Saturday, October 30, 2010

Paging Rush Limbaugh, Clean Up in Aisle 9

So, one Kevin DuJan, editor-chief of, penned An Open Letter to Rush Limbaugh and His Listeners — With Notes on the Democrat Civil War Already In Progress.

DuJan begins his open letter to Limbaugh this way.

Dear Rush,

It’s my great hope that some of your listeners find a way to get this letter to you, or that it makes it to “Snerdley” and finds its way into your hands.

Evidently DuJan, a self professed lifelong Democrat, addled still by “great hope,” is not fully cognizant of the communication abilities of the internet, because if he would have clicked on Rush Limbaugh’s home page, he would have noted that he could have deposited his open letter to Limbaugh directly into Limbaugh’s hand by clicking on this private email to Rush link.

But the above information is admittedly merely background noise.  The more pertinent reason for this post is the contents of the letter itself.  Most sites I have visited, which have linked to DuJan’s open letter, have focused on the following information contained within the open letter as some sort of “sign” that lifelong Democrats are moving into the mainstream, at least for this upcoming election, anxious to join hands with lifelong Republicans in taking America back, which allegedly bodes well for the November 2 elections.  To wit.

... I don’t think even you understand just how much damage Obama has done to the Democrat Party — to the point where formerly lifelong Democrats like myself, and everyone here at, are actively working to expose the party and literally burn it to the ground for the good of the country.

None of this is being reported in the media, but a Civil War in the Democrat ranks has been raging since May 31st, 2008…a date every Hillary Clinton supporter knows well, because that was the date of the Democrat Rules & Bylaws Committee Meeting where Howard Dean (then-DNC Chair), Donna Brazile, and scores of other Kool-Aid slurping Obama flunkies took off their masks and revealed the full extent of the Leftist coup that had taken over the party…

But what I think individuals should focus on, when reading DuJan’s open letter to Limbaugh, is this paragraph, particularly the words in bold.

If you have not seen it already, Rush, you need to watch Gigi Gaston’s documentary “We Will Not Be Silenced 2008″.  I’m featured in a segment on the voter fraud that was committed in the Iowa Caucus back in January of 2008.  While I was always aware Democrats use unions and other means to cheat in elections, I never knew the Democrat Party was capable of the large-scale, aggressive, unapologetic fraud it committed on Obama’s behalf all through 2008.  In Iowa, I watched Obama’s ACORN and SEIU goons push and shove old people, bully them, and intimidate them when they wanted to vote for Hillary Clinton.  I saw scores of Illinois license plates fill the parking lots outside caucus locations, with Chicagoland Obama supporters illegally entering the Caucus sites to vote for Obama and game Iowa for him.  Having planned ahead, Obama supporters actually RAN those caucus sites, and held the doors open for all these fraudulent voters to walk right in, without being asked for IDs, where they then took control of the caucuses and bullied the Iowa residents into supporting Obama — lest they be called RAAACISTS! out in the open in front of their friends and neighbors in those open-air caucuses.

DuJan is tacitly admitting that he has known, and by extension DuJan’s fellow lifelong Democrats have known, that election cheating is part and parcel of the Democratic party.  DuJan can deny that he “never knew” that the Democratic party was capable of “large-scale, aggressive, unapologetic fraud,” but this is simply disingenuous posturing.

Which brings us to reason I titled this post, “Paging Rush Limbaugh, Clean Up in Aisle 9.”  On October 17, in a post titled This election will make Obama more, not less, dangerous, Malone Vandam penned a phrase which I think clearly defines lifelong Republicans, and by extension Republican mouthpiece extradonaire Rush Limbaugh.  “Janitorial socialists.”

How apt is it that DuJan desires to employ one of the lead janitorial socialists, Limbaugh, to clean up the Democratic party?  This really should not be surprising, though, because I cannot think of a single Democratic professional jobholder who would be willing to put their hand to a broom.  Clean up in aisle 9, Rush.

Posted by John Venlet on 10/30 at 09:24 AM
(3) CommentsPermalink

Friday, October 29, 2010

Youthful Words Found on the Street

While out for an early morning walk with the dog; pre-dawn dark, chill of Fall, crunch of leaves; I came across a bit of litter mixed in with the fallen leaves.  Because I’m not fond of litter in my neighborhood, I stooped down, grabbed the litter and stuffed it into my vest pocket for proper disposal upon my return home, as I am wont to do.

