interested in restricting liberty.  Especially for Coptic Christians.  And women.

Mubarak’s police state did a lot to suppress the Muslim Brotherhood.  President Morsi’s party.  The Muslim Brotherhood also wanted to impose Sharia law on the Egyptian people.  And did not like Hosni Mubarak for making peace with Israel.  Being secular.  Making it harder to smuggle arms into the Gaza Strip to their friend.  The terrorist group Hamas.  A militant Palestinian Islamic movement dedicated to the destruction of Israel.  And member of the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood.  So the Brotherhood was no friend of peace in the Middle East.  Or secularism.  Which is why Mubarak brutally suppressed the Muslim Brotherhood.  But now the Brotherhood was in power.  And they would have their revenge.  As they put Egypt on the road to Sharia law.

Both the Nazis and the Muslim Brotherhood lied to Rise to Power

Hosni Mubarak was a friend to America.  Israel.  And Middle East peace.  He had his faults.  But he was so critical to peace and stability in the region the United States and their friends and allies should have tried to help Mubarak reform Egypt.  Instead of throwing him under the bus.  Like President Obama did.  Who spent his political career bashing George W. Bush for trying to bring democracy to the Middle East.  And here he was.  President Obama.  Trying to bring democracy to Egypt.  Telling our friend and ally, Hosni Mubarak, he had to go.  When the only opposition party in Egypt was the friend of Hamas and Iran.  The Muslim Brotherhood.

The conservatives warned President Obama about letting the Muslim Brotherhood rise to power.  That it was not in America’s best interests.  Israel’s.  Or the Middle East’s.  And the Brotherhood knew the Americans and Israelis and the West in general were uncomfortable with them in power.  So to appease everyone they said not to worry.  They weren’t interested in rising to power.  And they wouldn’t run for the presidency.  They just wanted to help the nation they loved, Egypt, to be free.  That’s all.  But then one thing led to another.  And the Muslim Brotherhood rose to power.  With one of their own becoming president.  Just like conservatives warned would happen.  And the Brotherhood promised wouldn’t happen.  So what happened?

The Muslim Brotherhood, of course, lied.  That’s how you rise to power when you want to change the country against the will of the people.  Adolf Hitler didn’t rise to power through a military coup.  The Nazis won elections.  They didn’t campaign on the truth.  They didn’t tell the people that they were going to invade Poland, Norway, North Africa, the Low Countries, France, Greece, the Soviet Union, etc.  That they were going to build death camps.  Or use a brutal secret police (the Gestapo) to terrorize their own people.  For these aren’t the kinds of things people vote for.  So you lie to the people.  And say you want to do other things.  Not the things people warned would happen if the Nazis rose to power.  Especially those who read Mein Kampf.  Where Hitler himself told the world what he planned on doing.  It was all there.  All you had to do was read his book.

Candidates who Promise Everything typically want to Change the Country Against the Will of the People

Iranian students protested the Shah of Iran.  Just like the Egyptians protested Hosni Mubarak.  Men and women.  Including a lot of college graduates who could not find any work with their new degrees.  They blamed the Shah.  Another friend and ally of the United States.  They demanded jobs.  And liberty.  A democracy of the people.  And that’s exactly what they got.  Then they voted for an Islamic republic.  And those people who protested to overthrow the Shah lost everything they wanted.  Especially the women.  Who had fewer liberties after the Iranian Revolution than they had under the Shah of Iran.  During the elections the Islamists didn’t say they were going to do this.  For people demanding liberty and jobs are not going to vote for someone promising to take away even more of their liberties.  So they lied.  Allowing them to rise to power.  To change the country against the will of the people.

Removing the Muslim Brotherhood from power is good for the United States.  For Israel.  And for peace in the Middle East.  Because with the Muslim Brotherhood in power Iran had a good friend in Egypt.  To help expand their hegemony in the region.  Shiite rule in a predominantly Sunni area.  And what was once a more secular area.  Before the Arab Spring.  Some expressed concern about the military removing a democratically elected president.  Of course they must express this publically.  Especially when they’re trying to spread democracy.  But there is a difference between good democracy and bad democracy.  Bad democracy is the kind that is only transitory.  A tool.  A means to an end.  When you want to change a country against the will of the people.  And once you achieve the end you can dispose of that ridiculous thing called democracy.  Like the Nazis did.  Like the Iranians did.  And like the Muslim Brotherhood was well along the way in doing.

This is something people need to learn.  Not to trust those running for office.  Especially those who promise everything the people want.  You see, there is a reason why the people don’t have everything they want.  It’s just not possible.  It’s too costly.  And you just can’t please everyone.  So no matter how much you give the people there will still be some who want something else.  Always.  Which is good for people running for office.  As they always have something to lie about.  That is, to make a promise they can’t keep.  Or simply have no intention of keeping.  Because they want to change the country against the will of the people.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Sandy Hook, Gun Control, Second Amendment, Patriot Act, Motor Vehicle Accidents and Partial-Birth Abortion

Posted by PITHOCRATES - January 10th, 2013

Politics 101

The Social Democracies of Europe were all Oppressive Absolute Monarchies at one Time

What happened in Newtown, Connecticut, was a tragedy.  The shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary took 26 lives.  Including 20 children.  The most innocent of us.  Which has ignited a firestorm of debate over guns.  The Left blames these deaths on an epidemic of gun violence.  Caused by people having access to guns.  So the Left wants to have a real debate on gun control.  To stop this epidemic of child deaths caused by firearms.  By severely restricting access to guns.