Upon returning home, I pulled the offending litter from my pocket to toss in the trash, and noted that what I had pocketed as litter, was actually two pages of lined notebook paper, neatly folded three times.  In order to satisfy my curiousity regarding this find, I unfolded the sheets of paper, and found that I was holding a seventh grader’s rough draft of written words for an unknown class.  At least that is what I was led to deduce based on the the annotations neatly penned at the top of the first sheet of paper.  “Rough Draft.,” Mina ______. 7a.

Anyway, I read through the words penned by this young individual, probably a 12 year old girl, and found that I was impressed by her perspicacity, a trait many individuals are inclined to discredit in 12 year olds.  I was impressed enough by this girls rough draft that I attempted to return the work by stepping into the Catholic school by my house to inquire if she was a student.  Unfortunately, this was not the case.

Here are the words I found.  Verbatim.  They exhibit a deeper understanding than I note in too large of a percentage of individuals.

No one wants to realize the truth.
People cover up honest facts.

We sympathize ourselves.
They pretend; ignore reality.

We tell ourselves it’s okay when we glance at the dusty
exercise bike in the corner.

We ignore the man with the damp cardboard sign
and empty Starbucks cup.

Yeah God loves you.
So the rest isn’t your problem.

We blame it on fate.
Oh Jesus Lord Almighty.
Sure, he loves you.

You tell yourself not to worry about other countries in
the world.  You try not to think about them.

Cause your main concern is fitting into a smaller
size jean.  The reputation of your country means

They say we’re fighting for peace.
But nobody wins when it comes to war.

And the numbers of those who aren’t coming home
are beginning to show.

Sure, we could say it’s us against them.
It’s just going to result in finger pointing in the end.

But they’re just using what they know.
It’s what the kids see on the tv screen.

We’re convinced we’re right.
But we’re not the good guys.

Fighting is only an excuse for us.
And fighting has turned into a standard of life.

But it doesn’t have to be.
It’s just the same old game.

We worry about meals when other countries are
burning wives and losing lives.

You never know what you have till it’s goine.  But some
Never have had anything.

We’re spiraling out of control, and it’s inevitable.
Someone help us please, cause we’re on all fours.

You say you can’t sleep at night.
We’re all convinced nothings going to end up alright.

We keep playing this sick game, it’s so insincere.
I wish I could change the ways of the world.

Posted by John Venlet on 10/29 at 11:08 AM
(0) CommentsPermalink

Thursday, October 28, 2010

Voting Quote of the Day


From a post at The Elector Retards titled Iron Triangles or Iron Shackles?.  Read the short social studies lesson, “Iron Triangles,” which follows the quote, also.

Posted by John Venlet on 10/28 at 04:37 PM
(0) CommentsPermalink

Quite Simply, Hauntingly Beautiful

Posted at Blazing Cat Fur, Alice…Dancing Under the Gallows.  Twelve minutes and eleven seconds (video) of haunting beauty.

Barukh atah Adonai Eloheinu melekh ha‑olam, she‑hehiyanu v’kiy’manu v’higi’anu la‑z’man ha‑ze.

Posted by John Venlet on 10/28 at 03:18 PM
(0) CommentsPermalink

Comments on “Undeserved” Wealth

Johnathan Pearce, in a post at Samizdata titled Desert according to whom?, notes a post at Stumbling and Mumbling titled Self-deception & the undeserving rich.

Both posts make for interesting reading, along with the comments, but I draw your attention specifically to this comment within Pearce’s post.

Another point for redistributionists of all kinds to remember is this: if person A does not, according to some yardstick, “deserve” his or her wealth, then neither does anyone else “deserve” that wealth, either, since why should they presume to grab the benefits of such unearned luck? The logical result, surely, would be to destroy that wealth, so that no-one receives it at all. (bold by ed.)

Samizdata commenter Alisa astutely responds to the words, in bold, above.

Being done as we speak.

Posted by John Venlet on 10/28 at 09:44 AM
(0) CommentsPermalink

Wednesday, October 27, 2010

Voting Notes

I’ve written many posts stating my thoughts regarding voting, over the years, but it was on January 31, 2004, in a post I titled I’m Thinking Clearly, Now, that I publicly stated that I would not vote again.

Here is an additional piece on not voting for readers to consider, written by Don Emmerich.  It is titled Why I Don’t Vote.  Emmerich ends his post this way.

It’s time to stop playing their game. It’s time to do all we can to undermine their tyranny and fight for liberty.

Read the whole thing.

Posted by John Venlet on 10/27 at 04:44 PM
(1) CommentsPermalink

“Love of Country”

Francis W. Porretto has up a post titled Love of Country.  Though Francis’ post suggests that Americans’ love of country may be measured by the upcoming November 2nd vote, a measurement standard with which I disagree, Francis articulates a couple points which are worth reposting here.

Freedom is America’s genome. Not majoritarian democracy, not consolidated federal power, not “social justice” or “political correctness,” and not a fine mesh of rules that cover every aspect of life and commerce, emitted by a gaggle of self-important mandarins in the District of Columbia.

He who works against Americans’ freedom works against America.

And this.

To love this country, you must love freedom.  You cannot in good conscience ratify the designs of those who seek to replace a free order with authoritarian social-fascism. No matter what your parents told you or for whom they voted, and no matter how you stand to benefit personally. Nor can you refrain from speaking up when others announce their intention to do so. (bold by ed.)

I love freedom.  Need I say I love my country?

Posted by John Venlet on 10/27 at 03:30 PM
(0) CommentsPermalink

The Uncivil French, Hardly an Exemplary Example

Last week, writing and posting at, Paul Joseph Watson wondered if Americans would follow the example of the French in mass civil unrest if so-called austerity measures are instituted by the United States government.

While Watson correctly notes that the limited violent protests occurring in France were the work of rent-a-mob punks, he incorrectly labels them as anarchists.  True anarchists, living without rule, do not resort to random violence to further the cause of freedom.  True anarchists deal with each other individually, man to man, to their mutual benefit.

Watson continues his wondering regarding Americans following the French example by noting the following regarding what has been occurring in France.

The legitimate protests and the ones that genuinely hurt the establishment and put the idiot anarchists to shame are being run by French workers, truck drivers, and union leaders, and enjoy the support of around 70% of the population…

This is genuine people power – the French are sending a message to the establishment that they will no longer play ball until the looting stops. (bold by ed.)

Watson’s statement, in bold above, is just plain wrong.  The French may be sending a message to the establishment, but the message is not we “will no longer play ball until the looting stops.”  The message the French are sending to the establishment is “Hey, establishment, we want you to do something about the looting, as long as you don’t cut off the loot you’re paying me,” which is hardly “legitimate,” or an example to be followed.

The French have not supplied an example for Americans to follow, unless Americans desire to follow the French into complete and utter subservience to the State.

Watson’s poor example is filed under the heading Will Americans Follow French Example Of Mass Civil Unrest?

Spotted at Drudge last week.

Posted by John Venlet on 10/27 at 09:20 AM
(0) CommentsPermalink

Golden Fleeced?

There’s gold in them there hills!  In the past, when such words became common knowledge, a stampede of fortune seekers, heading for the hills, could almost be guaranteed.  I think that if those words which open this post once again became common knowledge, regarding some remote area of the country, a stampede of fortune seekers would soon overwhelm the hills.

I, myself, do not own much gold, and what I do own is not in traditional asset form, but rather in the form of jewlery.  Now this fact seems to run against current advice to buy, buy, buy gold, in its various forms, but what, exactly, is one purchasing when they purchase gold?

Donald Sensing points to two somewhat contrarian pieces on gold’s alleged luster as an asset, which are worth looking at, if only to enrich your thinking, rather than your pocket.

First is a short PowerPoint like piece at Business Insider titled 9 Ways That Gold Is A Religion Masquerading As An Asset Class.  My personal favorite from this piece ( from slide #7).

Just like Christianity is divided into so many sects, so too is gold: You’ve got the hard bullion people, the people who invest in the miners, the ETFs, and even spinoff precious metals, like silver.

You also have the really out-there, cult-like folks who think Fort Knox is empty, or filled with tungsten.

The second piece Sensing points to, also posted at Business Insider, is a quote from one Jeremy Grantham, which is posted under the heading Jeremy Grantham: Gold Is A “Faith-Based” Investment, And There Are Better Places To Put Your Money.