Those on the Right, on the other hand, want to protect their Second Amendment right.  The right to keep and bear arms.  Which allowed the First Amendment.  Freedom of speech.  The British colonial governors tried hard to clamp down on the anti-British sentiment in their American colonies.  And to muzzle that anti-British speech.  They sent over British Red Coats to occupy American cities to keep order.  And to find and confiscate the Americans’ guns.  So the first few amendments of the Bill of Rights (the first 10 amendments) protected free speech.  Gave us the power to protect ourselves from future state oppressors.  And they even included the Third Amendment.  Which states, “No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.”  Again, further protection from state oppression.

The nature of states is to oppress their people.  Most have throughout history.  Even the social democracies of Europe were all oppressive absolute monarchies at one time.  Where kings could do pretty much anything they wanted to.  England changed that with representative government.  America expanded on these liberties in the New World.  And ever since has been very wary of government.  Until the Twentieth century.  When the growth of government began.  Transferring ever more power to the federal government.  Everything the Founding Fathers feared would happen without a Bill of Rights.

When it comes to Restricting our Constitutional Rights Liberals Trust Government while Fearing Republicans

Those on the Left say the Constitution is a relic of a different age.  That today’s government is a kinder government.  A more caring government.  One that just wants to take care of the people.  By providing generous benefits.  Of course this is how some of the worst dictatorships started.  Nazi Germany and the USSR both put the people first.  Or so they said.  Even their names said they were putting the people first.  The Nazis were National Socialists.  And the USSR was the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.  Socialism is all about taking care of the people.  Yet these nations had some the most brutal secret police that terrorized and oppressed their people.  For there is no easier way to dictatorial power than championing the people.  And once the people stop fearing their government is when the state can take away their guns.  To make that oppression easier.  The Syrian government is currently having difficulty oppressing their people because they failed to keep guns out of the hands of those they wish to oppress.

If you read a history book you will read a lot about state secret police and state oppression.  It’s more the rule than the exception.  When you grow up in a free country it’s hard to believe this.  And when you’re young you think whatever you know and have experienced is normal.  And that things have always been that way.  Which is why the younger liberals dismiss talk about the transfer of power to the federal government.  While the older conservatives who have seen great change in their lives and know history still fear their government.  While the younger liberals grow up believing that government is not to be feared but to be trusted blindly.  They even look at what China is doing with their economy with approval.  Where the government controls the economy.  They like that.  Because liberals believe we can always trust a government more than a private corporation.  Even if that government oppresses their people.  Like they do in China.  Where people still deal with famine in the country.  Rural workers are paid poorly and live in dormitories in the city factories.  And political dissidents are tortured in labor camps where they manufacture goods without pay.

So naïve liberals trust government.  Completely.  Unless it’s George W. Bush using the Patriot Act.  That they fear.  But when President Obama uses the Patriot Act liberals ask, “The Patriot what?”  When it came to secret wiretaps on people with known ties to terrorists the Left quaked with fear over where these abuses of power would end.  But when President Obama starts talking about gun control they haven’t a care in the world.  Because when it comes to restricting our constitutional rights liberals trust government while fearing Republicans.

People killed 37 Kids with Guns in 2010 while Partial-Birth Abortions have claimed some 2,000 Lives a Year

President Obama’s former Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, said, “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.”  For the best way to advance an agenda (especially an unpopular agenda) was in the emotional chaos following a serious crisis.  Such as the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary.  The majority of Americans oppose gun control.  But in that majority are some people that they may be able to convince that some restrictions on the Second Amendment is a good thing in the emotional chaos following Sandy Hook Elementary.  Convincing them that guns are causing an epidemic of childhood deaths.  That without guns these kids simply wouldn’t be dying.  A powerful message during emotional times.  But if you remove the emotions and look at some facts you see something different (see 10 Leading Causes of Death, United States by the Centers for Disease Control).

These are deaths by unintentional injury.  Looking at the leading causes of death in 2010 (the latest year of data) for children aged 5-14 you see 1,643 deaths.  About half (809) of those are from motor vehicle accidents.  Drowning came in next at 251 (15.3%).  Then fire/burn at 135 (8.2%).  Then suffocation at 79 (4.8%).  You have to go all the way down to number 7 on the list to get to firearms.  Where we can see they killed 37 children in 2010.  Or 2.3% of the total number of kids aged 5-14 who died from an unintentional injury.  Based on an approximate population of 41 million kids aged 5-14 the total number of kids killed by firearms comes to about 0.00009% of this total.  According to the CDC’s numbers, guns aren’t killing a lot of kids.  Motor vehicles are.  But firearms are not.  So taking away our guns will probably not change these numbers much.  If at all.  So the motive can’t be saving children’s lives.  In fact, one can make the argument that there is a greater killer of children out there than anything on the above list.  Abortion.

It’s hard to get numbers on abortions.  But if you check various sources the number appears to be over a million a year.  Wikipedia shows 1,313,000 abortions in 2000.  Including 2,232 (about 0.17% of all abortions in 2000) that were partial-birth abortions.  Whatever your politics on the abortion issue are one thing regarding partial-birth abortions is clear.  These are human lives.  For the ‘partial’ part of these abortions requires terminating the life of the fetus while the head is still inside of the mother.  For if they terminated the life of the fetus outside of the mother it would be murder according to the law.  And you can’t kill something that isn’t alive.  In fact, an accidental wrongful death of a pregnant woman often results in two charges of manslaughter.  One for the mother.  And one for the unborn fetus.  Assuming there was no spike in partial-birth abortions in 2000 one can assume that number is representative of all years.  Which is far more deaths than by motor vehicle accident let alone from firearms.  Yet President Obama wants gun control to save kids lives.  When he could save even more by simply revising his stance on partial-birth abortion.  Something he argued to keep when a state senator in Illinois.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,