Everyone asks about gold. This is the irony: just as Jim Grant tells us (correctly) that we all have faith-based paper currencies backed by nothing, it is equally fair to say that gold is a faith-based metal. It pays no dividend, cannot be eaten, and is mostly used for nothing more useful than jewelry. I would say that anything of which 75% sits idly and expensively in bank vaults is, as a measure of value, only one step up from the Polynesian islands that attached value to certain well-known large rocks that were traded. But only one step up. I own some personally, but really more for amusement and speculation than for serious investing. It may well work and it may not. In the longer run, I believe that resources in the ground, forestry, agriculture, common stocks, and even real estate are more certain to resist any inflation or paper currency crisis than is gold.

I think I’ll stick with my personal faith in the Creator, a bit of gold jewelry, my personal abilities, my like minded friends, and keep my gun at close hand.

Posted by John Venlet on 10/27 at 07:43 AM
(1) CommentsPermalink

Tuesday, October 26, 2010

A Brief Exchange with Pat Miles

Yesterday evening, there was a knock at my front door.  When I approached the door, there stood Michigan Democrat congressional candidate Pat Miles.

When I opened the door, Miles beamed an earnest, hopeful, photo op will I have your vote smile, a mien which struck me as an imitation of Obama’s all too familiar hopey changey electioneering persona.

I opened the door, stuck out my hand and said, “Well, well Pat Miles.  How can I help you?”

Miles gladly and firmly shook my proffered hand, and launched into his upcoming election spiel, which I politely cut short by informing Miles that I did not plan on voting.  For any candidate.

To Miles’ credit, though he was somewhat taken aback by my statement, he did not immediately turn tail and leave, but rather asked why I would not vote.  I listed off a variety of reasons of why I would not vote, many of which I have previously enumerated here in these pages, but ended by informing Miles that all voting is inherently immoral, due to its coercive nature, pitting one group of individuals against another with the complicity of the State as their enforcer.

Miles stated to me that understood my reasoning, but I am doubtful Miles fully comprehended its validity.

I ended my short exchange with Miles by asking him if he wanted my respect, to which he replied in the affirmative.  Here is my response to his affirmation.  “Pat, if you want my respect, and desire to retain your integrity, withdraw yourself from politics.”  Miles responded by asking, “Do you mean if I’m elected?”  To which I replied, “No, Pat, if you want my respect, immediately withdraw your name as a candidate for Congress, then you and I can deal with each other as men, rather than as subjects to be controlled by the State.”

Posted by John Venlet on 10/26 at 11:12 AM
(1) CommentsPermalink

Marriage Advice

Laura B, The Trooper’s Girl, has a bit of marriage advice geared towards military and police spouses, though I think her advice is applicable to all individuals regardless of their avocation.

The post is titled Getting Squirrely, which is apropos, I think, especially as I enter the nineteenth year of my second marriage, and contemplate the squirrely moments which have occurred over those years between myself and the Lovely Melis.

Laura B’s closing advisory note.

Be wise. Know that a marriage is often just like a job - it requires work, respect for each other, kindness and politeness when you really want to throw a stapler at their head, as well as an ability to accept disappointment. Sometimes you won’t even like each other. And sometimes even the love you had at the start has to be sanded down and refinished, having tarnished over the years. Sometimes you will have to be the cheerleader, bringing low spirits up when you know that there is a reason for low spirits and you’d just as soon wallow in them, too. And if you happen to have that cheerleader outfit already? Hey, win-win, my friend…now, I wonder where he put those motor boots?....

Posted by John Venlet on 10/26 at 08:17 AM
(0) CommentsPermalink

Hope Bourne - Iron Willed Individual - RIP

I did not know Hope Bourne, nor was I even aware of her, but after reading a Telegraph piece, which notes her death on August 22 of this year, I rue the fact that that I did not.  I’ll have to search for some of her works.

Friends tell me I could live better on National Assistance, or whatever they call it now. Over my dead body!...

“I’m bloody-minded. My independence is the most important thing in the world to me: freedom and a vigorous outdoor life.”

I think Dick Proenneke would have liked her, too.

Hope Bourne.

Linked via Claire Wolfe.

Posted by John Venlet on 10/26 at 07:35 AM
(0) CommentsPermalink

Friday, October 22, 2010

Withdraw Your Mind from the State

Withdrawing your mind from the State has been encouraged in the past, with little success.  I encourage withdrawing your mind from the State once again, as does b-ohare in a post at Wendy McElroy’s place titled To the men and women of the mind - go on strikeNow is the time.

Where are the real men and women of the minds - those intelligent enough to oppose every “progress” made in Washington in the name of the people? Washington is an utter failure - someone needs to put it out of our misery. At risk of sounding hypocritical by ending with a quote from government official Ronald Reagan, doesn’t history provide us enough case studies and examples already to determine that “government is not a solution to our problem, government is the problem?” I call on you - the men and women of the mind - to “shrug” and put your minds officially on strike.

The entire post is worth reading and contemplating.

Posted by John Venlet on 10/22 at 10:35 AM
(0) CommentsPermalink

Upcoming Election Quote of the Day

So, for instance, if you have (what I would consider to be) dumb opinions about God, evolution, and so on, it doesn’t matter, if, when you win your election, your most important political idea about God, evolution etc., is that both you and I should be allowed to worship God or not, think seriously (as I would see it) about science or not, as you imagine that your God is telling you to, or as I think makes sense. If that’s what you’ll do when you win your election, that’ll do for me. And our agreement actually goes deeper than this. If the major political consequence of you believing in your God is you also believing that nobody on earth should try to play God, then I agree wholeheartedly. Politically, we are more than mere allies; we are kindred spirits.

Brian Micklethwait in a post at Samizdata titled Dumb versus dumber – some more thoughts on the forthcoming US elections

Posted by John Venlet on 10/22 at 07:59 AM
(0) CommentsPermalink

Thursday, October 21, 2010

Oh For a Place to Stand

Archimedes is credited with stating the following.

Give me a lever long enough and a fulcrum on which to place it, and I shall move the world.

I thought of this quote, today, when I read the following words which were uttered by Sam Harris.

I happen to think that the scientific study of morality is the lever that, if pulled hard enough, will completely dislodge religion from the firmament of our concerns. The world religions will land somewhere near astrology, witchcraft and Greek mythology on the scrapheap. In their place we will have a thoroughgoing understanding of human flourishing, which will include even the most rarified and traditionally “spiritual” states of human consciousness.

These words of Harris’ were gleaned from a New Scientist piece titled Special report: Morality put to the test.  Specifically, the words were gleaned from the portion of the report titled Morality: ‘We can send religion to the scrap heap’, which is an short question and answer session with Harris.

Harris evidently desires to utilize science as the fulcrum for his lever to “dislodge religion” and send it to the scrap heap, but just as evidently Harris misunderstands the operating principles of a lever and a fulcrum, because proper utilization of a lever and fulcrum, and the mechanical advantage gained via proper utilization, decreases the amount of input force required to dislodge the offending object.  Any attempts to “pull hard enough,” in attempts to dislodge offending objects with a lever and fulcrum, will be futile if the fulcrum is not properly placed in relation to the lever and the offending object.

The issue here, regardless of Harris and his end of faith crusade, or the force he hopes to apply to his lever, is not religion, per se, but fundamental, dogmatic religions and their “it’s my way or the highway” mentalities, which, I believe, are not not godlike, but rather militant in nature, and I have no issues with dislodging fundamental, dogmatic religions or their militant drum beaters.

I, at this point in time and knowledge, do not see science dislodging religion, unless, as RicketyClick notes, the State hijacks Harris’ hypothesis, it’s science after all, for their own nefarious purposes.

I do not think that religion will ever be dislodge from man or society, but if it is dislodged, the following words, written by Malone Vandam back in June of this year, may be considered as prescient.

It’s pretty clear to me that America without its Scriptural underpinnings as the absolute referent for its values and mode of being looks increasingly like a postmodern Carthage, an atavistic society of degeneration that embraces a culture of death. The West and America have always seen degenerate behaviors but always had recourse to a transcendent vision that rejected them. Now we’re moving into what appears to be a phase of puritanical relativism, where degenerate behavior is normalized and the transcendent vision is rejected.

The individual as an embodied soul created in the image and likeness of God, whose duties and fidelities are infinitely more important than his appetites and urges, is reduced by puritanical relativism to a self-activating fetish who is further reduced to a bag of flesh no better than other animals and condemned to an empty and meaningless life and death.

That right there is the end of everything that we ever truly loved or was ever truly lovable about the high status of the individual in the West and America.

Posted by John Venlet on 10/21 at 06:38 PM
(1) CommentsPermalink
Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 >